Friday at the Movies: Where the Wild Things Are

This is the first of what I hope to be a series of blogs on Fridays about movies. Today I went to see Spike Jonze’s vision of Where the Wild Things Are. I must admit great anticipation on my part. Spike Jonze is not for everybody (know as the director of the art house films BeingJohn Malkovich and Adaptation) but I really appreciate him as a director. Also, Where the Wild Things Are was not only my favorite book from childhood, its author and illustrator Maurice Sendak, was an inspiration to me as an artist. His strange and sometimes dark tales and distinctive artistic style captivates me even as an adult. So… expectations were high.

I must tell you that if you are looking for a movie to take your children to, this is not it. Not that its subject matter is simply too adult or too violent (as so many movies marketed towards teenagers are), but it is… scary. Scary in the way a child sees things as scary. When things seem uncertain… when people you trust first let you down… when you’re so upset you feel out of control… that kind of scary. The movie captures well how we as adults miss how helpless and frightened our children feel as we weather the trials of life. This movie was for me as a parent to see my own trials through my children’s eyes. And it was unsettling.

The movie creates a much more developed context for the main character, Max, than is present in the original children’s book and some might get frustrated with the liberties taken (Max’s mother is divorced and has a romantic interest at the house for dinner, Max has a disinterested teenage sister and Max runs away when he is angrily ordered to his room), but I think it depicts well a common family in the United States today. It also sets up quite well the somewhat confusing emotional journey Max makes to the island of the Wild Things.

The movie isn’t perfect. It seems to lose focus towards the middle as all the Wild Things seem to have there own issues and perhaps are playing out different aspects of Max’s own psyche. There are some honestly scary moments as one of the Wild Things truly seems out of control with anger and disappoint. But the masterful rendering of the Wild Things as well as their character development and the layers of symbolism present make this an enjoyable film. What I liked most about it is that it shows the value of true affection even when people do dumb things in relationships. “Love covers all wrongs” Prov. 10:12.

If you are looking for the next Cars or Finding Nemo, this is not your movie. If you like quirky films that try to peel back the layers of our confused hearts to get to the root of a matter, go see Where the Wild Things Are. You'll appreciate the ride.

How Being 'Right' All the Time Destroys Discussion... and Relationships

I was having a conversation today with a person who I not only admire and greatly respect, but who helped shaped my understanding of Christian ministry, particularly Christian Education. He works for a publication company and they are in the middle of revamping some Bible study material. After we talked a bit about the project, we both noted that studying the Bible passage and leading a discussion about a passage were very different things and, sadly, not many Christians actually know how to have a Bible discussion or have a meaningful conversation about their faith.

Some of it stems from nerves. Christians who take seriously the Gospel message of salvation often feel the weight of communicating that message to others in a Bible discussion context: “What if I say the wrong things? What if I don’t know the answer to the questions people might ask?” I sympathize with people who just feel overwhelmed by their perceived responsibility to be the perfect teacher. But perhaps worse than this is the circumstance with folks who do think they know how to lead a Bible discussion because they have all the answers, or at least know better than everyone else in the room.

One is not disqualified from leading a Bible discussion because one doesn’t have all the answers. In fact, if the discussion leader is constantly spouting off all the “right” answers, there won’t be much of a discussion. Too many people who profess to be followers of Christ insist that to be a Christian means you must have an answer for everything: what kind of movies you can watch, what kind food you can eat, how you should educate your children, even how you should regime your infant’s schedule. “There is an answer.” When this attitude is brought into a Bible discussion people quickly fall into a game of “guess the teacher”… trying to deduce what the discussion leader wants to hear. This not only shuts down conversation but relationship as well (is it any wonder that so many non-Christians find relationships with Christians so tedious?).

I have spent over half my life leading Bible discussions in various settings (churches, college dormitories, fraternity houses, homes) and one of my favorite things to say is, “I haven’t thought about it from that perspective before… let me think about that.” Most Christians are terrified of ‘not knowing.’ Why? My experience is, more often than not, that these adherents of the Christian religion believe that being a good Christian means knowing all the right things or knowing all the right rules so they can do all the right things. Let me be honest: I am a pastor, from a family of pastors… I have been a Christian all my life and a student of the scriptures and theology for 20 years... and I am confused all the time!

