:: in.a.mirror.dimly :: A theology and culture blog with the Bible in one tab and a news feed in the other.

 The other night we watched The Illusionist. I have never heard of it, but was quickly drawn into the story and dazzled by the camera work.

Set in Austria in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s, an illusionist wins a tremendous following because of his seemingly supernatural powers. When his childhood love is engaged to the crown price, he turns his powers toward reuniting with her and attacking the prince.

This movie truly has all that I could have asked. The filming is so good that we actually rewound some scenes just to appreciate how well they were done. The characters are developed and believable, the dialogue and action flow, and the ending was perfect. I’d say more, but then I’d be guilty of spoiling the whole thing.

I recommend renting it because it’s so much more than a movie. It’s a good story that is artfully crafted.

Technorati Tags: illusionist - movie  

It helps to laugh at yourself sometimes.

In my early years as a Christian I struggled with anger and was generally kind of down. My headphones were on and Nirvana was blasting into my brain.

And then Philippians 4:8 came to mind:

“Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is worthy of respect, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if something is excellent or praiseworthy, think about these things.”

I took off the headphones, grabbed all of my secular music, and tossed it into the trash can. While I can’t say this for all of my music at the time, most of it–including Nirvana–fed my anger instead of relieving it. In other words, I viewed music in terms of its affect on my spirit. Add a conservative church that supported such a move into the mix, and you have my personal views on music for about eight years of my life.

About four years ago I began lightening up. And now I laugh at myself. I laugh because I was so naive to think secular music = bad and Christian music = good. There are such things as good and bad music, but these things can be found in both camps. I still believe that we should not knowingly pollute our minds with music that has ridiculously violent or sexually explicit lyrics, but the line between what’s acceptable and what is not has become gray in my estimation.

Today I listen to David Crowder and Neal Morse, but I have also added Johnny Cash and U2: two artists I would have never listened to five years ago. And that goes especially for U2 (In my opinion Bono is an acquired taste).

And now I’ll leave the rest open for comments.  : )

Technorati Tags: music - secular - christian - u2 - david+crowder - philippians

Steve Jobs says, “Let our music go!” in an open letter. According to NPR, the music industry won’t listen, but they probably should because of a 20% drop in profits in the industry.

Andrew Jones has been tracking the latest with the Ted Haggard scandal over at tallskinnykiwi: Haggard and Haggard and the Hazards of Hotels.

Enough has already been said about this issue by others. Andrew has some good content to ponder for sure, especially a comment by Will Samson:

Please pray for Ted Haggard and his family - Even if you do not agree with all of his politics, he is in the middle of a private hell that most of us cannot relate to. This is true whether the allegations are confirmed or not.

Mark Driscoll has some thoughts worth considering over at Resurgence, though some of them will be controversial (as usual).

With so much political, spiritual, and sexual chaos swirling about, I have decided to take a slightly different track. I think this tragic situation should be an immensely important lesson on leadership, the celebrity status of leaders, and what we expect of them.

Keep in mind that Haggard was the pastor of 14,000 AND the top guy at the National Association of Evangelicals. Either one is enough to cause a good man (or woman!) to crack. The two together sounds like a recipe for disaster. Even the saintly Bill Hybels had a break down as the pastor of Willow Creek Community Church.

I’m not saying that Christians can’t lead large organizations and remain pure. Billy Graham pulled it off. But his ministry was very focused on presenting the Gospel at certain events. He did other things for sure, but he was not a pastor of thousands AND an world-traveling evangelist.

Every person with power and pressure will be vulnerable to sin. Immorality abounds in Washington D.C. among our politicians, and even Martin Luther King Jr. had a mistress. Power and pressure do not equal sin, but they make it far more likely.

And this leads to my point: do we really need celebrity pastors of huge congregations? Are we expecting too much out of our church and parachurch leaders? I think we are.

