It was my original intent to write a review of this film, but time has passed and I'm not sure I would sy anything that has not already been said by people who can say it far better than I. So instead of reviewing the film, which I enjoyed, I want to share some mental meanderings that are closely connected to it. These have been born out of conversations I have had regarding the film.
I guess my biggest question is that I wonder how people who did not read the books reacted to the film, but more importantly, I think my question should be, how do those who do not know the Gospel, respond to the Narnia stories and the film.
You see, when I saw the film, I reacted to particular points emotionally, just as I did when I read the books. As I was watching the movie, I could sense two different sources for that kind of reaction.
The first source was connecting what I was watching to the story I had read and loved not all that long ago (I did not read the books until my first year at Seminary at 26 years old), I remember specifically making the connections to the points in the story that I liked so well, and I was reacting with gladness or slight disappointment at how the movie stayed or strayed with the story written by C.S. Lewis.
But there was a deeper connection going on as well. Just as when I read the book for the first time, the story that Lewis tells is deeply connected to another story that lives within my very self, the accounts of Jesus Christ in the Gospel. This movie connects me to a much deeper and much broader narrative, and it is that narrative that gives me the love I have for these books and this movie.
And so, that being said, I have to wonder how others who do not have that other narrative inside them respond to these books and this film. The interactions I have had so far with those who did not like the books was precisely because they did not 'get it'. In fact, one woman said she could not follow the story at all and really hated it. She felt it did not make any sense at all. When the parallels to the Gospel were pointed out to her, she did a complete 180 on the spot, seeing the connections and having made them, said she needed to go back and read the books again.
I know I should expect that those who do not know about redemption should not be expected to 'see it' in these books and films - but I just can't get past thinking "How can they not see it?"
Interesting and wonderful to think how the work of the Holy Spirit extends past understanding of Scripture and Salvation and touches every part of our lives and how we view the world around us.
Wednesday, December 28, 2005
A Great Deception
A fellow blogger pointed out this.
I'm going to quote part of his post:
I'm going to quote part of his post:
Ok guys, she looks pretty good, doesn't she? And how many of you woman wished you were built like this? Pretty impressive for a 14 year old. Too bad she's fake...
go to the site, then click the image and it will launch a flash viewer that walks you through the step by step process of how they digitally enhanced this young girl to make her look spectacular. Look at what they are changing, and ask yourself why.
What's the point here? This is what guys are demanding, what girls are aspiring to - and its a fiction. It's also a recipe for disaster. It destroys relationships, it belittles the image of God in all of us.
Shocking? It should be. The group who created this example is called GirlPower, and they're trying to illustrate where things are going in out culture. Yet where's the church in all this? It seems to me this is precisely the type of thing the gospel should be challenging in our culture, and I wonder if we could learn something from how GirlPower folks have gone about it...
Comments?
Thanks to Christian
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
The Birth and Death of Christmas
Before Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem some two thousand years ago, the entire world was immersed in deep darkness. Only in Israel did the light dispel the darkness, but even there the light was dimmed by the traditions of men. With the rising of the Sun of Righteousness (Malachi 4:2.), the Light of the World (John 1:9; 3:19; 8:12; 9:5; 12:46.) dawned not only on those sitting in the darkness of Galilee (Isaiah 9:1-7.) but on the whole pagan world. (Colossians 1:6.)
The Old Testament looked forward to the hallowing presence of God extending throughout the whole world. There would come a new covenant, (Jeremiah 31:31ff.; Ezekiel 36:24ff.) and all of life would become sacred. Instead of the Levitical principle of the unclean defiling the clean, (Leviticus 7:19-21; Haggai 2:12-14.) a fountain for cleansing would be opened. (Zechariah 13:1.) From under the threshold of the temple, the river of God's presence would flow, deeper and wider as it went, transforming all before it. (Ezekiel 47:1-12.) What had been inscribed on the miter of the high priest (Exodus 28:36-38.) would now be inscribed on the bells of horses, and the work of mothers, toiling over meals, would now become as sacred as the work of the priests in the Temple. (Zechariah 14:20, 21.)