I don’t mean to say that the scriptures are confusing (indeed its fundamental message of grace and mercy in the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is very clear). I do mean to say that I am very confusing and so is every other person I have ever met. We are a jumble of mixed motives, insecurities, noble impulses and base desires. The depths of each human life is so rich and dark, so marvelous and shameful that it is difficult to understand how to honestly submit ourselves to God’s good guidance and love. So, when I was leading a Bible discussion on honoring father and mother and someone asked me, “what does it look like to honor a parent who has been sexually abusive?” I said, “I don’t know. I have never thought about that before but I am sure others have. Let me talk to them.” I am not sure I would say that if I were to get the same question today, but that wasn’t a bad answer at the time. Why not? Because I didn’t know. Because this question might come from a very painful place and to have a glib answer would only disrespect that pain. It communicated that I respect this person enough to be honest about the limits of my own experience and knowledge and that for the sake of this person I am willing to do the work of expanding those limits. It also gives that person room to comment honestly where they are struggling with understanding and applying the scripture. And if people don’t have the freedom to be honest in discussion … even if they are honestly wrong… they won’t speak and eventually won’t come.

My friend from the phone conversation is well known for saying “if people aren’t speaking heresy at your Bible discussions, something is wrong with the way you are leading them” (and, yes… that tells many people exactly who I was talking to but don’t blab his name in the comments section). Leading a Bible discussion is not getting the right answer out there, but having people struggle honestly with the text. A good discussion leader helps them in that struggle, not condemn them for not believing the right things. It would be wise for Christians to take this same attitude into their relationships with people who don’t share their faith. Knowledge is a good thing but “knowledge puffs up but love builds up” (1 Corinthians 8:1). Sometimes the loving answer is “I don’t know.”

Heartbreak and Casey at the Bat

I wanted to share something very powerful in loving people well that I learned... from baseball.

As any baseball fan knows, October is the month of heartbreak. If your team hasn’t done well during the regular season, you’ve been waiting for the season to end to provide some relief and begin hoping for next year. But, if your team has done well, you advance to the playoffs with the hope of winning the World Series! Today, my first love, the Philadelphia Phillies, lost to the Colorado Rockies, and my adopted team, the St. Louis Cardinals, lost to the Los Angeles Dodgers in their respective playoff games. I was reminded of a famous baseball poem written by Ernest Thayer in 1888 called “Casey at the Bat.” In it, the home team, Mudville, is putting their last hope on the “mighty Casey” to bat the winning run in. But the poem ends with:

Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright;
The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light,
And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout;
But there is no joy in Mudville— mighty Casey has struck out.

“There is no joy in Mudville.” Heartbreak. I know this may seem somewhat comical, but the serious baseball fan knows about hopes disappointed. I remember vividly two games of the 1993 Worlds Series. My Phils were playing the Toronto Blue Jays. In Games 4, I watched relief pitcher Mitch Williams blow a 5 run lead to lose the game 15 to 14. And in Game 6, the Blue Jays scored 3 runs in the 9th inning to win the game and the series. As the runs came across the plate, in silence I slowly walked to the television and turned it off.

What does this have to do with loving people well? When people are heartbroken... over things more series than baseball... don’t try to cheer them up… don’t try to tell them things aren’t so bad… and please don’t tell them that God has something better for them! At least not in the moment of heartbreak… no, let them have that moment in peace. Perhaps a hug or simply be with the person. Somewhere the sun is shining bright… but not here in Mudville. Respect the person’s hurt as they take in the fact that their hopes are dashed. There will be other times to remind people of the good in life… maybe even to say “there’s always next year” (which didn’t come for me until last year… 15 years later… when the Phils beat Tampa Bay). But tonight, there is no joy in Mudville-mighty Casey has struck out. Respect that and you will have loved the person well.

In this way, I am sure that Job would have been a fan of baseball!

For a brief history on "Casey at the Bat" and the full text, go to: www.baseball-almanac.com/poetry/po_case.shtml

Baseball Post-Season

Blogging must take a backseat to the Baseball Playoffs tonight. Go Phils!