Spencer Burke was a top pastor at a huge church in California when one day he broke down emotionally at a men’s retreat. He did not fall into sin. Spencer backed out before the stress and pressure ate him up.

He moved on to serve as an elder at Rock Harbor, another growing church in California. Sure enough the pastor of this large congregation had an affair. Is any of this starting to make sense???

In my view we can have pastors of large churches, but I agree with church planter Neil Cole who says that mega churches should not be the norm.

Small is beautiful and allows the church to distribute leadership more evenly. We can have paid pastors, but must also be wary of expecting too much from them. In the midst of the ruins surrounding Ted Haggard and his church, I pray that we can find new leadership models and church structures that do not set up pastors for break downs.

My absolute favorite pastel artist is showing her work at the Southern Vermont Arts Center. Skye Forest is an award-winning pastel artist who has a fairly hectic job working with children.

Her paintings offer a counter-balance with some of the most serene, magical scenes you could ever imagine. They have an almost photographic quality, while also possessing something else that I can’t quite put my finger on.

Her latest batch of landscapes explore a wide variety of colors, including purple sunsets, golden fields, and the usual interaction with blue streams.

Though I do not seek out violent or depressing films, I am not a stranger to them. In fact, one of my favorites is Saving Private Ryan. This is not because I have a lust for violence, but because this film shoes war in all of its ignominy and asks important questions about the value of life.

Munich is another such film that confronts terrorism and counter-terrorism, showing the endless depravity that grips both sides. There are no heroes in this movie, only small pieces caught up in something far larger and more ruthless than they can ever imagine.

With a series of assassination attempts and murders, it is by far the most violent movie I have ever seen. It’s disturbing in many ways, but it has to be.

I have always been astonished by the endless circle of violence that is so easy to perpetuate. The Middle East is certainly caught in it and has been for some time. One of the main points of the movie was that with each assassination, another terrorist who is far more violent rises to replace the fallen leader.

The main Israeli assassin is confronted with this truth along with the approval of many at home. They see him as a patriot who is defending their country.

The final shot of the film shows the disillusioned main character standing in a park by himself with the twin towers looming in the background (remember this took place in the 70’s). That haunting scene is a challenge to the way in which we deal with terrorism.

Read more about Operation Wrath of God, the Israeli assassination campaign.

Barack Obama is one of the most popular politicians in America right now. He’s sharp, friendly, and he doesn’t keep track of his web site. What was that you say? His web site?

Yes, yes. Politicians not only fail to read the legislation they pass, they also fail to read their own web sites. It’s all the rage right now.

Martha Rainville, who almost looks as friendly and “aw shucks” as Obama, found herself in quite a mess when one of her staffers ripped policy information from some noted Democrats, such as Queen Hilary. Yes, the bloggers had a field day with it. Of course it’s nothing she couldn’t fix without passing the buck.

But now I’m off track. Back to our good, cheerful friend Barack Obama.

Obama has several articles in the latest issue of Time magazine. They are quite good. I read most of them in line at the supermarket. In his article on faith he shares the following story about his own web site negligence in the article about his spiritual journey:

“The reason the doctor was considering voting for my opponent was not my position on abortion as such. Rather, he had read an entry that my campaign had posted on my website, suggesting that I would fight “right-wing ideologues who want to take away a woman’s right to choose.” He went on to write:

“Whatever your convictions, if you truly believe that those who oppose abortion are all ideologues driven by perverse desires to inflict suffering on women, then you, in my judgment, are not fair-minded. … I do not ask at this point that you oppose abortion, only that you speak about this issue in fair-minded words.”

I checked my website and found the offending words. They were not my own; my staff had posted them to summarize my pro-choice position during the Democratic primary, at a time when some of my opponents were questioning my commitment to protect Roe v. Wade. Within the bubble of Democratic Party politics, this was standard boilerplate, designed to fire up the base. The notion of engaging the other side on the issue was pointless, the argument went; any ambiguity on the issue implied weakness.”