As the Apostles took the message of the Messiah to the Jews of the Diaspora, they had a point of contact in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Upon arrival in a pagan city, Paul sought out the gatherings of the Jews on their Sabbath. (Acts 13:14; 16:13; 17:2.) Then he would open the Scriptures and proclaim the good news of Jesus the Messiah (Acts 13:42; 18:4.). Many non-Jews, hungry for more than their pagan religions offered, assembled with the Jews and were won to the Messiah of Israel. (Acts 13:44.)
On those occasions when there was no Jewish point of contact, Paul sought out things within the pagan world that hinted that there was more to life than what the ancient gods offered them. Even though God had given the nations over to the demonic principalities and powers (Deuteronomy 4:19, 20;1 Corinthians 10:20; Galatians 4:8.), he had done so with his treasure, Israel, in view (Deuteronomy 32:8.) that in the fullness of time (Galatians 4:4.) all nations might be blessed in the Seed of Abraham. (Galatians 3:13-16.) He did not leave himself without witness, doing good to the pagans, giving them rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness (Acts 14:16, 17.). He made all nations from one and had determined their epochs and borders in order that they should seek him. (Acts 17:26.)
While an all-encompassing depravity marked the whole family of man, the gnarled and broken remnant of the divine image remained as part of the very essence of human existence. All of humankind not only retained a basic sense of right and wrong, their consciences bearing witness to the work of God's moral law on their hearts, (Romans 2:14-15.) but they also held a repressed knowledge of the true God. (Romans 1:18-25.) Because God's temporal kindness extends to the whole world, pagans spoke truth, such as that articulated by the poets Aratus, Epimenides, Cleanthes and Menander. (Acts 17:28; 1Corinthians 15:33; Titus 1:12.) It was an imperfect thing, this pagan truth, and almost always distorted away from God and his Word, but it formed a backdrop against which the Apostles displayed the victory of Jesus over the dark powers.
The Apostles had the Old Testament as a model. The old Prophets had used pagan myth to proclaim the power and majesty of the one true God. What are the "gods" of chaos, the dragons of the deep, such as Tiamat (Leviathan, Rahab.), compared to Yahweh? (Job 9:13; 26:12; 38:8-11; Psalm 74:12ff.;87:4; 89:10; Isaiah 30:7; 51:9; Ezekiel 29:3.)
It was in such a tradition that Saint Paul stood one day on Mars Hill and preached the good news of the dying and rising God to the Athenians. He took as his starting point a pagan altar: "Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you." (Acts 17:23.) He began with the nugget of truth that was implicitly preserved within their pagan worship and used that to preach the victory of the Lord Jesus Christ.
As centuries came and went, the ancient torch bearers of the truth told the old, old story, ever adapting the timeless message to the pagan cultures around them. They pointed to the longings of sinful people -- longings that could only be satisfied at the foot of a cross, in the shadow of an empty tomb. Sometimes they took objects of nature, as Saint Patrick is said to have done with the shamrock to present the nature of the one true God. Sometimes they expropriated the pagans' own nature celebrations to present the great truths about Jesus: his virgin birth, sinless life, substitutionary death and triumphant resurrection. Schaff commented about the ancient Roman, late December festivals that were held "in honor of the sun, who in the winter solstice is, as it were, born anew and begins his conquering march. This phenomenon in nature was regarded as an appropriate symbol of the appearance of the Sun of Righteousness dispelling the long night of sin and error." Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church,Volume I, (Scribner's Sons, 1916.)
It is out of that milieu where the gospel of Christ first dispelled the demonic darkness of the ancient, pagan world that so many things that we do as Christians have come. For over a millennium and a half, the pagan festivals have been superseded by those of Christ. The ancient winter festival came to point to the incarnation of our Lord Jesus. Even though the eleventh century division of the Church into East and West separated the day for Christmas, the pageant itself was never dislodged, not even by the Protestant Reformation. As he did with so much of the rest of the traditional clutter that buried the gospel, Luther sought to refine Christmas into a truly Christian holy day. Calvin, too, generally the more thoroughgoing of the two great Reformers, still kept Christmas in Geneva, much to the consternation of the Scots, who seeing that it had no explicit biblical warrant, banned it altogether.