In the House of Tom Bombadil

“Come dear folk… laugh and be merry…. Let us shut out the night. Fear nothing!”

In the last entry, I mentioned Tolkien and it got me thinking about his influence on me (which is significant). The power of story telling, the ideas of courage and loyalty, and the importance of character over against ability and physical stature are not only important life lessons, but indispensable biblical truths that Tolkien helped emblazon on my heart with his own story telling. There is one theme in his The Lord of the Rings that has also helped me better understand a crucial characteristic of the Church as God intended it to be: hospitable.

I have talked with literally hundreds of parishioners about their respective churches and their comfort level in inviting friends to church. Most say something like: “I love my church but I could never invite my neighbor. They just wouldn’t feel comfortable with ‘X,’” with ‘X’ being any number of things: style of worship, attire, preaching, etc. As I ask more questions, four times out of five I begin to sense that what this person really means is that they don’t believe their friend would feel welcome. The visitor feels awkward because of their dress or tattoos. If the person was not a Christian, the preacher talked as if they weren’t really but talked about them in a way which made them feel as if they didn’t belong. No one sought to put them at ease… or perhaps talked to them at all! If this is true, this is a terrible indictment on the Church.

In the larger tale of The Lord of the Rings, there is a story of how a beleaguered band of travelers finds rest in the House of Tom Bombadil. Bombadil is a mysterious character but he seems to carry in his presence the light of Creation as it was in the beginning: powerful, marvelous but also joyful and merry. His home in the Old Forest becomes a respite for the travelers. The quote written at the start of this entry is spoken by Tom's Wife, Goldberry, at the beginning of their stay. In Tom's house, they are reminded of how things should be and helps shut out the darkness of the world, even if for a short while. It is a place of affection and hospitality.

This is something of what fellowship in the Church should be: merry and joyful as we taste fellowship “as it was in the beginning” but mindful of the darkness outside and preparing to go back into it. The hospitality of this fellowship is not just for those “belong” (meaning those who have an orthodox confession of Christian faith) but for any traveler looking for… as Bob Dylan put it… “shelter from the storm.” Now, we can only begin to know the full extent of the respite as we drink deeply from the well of God’s grace and love, and we will never know it fully in this life. But we should pray and strive to realize some of it in the here and now.

In this way we begin to embody the picture Jesus painted of the Kingdom of God: “He told them another parable: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all your seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and perch in its branches.’” Matthew 13:31-32. We want to see people see the church fellowship as a place of shelter, just as God intends for it to be. What does this look like? You tell me.

God Loves the Suburbs Too

According to the Christian scriptures, all of humanity will find its rest in the Garden-City of God. Many pastors in the past decade or so have used this (in some measure) as a clarion call for the evangelical church to head back into the major cities of America… that cities are where God really wants us. While I admire the work done in places like New York City, St. Louis, and San Francisco, I think this kind of reasoning is just wrongheaded (some of my best friends just disowned me).

For many decades during the 20th Century, evangelical whites were emptying out of the cities. This movement of population, most commonly called ‘white flight,’ had the net effect of pushing major American cities into decline. Philadelphia, St. Louis, Baltimore all suffered financially… and spiritually. However, with a renewed vision that the Church should be an institution of transformation, many evangelicals are heading back into the major cities. This is wonderful.

But lots of people live in the suburbs and in the country, too. While the Christian scriptures speak of an eventual Garden-City, I hardly think most of the major cities around the world qualify as what God had in mind. There are many fascinating cultural and architectural achievements in the cities: the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, the Louvre in Paris, and the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lampur. But there is unbelievable squalor and filth as people are piled on top of each other not to mention the hideousness of urban blight (the “ruins” of Detroit come to mind). “This speaks to the need of transformation and renewal in the cities.” Yes, but not to the ethical superiority of ministry in the city over against other places.

Perhaps my brain has been addled by reading too many Agrarians and too much Tolkien (his love of the pastoral life comes through in his affectionate description of the Shire and his condemnation of characters like Saruman who has a ‘mind of metal’). Perhaps I am still too close to my immigrant roots that pass on to me a desire for personal freedom and more open places. But perhaps, God’s vision of the Garden-City is something more… humane… than modern urban life.