Ah, so we can go easy on Martha. If Obama, the true “man with the plan,” can let someone else botch up his web site, let’s go easy on Rainie (if I may insert my own Bushism).

It’s not her fault that politicians don’t read their own web sites. It’s just par for the course.

The Rutland Herald has a great review of the exhibit, Memories of WWII: Archives of the Associated Press, at the Southern Vermont Arts Center.

I’m not sure I can sleep tonight after reading this:

“Agonizing as it is to admit, Göring himself made a statement during the Nuremberg trials that is unnervingly germane to the state of the world today.

He said, ‘It is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.’”

That sounds way too true and way too familiar.

After praying for my step-mom last night (she’s having another tumor removed today and prayers for her are appreciated) I began to think about our cultural expectations of suffering and pain. For the most part we assume that we are entitled to good health. Our culture is obsessed with looking thin, fit, and in the prime of life between 18 and 30 years old.

When suffering afflicts us or someone we know, we generally act as if this unnatural or even wrong. Some have abandoned God when placed in such a situation. But is suffering unusual? Is it not a normal part of life in a broken world? Can we truly confine pain, suffering, and death within the walls of hospitals and nursing homes?

While reading the prison letters of Dietrich Bonhoeffer the other day, I was once again confronted with the place that suffering holds in our lives. It cannot be avoided. Bonhoeffer embraced his sufferings and in that dark place, he found God.

That is where the cross becomes so important. If there wasn’t a God who was willing to suffer with us, to promise his comforting presence, and to offer the hope of resurrection and new life some day, then we would do well to become hedonists and let as many good times roll as we can. The Bible never sugar-coats life. The Psalms, for instance, are full of complaints, laments, and pleas for help.

We create the expectations for smooth sailing. We are the ones who expect health and prosperity. Our greatest failure is the inability to recognize what health and prosperity look like even in the midst of suffering.

Today I’m wrapping up my little series, the only kind of series that I can handle, on blogging and the sexes. My intention has been to address the following question today:

“3. Why aren’t more women bloggers noticed in general? And then the follow up: Why aren’t women bloggers as prominent as men in the emerging church?”

Over the past week a number of possible reasons have surfaced from various commenters, here’s a run-down:
1. Men more numerous in the computer field and have an edge on blogging.
2. In the church, more men are in ministry and can combine blogging with their ministry.
3. Fewer women blog and consequently are not noticed as often by men who link to one another and command the majority of the blog traffic.
4. In some cases women blog in a different style than men and are unfortunately and unjustly marginalized.
5. Subtle discrimination that still lurks in our culture.
6. Lack of initiative to bring women into the blog conversation.

The last one is the most important for me at this point. Instead of lamenting that men do not notice women, I’d like to provide some possible ways to include women in blogging conversations. There have already been some excellent posts about ways to include women in the emerging church, and blogs are part of that, but I want to address ways men can help bring women into the blogging conversation. Here are some things that I’ve been up and would recommend doing:

- Take a look at the list of blogs that you read regularly and try to get a sense of what your preferences are in the blogs you read. Do these preferences unnecessarily exclude women? (for example, you may only want to read blogs on football or hockey, and you probably will not find many blogs by women on these topics. But if you’re interested in the church or in politics, you can certainly find women who are doing an excellent job of blogging).

- Look for female bloggers in the blogrolls of your favorite blogs. Go to their sites and then visit the sites of all the women on their blog rolls. If you have Firefox as your web browser (as most certainly should be the case), you can open all of these pages in tabs all at once and check them out.

- Try to find a site that aggregates blogs in your area of interest and scan them for women. For example, emerging church blogs or emerging women are both good places to start for the emerging church.

- If you’re like me and you don’t have a ton of time to read through all of these blogs, do yourself a favor and set up a bloglines account. This will make it very easy to check on the blogs when they have new content without having to visit every day. You can even set up your blogline page to only have the first few lines of the post. This will give you a chance to find out which blogs are a good fit for your blog roll.