Two thousand years have come and gone since the birth of our Lord. Ever since the ancient Brumaliae were baptized into Christmas, the believer has been confronted with the conflict: instead of the triumphant Sun of Righteousness, the Risen Lord, Jesus Christ, pagan humankind turns to the beatific, ever-Virgin mother, the Queen of Heaven. (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17ff.) But ours is a still darker time. Satan appears to have been released from the pit, once again to deceive the nations and turn them back to their ancient roots. (Revelation 20:1-3, 7-9.) The overthrow of Christian civilization is proceeding apace, and we are reverting to our pagan roots, roots that were soiled through with demonic things. Christ is being sanitized from Christmas altogether, and the old pagan roots quickly rise to displace the biblical Christ with one made according to human imagination. The nations that once comprised Christendom will no longer tolerate the public mention of Jesus' name, but a supernatural figure, a fat elf, clad in red, who winks at sin and gives gifts to those who are good, Santa Claus, is worshipped throughout the world on Christmas.
Christmas is our blessing and our curse. To the extent that we use Christmas truly to present the Lord Jesus, we follow in the footsteps of those who first brought the gospel to many of our ancestors. But it is a thing that, unbridled by Scripture, takes on a power of its own and leaves in its wake a mountain of debt, depression and debauchery.
-BV
thanks again to Bob Vincent
The Old Testament looked forward to the hallowing presence of God extending throughout the whole world. There would come a new covenant, (Jeremiah 31:31ff.; Ezekiel 36:24ff.) and all of life would become sacred. Instead of the Levitical principle of the unclean defiling the clean, (Leviticus 7:19-21; Haggai 2:12-14.) a fountain for cleansing would be opened. (Zechariah 13:1.) From under the threshold of the temple, the river of God's presence would flow, deeper and wider as it went, transforming all before it. (Ezekiel 47:1-12.) What had been inscribed on the miter of the high priest (Exodus 28:36-38.) would now be inscribed on the bells of horses, and the work of mothers, toiling over meals, would now become as sacred as the work of the priests in the Temple. (Zechariah 14:20, 21.)
As the Apostles took the message of the Messiah to the Jews of the Diaspora, they had a point of contact in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. Upon arrival in a pagan city, Paul sought out the gatherings of the Jews on their Sabbath. (Acts 13:14; 16:13; 17:2.) Then he would open the Scriptures and proclaim the good news of Jesus the Messiah (Acts 13:42; 18:4.). Many non-Jews, hungry for more than their pagan religions offered, assembled with the Jews and were won to the Messiah of Israel. (Acts 13:44.)
On those occasions when there was no Jewish point of contact, Paul sought out things within the pagan world that hinted that there was more to life than what the ancient gods offered them. Even though God had given the nations over to the demonic principalities and powers (Deuteronomy 4:19, 20;1 Corinthians 10:20; Galatians 4:8.), he had done so with his treasure, Israel, in view (Deuteronomy 32:8.) that in the fullness of time (Galatians 4:4.) all nations might be blessed in the Seed of Abraham. (Galatians 3:13-16.) He did not leave himself without witness, doing good to the pagans, giving them rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling their hearts with food and gladness (Acts 14:16, 17.). He made all nations from one and had determined their epochs and borders in order that they should seek him. (Acts 17:26.)
While an all-encompassing depravity marked the whole family of man, the gnarled and broken remnant of the divine image remained as part of the very essence of human existence. All of humankind not only retained a basic sense of right and wrong, their consciences bearing witness to the work of God's moral law on their hearts, (Romans 2:14-15.) but they also held a repressed knowledge of the true God. (Romans 1:18-25.) Because God's temporal kindness extends to the whole world, pagans spoke truth, such as that articulated by the poets Aratus, Epimenides, Cleanthes and Menander. (Acts 17:28; 1Corinthians 15:33; Titus 1:12.) It was an imperfect thing, this pagan truth, and almost always distorted away from God and his Word, but it formed a backdrop against which the Apostles displayed the victory of Jesus over the dark powers.
The Apostles had the Old Testament as a model. The old Prophets had used pagan myth to proclaim the power and majesty of the one true God. What are the "gods" of chaos, the dragons of the deep, such as Tiamat (Leviathan, Rahab.), compared to Yahweh? (Job 9:13; 26:12; 38:8-11; Psalm 74:12ff.;87:4; 89:10; Isaiah 30:7; 51:9; Ezekiel 29:3.)