If people are called to the City, go and you have my prayers. There are very real sacrifices one has to make to do this kind of work. But there is plenty of transformation needed in the angst ridden suburbs and in poverty stricken rural areas. In the last century many people in churches said: “if you are serious about ministry, you would go on the missions field and to Africa.” Let’s not make ‘the City’ the new ‘Africa.’

Anger and the 2016 Olympics

I read an article today about why some officials in Chicago thought they had lost their bid to host the 2016 Olympics: it was Bush’s fault.

Apparently President Obama did not have enough time to turn around world opinion about the United States after the previous administration destroyed our reputation abroad. The Rev. Jesse Jackson, U.S. Senator Ronald Burris (Illinois) and other notable names with connections to Chicago laid the blame at the feet of George Bush.

Never mind that the city of Chicago itself was divided in very public ways about hosting the Olympics. Never mind that the news of violence coming out of Chicago was all over the national television (Rio has its own problems as well). Never mind that a US cities have hosted Olympic Games in 2002, 1996, 1984 and 1980 over the past thirty years and eight times over the history of the games (almost three times more than any other country with the exception of France who has hosted the games only once in the past forty years). Never mind the United States Olympic Committee has been in complete disarray since Peter Uberoth left last year and the new leadership, coming from the corporate world, did their best to alienate the international world of sports. These had nothing to do with it. It was because of Bush.

When personal animus towards another becomes one’s world view, it has a way of twisting the soul and bending the mind to see the object of resentment as the cause of any annoyance, trivial or significant. This is not about politics, left or right. This dynamic is not confined to politics either. Anger, which may be justified, if it is unchecked or not balanced with understanding, has a way of distorting our view of the people and the world around us. Anger is not a sin but it is a disastrous motivation for action. “[F]or man's anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires” James 1:20. If we are looking for justice and equity in this life… if we hope to experience love and mercy that heals our hurts… we must not nurse personal resentment. If we do, we will become as ugly as the object of our disdain.

Power Dynamics

This blog entry is the beginning of what I hope to be a longer article or perhaps a pamphlet on something with which church leaders need to start grappling: power dynamics.

Many things have recently set my mind on thinking about this but I will use David Letterman’s recent admission to having sex with employees as the doorway into this subject. Of course, Letterman was a victim of extortion and this is awful, but what about a boss having intimate relations with those in his employ? Did the women initiate the relationships? Did he initiate them? How did his position impact their decisions to engage in these illicit relations? This is not something that men in positions of authority think much about, but women are very aware of it.

We all have experiences with a boss who was intimidating and most of us resolve never to be that kind of boss. When we enter positions of authority, we take special measure to insure we aren’t “that kind of boss.” We will never be “the man.” We may even ask our employs to *not* refer to us as “the boss.” The thing is, if you are in a position of authority over someone, then you are “the man” whether you like it or not. Your authority brings with it power over others. Living in the sinful world we live in and given the innate insecurity we all have at some level, people will have fears about those in power over them. Which means, if you are in a position of authority, people have fears about you! Fears that may make them very compliant or very resentful.

“But people don’t need to be afraid of me.” “I’m not that kind of boss.” “I want to create a consensus atmosphere.” “I don’t like the distance created in the boss-employee model so I don’t act like that.” I have heard lots of lots of responses. This does one of two things in the minds of employees: (1) makes them even more insecure because you seem not to acknowledge the power you have over them and therefore more likely to hurt them, just as an older brother is unaware of his strength while wrestling with his little brother, or (2) create a false sense of equality that will evaporate when the employee oversteps his or her bounds, fails in the job or hurts the boss in some other way. The boss usually and suddenly remembers his or her power in that instant leaving the employee disciplined or fired and certainly disillusioned.

If you are a person in authority over another… serving on a committee overseeing someone’s work, fulfilling a supervisory role at work… stop pretending that you are *not* “the boss.” Parents often try to be their children’s friends instead of an authority figure. This has disastrous results. The same is true if you fail to recognize the authority you have. You must recognize the power you wield and then consciously use it for the good of those who serve under you. If not, you will find yourself using it unconsciously in your own self-interest.