Any other ideas?

The NY Times reports: US Church eases gay bishop stance

“The US Episcopal Church has agreed to ‘exercise restraint’ in appointing gay bishops in an effort to prevent its expulsion from the Anglican communion.”

I previously posted my thoughts on the differences between men and women bloggers. I know there is no formula to follow and that exceptions will always come up. In fact, there may be a lot of exceptions. But if we can hit on some of the differences between men and women in the world of blogs, perhaps we will find some of the reasons why men do not pay enough attention to female bloggers.

Do women and men blog differently? Here is what some women had to say in the comment section last week:

Kim wrote . . .
I think men tend to report on what they think they’ve figured out and women tend to write about what & how they are experiencing something.

Makeesha wrote . . .
I don’t think I write all that differently from many male bloggers I read that write about similar things so I’m not sure I can support that theory…not personally anway

Tammy wrote . . .
In my experience, women tend to blog like they talk -longer stories, more details, lots of emotions, and the whole story instead of the conclusion. Another thing i notice is that men tend to have a blog that is about a defined topic. Women tend to have a blog that has attention deficit disorder. That is yet another generalization, so don’t try to engage me in a debate about gender roles!

Well that’s enough said for now. I don’t want to go on and on with how I fell about all of this . . . I need to just get to the facts and stick to the topic . . .

In all seriousness, I agree with the above statements. They are all on to something. I think men and women do blog differently, but there are always exceptions. Tommorrow I hope to address how men can pay more attention to female bloggers and what a more equal online discussion looks like.

If you haven’t had enough, I asked my friend Josh (the co-author and creator of this blog) to ask his wife Jamie to chime in on this issue. She has three small children at an age where most women are thinking about having their first. I think she is wise beyond her years and has always been a very passionate disciple. Don’t get lost in her generalizations or comments on feminism though. Those thoughts are merely footnotes to her thoughts on humility and sensitivity to God’s Holy Spirit. I was hoping to include her voice in the discussion and am glad she stopped by.

OK, it’s time to go, the rabbits are assaulting our Poang chair.

Last week I posted my Confessions of a Sexist Blog Reader after discovering that I am far too likely to read blogs by guys just like myself (though probably taller). The comment section quickly filled up with some helpful thoughts, some frustration, and some questions. It didn’t seem right to take little shots at answering the comments when I didn’t have time. I think this issue is important enough to warrant another full post or two. I hope to give this issue the attention that it deserves.

Here are some of the core issues/questions that came up:

1. Where do bloggers, men especially, find the time?
2. Do women and men blog differently?
3. Why aren’t more women bloggers noticed in general? And then the follow up: Why aren’t women bloggers as prominent as men in the emerging church?

I’ll take a crack at the first question today . . .

I have to admit that I am mystified sometimes by the amount of time that some bloggers pour into their design, posts, images, etc. This blog here is pretty plain and it has become even more plain because I’ve decided that it’s not worth spending time on editing pictures to have some eye candy on the site. Other people can do it, but I’d rather spend more time on content. But back to our question: where does the time come from?

Read the rest of this entry »

I have a rule. The rule is that I only put up links to blogs that I read in my Bloglines reader. It’s not a perfect one to one correspondence, but I see no need to clutter our blog with links just for the heck of it.

And then I noticed a problem. Shoot, I only read blogs by men. Many of them are in my age group even. A few women have made the list of course, my favorites being Maggie Dawn, 802 Online’s Cathy Resmer, and Natasha Tynes. But when it comes to reading Christian or emerging church blogs, the list still has a large number of men on it. On one hand, this does make sense since most blogs in this category seem to be by men. I doubt that women are being intentionally suppressed or anything of that sort. The bigger problem is getting the men to notice the women who are blogging.