It was in such a tradition that Saint Paul stood one day on Mars Hill and preached the good news of the dying and rising God to the Athenians. He took as his starting point a pagan altar: "Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you." (Acts 17:23.) He began with the nugget of truth that was implicitly preserved within their pagan worship and used that to preach the victory of the Lord Jesus Christ.
As centuries came and went, the ancient torch bearers of the truth told the old, old story, ever adapting the timeless message to the pagan cultures around them. They pointed to the longings of sinful people -- longings that could only be satisfied at the foot of a cross, in the shadow of an empty tomb. Sometimes they took objects of nature, as Saint Patrick is said to have done with the shamrock to present the nature of the one true God. Sometimes they expropriated the pagans' own nature celebrations to present the great truths about Jesus: his virgin birth, sinless life, substitutionary death and triumphant resurrection. Schaff commented about the ancient Roman, late December festivals that were held "in honor of the sun, who in the winter solstice is, as it were, born anew and begins his conquering march. This phenomenon in nature was regarded as an appropriate symbol of the appearance of the Sun of Righteousness dispelling the long night of sin and error." Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church,Volume I, (Scribner's Sons, 1916.)
It is out of that milieu where the gospel of Christ first dispelled the demonic darkness of the ancient, pagan world that so many things that we do as Christians have come. For over a millennium and a half, the pagan festivals have been superseded by those of Christ. The ancient winter festival came to point to the incarnation of our Lord Jesus. Even though the eleventh century division of the Church into East and West separated the day for Christmas, the pageant itself was never dislodged, not even by the Protestant Reformation. As he did with so much of the rest of the traditional clutter that buried the gospel, Luther sought to refine Christmas into a truly Christian holy day. Calvin, too, generally the more thoroughgoing of the two great Reformers, still kept Christmas in Geneva, much to the consternation of the Scots, who seeing that it had no explicit biblical warrant, banned it altogether.
Two thousand years have come and gone since the birth of our Lord. Ever since the ancient Brumaliae were baptized into Christmas, the believer has been confronted with the conflict: instead of the triumphant Sun of Righteousness, the Risen Lord, Jesus Christ, pagan humankind turns to the beatific, ever-Virgin mother, the Queen of Heaven. (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17ff.) But ours is a still darker time. Satan appears to have been released from the pit, once again to deceive the nations and turn them back to their ancient roots. (Revelation 20:1-3, 7-9.) The overthrow of Christian civilization is proceeding apace, and we are reverting to our pagan roots, roots that were soiled through with demonic things. Christ is being sanitized from Christmas altogether, and the old pagan roots quickly rise to displace the biblical Christ with one made according to human imagination. The nations that once comprised Christendom will no longer tolerate the public mention of Jesus' name, but a supernatural figure, a fat elf, clad in red, who winks at sin and gives gifts to those who are good, Santa Claus, is worshipped throughout the world on Christmas.
Christmas is our blessing and our curse. To the extent that we use Christmas truly to present the Lord Jesus, we follow in the footsteps of those who first brought the gospel to many of our ancestors. But it is a thing that, unbridled by Scripture, takes on a power of its own and leaves in its wake a mountain of debt, depression and debauchery.
-BV
thanks again to Bob Vincent
Monday, December 12, 2005
Don't be a Scrooge
I thought this piece on the Ligonier site was an interesting point of view. I'm undecided as to whether or not I am in complete agreement - so maybe I am a Scrooge too... but only about some things.
Marley's Message to Scrooge
"Bah! Humbug!" These two words are instantly associated with Charles Dickens' immortal fictional anti-hero, Ebenezer Scrooge. We all recognize that Ebenezer Scrooge was a mean person - stingy, insensitive, selfish, andunkind. What we often miss in our understanding of his character is that he was preeminently profane. "Bah! Humbug!" was his Victorian use of profanity. It was profane in that Scrooge demeaned what was holy. He trampled on the sanctity of Christmas. He despised the sacred. He was cynical toward the sublime.
Christmas is indeed the world's most joyous holiday. It is called a"holiday" because the day is holy. It is a day when businesses close, when families gather, when churches are filled, and when soldiers put down their guns for a 24-hour truce. It is a day that differs from every other day.
Every generation has its abundance of Scrooges. The church is full of them. We hear endless complaints of commercialism. We are constantly told to put Christ back into Christmas. We hear that the tradition of Santa Claus is a sacrilege. We listen to those acquainted with history murmur that Christmas isn't biblical, that the Church invented Christmas to compete with the ancient Roman festival honoring the bull-god Mithras. All this carping is but a modern dose of Scroogeism, our own sanctimonious profanation of the holy.
Sure, Christmas is a time of commerce. The high degree of commerce at Christmas is driven by one thing: the buying of gifts for others. To present our friends and families with gifts is not an ugly, ignoble vice. It incarnates the amorphous "spirit of Christmas." The tradition rests ultimately on the supreme gift God has given the world. God so loved the world, the Bible says, that He gave His only begotten Son. The giving of gifts is a marvelous response to the receiving of such a gift. For one day a year at least, we taste the sweetness inherent in the truth that it is more blessed to give than to receive.
Christ is still in Christmas, and for one brief season the secular world broadcasts the message of Christ over every radio station and television channel in the land. Not only music but the visual arts are present in abundance, bearing testimony to the historic significance of the birth of Jesus.
Kris Kringle is a mythical hero, not a villain. He is pure fiction - but afiction used to illustrate a glorious truth. And the early Christians had the wisdom to flee from Mithras and direct their zeal to the celebration of the birth of Christ. Who associates Christmas today with Mithras?
We celebrate Christmas because we cannot eradicate from our consciousness our profound awareness of the difference between the sacred and the profane. Man, in the generic sense, has an incurable propensity for marking sacred space and sacred time.
When God touches earth, the place is holy. When God appears in history, the time is holy. There was never a more holy place than the city of Bethlehem, where the Word became flesh. There was never a more holy time than Christmas morning when Emmanuel was born. Christmas is a holiday. It is the holiest of holy days. We must heed the warning of Jacob Marley: "Don't be a Scrooge" at Christmas.
Marley's Message to Scrooge
"Bah! Humbug!" These two words are instantly associated with Charles Dickens' immortal fictional anti-hero, Ebenezer Scrooge. We all recognize that Ebenezer Scrooge was a mean person - stingy, insensitive, selfish, andunkind. What we often miss in our understanding of his character is that he was preeminently profane. "Bah! Humbug!" was his Victorian use of profanity. It was profane in that Scrooge demeaned what was holy. He trampled on the sanctity of Christmas. He despised the sacred. He was cynical toward the sublime.
Christmas is indeed the world's most joyous holiday. It is called a"holiday" because the day is holy. It is a day when businesses close, when families gather, when churches are filled, and when soldiers put down their guns for a 24-hour truce. It is a day that differs from every other day.
Every generation has its abundance of Scrooges. The church is full of them. We hear endless complaints of commercialism. We are constantly told to put Christ back into Christmas. We hear that the tradition of Santa Claus is a sacrilege. We listen to those acquainted with history murmur that Christmas isn't biblical, that the Church invented Christmas to compete with the ancient Roman festival honoring the bull-god Mithras. All this carping is but a modern dose of Scroogeism, our own sanctimonious profanation of the holy.
Sure, Christmas is a time of commerce. The high degree of commerce at Christmas is driven by one thing: the buying of gifts for others. To present our friends and families with gifts is not an ugly, ignoble vice. It incarnates the amorphous "spirit of Christmas." The tradition rests ultimately on the supreme gift God has given the world. God so loved the world, the Bible says, that He gave His only begotten Son. The giving of gifts is a marvelous response to the receiving of such a gift. For one day a year at least, we taste the sweetness inherent in the truth that it is more blessed to give than to receive.
Christ is still in Christmas, and for one brief season the secular world broadcasts the message of Christ over every radio station and television channel in the land. Not only music but the visual arts are present in abundance, bearing testimony to the historic significance of the birth of Jesus.
Kris Kringle is a mythical hero, not a villain. He is pure fiction - but afiction used to illustrate a glorious truth. And the early Christians had the wisdom to flee from Mithras and direct their zeal to the celebration of the birth of Christ. Who associates Christmas today with Mithras?
We celebrate Christmas because we cannot eradicate from our consciousness our profound awareness of the difference between the sacred and the profane. Man, in the generic sense, has an incurable propensity for marking sacred space and sacred time.