And concerning Christian/Emerging Church Blogs Especially . . .
The next question is, “Who defines the standards of a ‘good blog’?” I confess I’m stepping into a black hole of sorts, but I can’t help thinking that women seem to blog . . . differently from men. Perhaps men are more detached, while women are more present emotionally. I don’t mean this as a critique, but there have been times when I have read a woman’s blog and thought, “Whoa, that is too much personal information!” It’s not a matter of right or wrong, it’s a matter of what people begin to accept as a norm. And if women blog differently, that may mean that men, who seem to do the majority of the blogging, are less likely to notice them. Why? Because they have different standards for a good blog and unfortunately their standards may have taken over.

It’s a theory, but there has to be something to it. There are countless other reasons for these trends, but that’s my two cents.

In order to branch out and read some noteworthy women’s blogs, I did a bit of searching last night and I think I have found a few blogs that are different from what I would usually pick, but quite good:

Hard Soap Girls: This is a group of four women from all over the world who blog together on life and Christianity. The title comes from a great C. S. Lewis quote about not peddling soft soap Christianity. They do some good reflection on scripture and talk very frankly about their lives. The glam shots on the “about” page were a little over the top in my book, but I guess they work.

Lynne Taylor: Not to be known only as “the wife of Steve Taylor,” Lynne has a great blog where she records her thoughts on church planting, spirituality, and life. She’s been blogging since February 2004.

If anyone else has some thoughts on why the blogs of women are tough to find in the emerging church conversation, I’m open to suggestions. For now, enjoy these fine blogs and check out my blog log for a few more women bloggers of note. There are a few other I’m keeping on the back burner for now, but may add in the future.

If Christians are intent on wasting their time, they should find a frivolous little hobby to fritter away the hours. This is far more preferable than fighting for an amendment to the Constitution that bans gay marriage. The latest hysteria is shameful, as in the Washington Post’s latest article. Conservative Republicans are waving the gay marriage flag for a few days to rouse their dissatisfied or indifferent constituents out of their haze. Gay marriage is the bait intended to lure wayward Christian Republicans back to the right.

Are Christians biting? Some are. As for myself, I have grown weary of the hype about the gay marriage amendment. Please just let it die and let the states make their own mess.

As for my personal views on this topic, I have always felt that gay couples should be allowed to marry. That seems to be a no-brainer for me. Marriage does not need to be “protected,” come on, we’ve already trashed it with a 50% divorce rate. We spend $20,000 on the wedding, $5,000 on the honeymoon, and zip on pre-marital counseling. If we’re worried about immorality and adultery, heterosexual couples have done enough damage to marriage.

If a gay couple wants to make a life-long commitment to one another, receive health benefits, and derive the other practical benefits that marriage brings, isn’t that preferable to forcing them to shack up together without a formal commitment before witnesses?

Regarding the teachings of the scripture and the topic of gay marriage, I certainly am in more of a haze about it since moving to Vermont. The Bible does make some clear statements against homosexuality, but some sincere Christians do believe that times have changed. It’s a tough one. What do you say to someone who knows he/she is homosexual? I can’t say, “No you’re not, it’s just sin.” How do I know?

If anything, I can point this person to God. Show them to the Father, and let Him sort it out. That may seem weak to some, and not nice enough for others, but that’s my place for now. Since I don’t know what to do with the texts about homosexuality in the Bible, I’m willing to step back a little. I have no problem repeating what the Bible says, but I also suspect that wherever I stand on this topic, I’ll probably be wrong.

Do I think homosexuality is a sin? Let’s step back. The Bible teaches that sex outside of marriage is a sin. So banning gay marriage is a big problem then. If a gay couple cannot even marry, they are in a tight spot. Would God consider a married homosexual couple to be sinful? That is where I’m stuck. We can propose arguments from scripture and from experience that fall on both sides.

This is a tough topic, do we really need to have it all figured out? If the answer is yes, then perhaps it’s time for a nice game of Skip-Bo or perhaps croquet.