When God touches earth, the place is holy. When God appears in history, the time is holy. There was never a more holy place than the city of Bethlehem, where the Word became flesh. There was never a more holy time than Christmas morning when Emmanuel was born. Christmas is a holiday. It is the holiest of holy days. We must heed the warning of Jacob Marley: "Don't be a Scrooge" at Christmas.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Poo
There are seasons of time in life that appear to fly by. We often look back on the last semester, or year, or even several years of our life and are surprised by how fast the time has gone. We spend so much effort doing things to capture particular moments in our minds, we take pictures and record family movies, forever pinning them to our digital refrigerator so we can revisit them and attempt to slow them down, relive them. We do certain things for entertainment with the particular purpose of stepping outside of the blazing speed of life to watch from the outside, to observe someone else's life in pseudo slow motion. Going to the theater, or to the movies is often one of the things that enable us to do that, but if you happened to find yourself at the movies this weekend you were in for a bit of a surprise.
I have enjoyed the Harry Potter movie franchise. Prior to this past summer I did not have the time or the interest in reading the books, and so was fully satisfied getting the abridged version of the story on screen. Something changed after the summer, perhaps it was the release of the trailer for Goblet of Fire, but a desire to read the books was firmly implanted in my mind. Though the interest was there, the time was not, so instead of reading the books I got my hands on the unabridged audio books, and utilized my commute to and from school, as well as my less frequent but longer commute to north Jersey where I fill the pulpit occasionally, to listen to all of the 6 current titles.
My very first impression as I listened to the first three books was how marvelous a job had been done by the film makers in staying with the story in the book and bringing it to life visually on the big screen. I was taken aback at how the characters were all so fully developed, and all the relationships firmly set, with little or nothing of importance cut away in the films. I intentionally went back and re-watched all three films to be sure I was remembering correctly, and I was.
With that backdrop you can imagine the expectation for Goblet of Fire. Even though it is longer by far than the previous 3 books, and preparing myself to be patient and understanding, knowing that they could not fit it all into one 2.5, even 4 hour film, I went excitedly to the movie theater with my wife with leveled expectation, but high hopes.
I'm not sure I have ever been so disappointed by a movie in my entire life, and I have seen a lot. This even trumped the huge let down of "The Matrix Reloaded" and its counterpart "Revolutions". Part of the problem is the fantastic job done by Peter Jackson with "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, which will likely be the standard for the Book to Movie Genre for generations to come. But the makers of the Harry Potter films could learn quite a bit from both of those projects. But before I get into that, let me give my full review.
The bottom line with this film is, I just didn't care. With every film in this franchise so far, (as well as in the books) care is taken to reacquaint the audience with the characters. We have been enabled to engage and relate to Harry in every book and each of the first three films. However, this time around there is simply no time given to such apparent "trivialities". This is the major problem with the film.
Many of you are saying, "yeah, but you only feel that way because you read the books, and if you didn't have that background knowledge then you wouldn't be so critical." Well, while this is often the case in such situations, I assure you that it is not so in this one. I have spoken with others who do not have any "special revelation" pertaining to the Harry Potter Universe and have only seen the movies, with the specific purpose of guarding against such judgment, and across the board the criticisms are the same. They said that, like me, they felt completely disconnected from the action of the film, that things just went too fast and they were not able to engage at all.
What they do not know; what only those who have read the books will see, is that the character development that was left on the cutting floor will come back to bite the producers of all the remaining films. I don't want to be a spoiler for those who do not know what happens next, but there are certain relationships, particularly those between Harry and his god-father Sirius, and Harry and Dumbledore, which are highly important to the rest of the story which were simply put to the side in favor of dragon's breath and seaweed.
On a positive note, the "dragon breath" and the "seaweed" mentioned above were absolutely excellent scenes, and near perfectly adapted from the book, as was the wonderful scene in the tub between Harry and Moaning Myrtle, but apart from those three scenes, without exaggeration, they failed miserably at bringing in the "feel" of the fourth book in the series.
The feel that I am speaking of, is impatience, an almost unnatural one that pervades the entire book. All of the books and the films are supposed to take place over an entire school year at Hogwarts, and while no movie can really get you to this place, the first 3 did a dramatically better job than Goblet. There are supposed to be months between each task, with days of preparation by each student, and in the film, they are seemingly rushed from one task to the next with only perhaps a day between. Harry is supposed to begin his journey in earnest to become a great and powerful wizard, but we never see him learn any spells, especially those that would help him in these tasks (which in the book are practiced with Ron and Hermione daily, for months). There is supposed to be a sense of foreboding, and impending doom, but in this film you can barely breathe without fear of missing something - we are not afforded the opportunity to wait and worry with Harry, to be frightened with him, or to care about him at all. Dumbledore, the usually caring and thoughtfully pensive old wizard is made to seem like a frantic meth addict, running about barely breathing between, often silly, out of character reactions. There is no time given to the formulation of thoughts and reactions. They are simply rushing from one 'cool' thing to the next with no real attempt to tell the story or develop any relationships which are so integral to the larger narrative.
What I don't understand is why they didn't do something about this during production. They must have watched the final product. Did they just throw up their hands? Did the studio set certain limits that left large amounts of film on the cutting room floor? I know this is likely at least partially the case, but you can't "speed up" acting - the scenes were intentionally fast paced, the dialogue was reminiscent of a David Mamet play, constantly being tossed back a forth without ever really being caught by anyone. Why didn't they do something?
This is where the comparisons to the other trilogy projects come in. In case anyone was wondering, J.K. Rowling is a genius. She has produced an amazing world in her stories that will likely, in 25 years, be as much of a literary staple as "The Lord of the Rings" was 25 years after its completion, if it is not already. One of the things that the Harry Potter people must learn from the "LotR" folks is this: Take as long as you need, but you must get it right. It is not as though this movie needed to be 4 hours long, it easily could have been, but it did not need to be. Even an extra 30 minutes would have added sufficient time to just slow down the overall pace a little, even if they did not work on some of the relationships I mentioned above.
If they wanted to really do it right, they could have made a KILLING by splitting up the movie into two parts and releasing the films within a few months of each other. I think this is the real winner here. I know I would have paid to see a 2 or even 3 part film that does more justice to the story it is telling. "LotR" and "Matrix" opened up the possibility for this kind of thing, as the endings to some of those films are somewhat anti-climactic, and leave you waiting for the continuation. I believe that, had the studio made a longer film and broke it up, the fans would be exponentially happier, the studio would have made exponentially more money, and the "slumping box office" I keep hearing about would have been exponentially boosted. Imagine a two or three part Potter film being released every two or three months in the theaters, and then think about that over the course of the next 3 books, all of which are likely to have similar problems. We are talking about at least six films, all with the potential of world-wide billion dollar box office returns. Why wouldn't they do it that way? I'm sure there is a reason, but no one has explained it to me yet.
One other thing, which is somewhat minor, but addressable nonetheless; they must get rolling on these other films. Get them shot and done before Harry looks 40 in his seventh year at Hogwarts. All of the characters are aging rather badly, none worse than Harry himself, who could easily get served in a US bar as he is, and we are supposed to suspend disbelief and consider him 14 years old. To use the Brits' own term: Rubbish. Of course, we are, and will be waiting awhile for the seventh book to come, but in the meantime - stop being such bloody gits and get to it!
To close, I am a huge fan of bringing books to the big screen. In fact, I have a few favorites in my own mind that I would love to see brought to the movies. But I would not dare do to any of them what has been done to this film. But I am hopeful that in the future, the studios will correct the mistakes made here and follow in the footsteps of other successful projects in making the full story come alive. All the cool effects in the world cannot tell a story, without the story.
I have enjoyed the Harry Potter movie franchise. Prior to this past summer I did not have the time or the interest in reading the books, and so was fully satisfied getting the abridged version of the story on screen. Something changed after the summer, perhaps it was the release of the trailer for Goblet of Fire, but a desire to read the books was firmly implanted in my mind. Though the interest was there, the time was not, so instead of reading the books I got my hands on the unabridged audio books, and utilized my commute to and from school, as well as my less frequent but longer commute to north Jersey where I fill the pulpit occasionally, to listen to all of the 6 current titles.
My very first impression as I listened to the first three books was how marvelous a job had been done by the film makers in staying with the story in the book and bringing it to life visually on the big screen. I was taken aback at how the characters were all so fully developed, and all the relationships firmly set, with little or nothing of importance cut away in the films. I intentionally went back and re-watched all three films to be sure I was remembering correctly, and I was.
With that backdrop you can imagine the expectation for Goblet of Fire. Even though it is longer by far than the previous 3 books, and preparing myself to be patient and understanding, knowing that they could not fit it all into one 2.5, even 4 hour film, I went excitedly to the movie theater with my wife with leveled expectation, but high hopes.
I'm not sure I have ever been so disappointed by a movie in my entire life, and I have seen a lot. This even trumped the huge let down of "The Matrix Reloaded" and its counterpart "Revolutions". Part of the problem is the fantastic job done by Peter Jackson with "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy, which will likely be the standard for the Book to Movie Genre for generations to come. But the makers of the Harry Potter films could learn quite a bit from both of those projects. But before I get into that, let me give my full review.
The bottom line with this film is, I just didn't care. With every film in this franchise so far, (as well as in the books) care is taken to reacquaint the audience with the characters. We have been enabled to engage and relate to Harry in every book and each of the first three films. However, this time around there is simply no time given to such apparent "trivialities". This is the major problem with the film.
Many of you are saying, "yeah, but you only feel that way because you read the books, and if you didn't have that background knowledge then you wouldn't be so critical." Well, while this is often the case in such situations, I assure you that it is not so in this one. I have spoken with others who do not have any "special revelation" pertaining to the Harry Potter Universe and have only seen the movies, with the specific purpose of guarding against such judgment, and across the board the criticisms are the same. They said that, like me, they felt completely disconnected from the action of the film, that things just went too fast and they were not able to engage at all.
What they do not know; what only those who have read the books will see, is that the character development that was left on the cutting floor will come back to bite the producers of all the remaining films. I don't want to be a spoiler for those who do not know what happens next, but there are certain relationships, particularly those between Harry and his god-father Sirius, and Harry and Dumbledore, which are highly important to the rest of the story which were simply put to the side in favor of dragon's breath and seaweed.
On a positive note, the "dragon breath" and the "seaweed" mentioned above were absolutely excellent scenes, and near perfectly adapted from the book, as was the wonderful scene in the tub between Harry and Moaning Myrtle, but apart from those three scenes, without exaggeration, they failed miserably at bringing in the "feel" of the fourth book in the series.
The feel that I am speaking of, is impatience, an almost unnatural one that pervades the entire book. All of the books and the films are supposed to take place over an entire school year at Hogwarts, and while no movie can really get you to this place, the first 3 did a dramatically better job than Goblet. There are supposed to be months between each task, with days of preparation by each student, and in the film, they are seemingly rushed from one task to the next with only perhaps a day between. Harry is supposed to begin his journey in earnest to become a great and powerful wizard, but we never see him learn any spells, especially those that would help him in these tasks (which in the book are practiced with Ron and Hermione daily, for months). There is supposed to be a sense of foreboding, and impending doom, but in this film you can barely breathe without fear of missing something - we are not afforded the opportunity to wait and worry with Harry, to be frightened with him, or to care about him at all. Dumbledore, the usually caring and thoughtfully pensive old wizard is made to seem like a frantic meth addict, running about barely breathing between, often silly, out of character reactions. There is no time given to the formulation of thoughts and reactions. They are simply rushing from one 'cool' thing to the next with no real attempt to tell the story or develop any relationships which are so integral to the larger narrative.
What I don't understand is why they didn't do something about this during production. They must have watched the final product. Did they just throw up their hands? Did the studio set certain limits that left large amounts of film on the cutting room floor? I know this is likely at least partially the case, but you can't "speed up" acting - the scenes were intentionally fast paced, the dialogue was reminiscent of a David Mamet play, constantly being tossed back a forth without ever really being caught by anyone. Why didn't they do something?
This is where the comparisons to the other trilogy projects come in. In case anyone was wondering, J.K. Rowling is a genius. She has produced an amazing world in her stories that will likely, in 25 years, be as much of a literary staple as "The Lord of the Rings" was 25 years after its completion, if it is not already. One of the things that the Harry Potter people must learn from the "LotR" folks is this: Take as long as you need, but you must get it right. It is not as though this movie needed to be 4 hours long, it easily could have been, but it did not need to be. Even an extra 30 minutes would have added sufficient time to just slow down the overall pace a little, even if they did not work on some of the relationships I mentioned above.
If they wanted to really do it right, they could have made a KILLING by splitting up the movie into two parts and releasing the films within a few months of each other. I think this is the real winner here. I know I would have paid to see a 2 or even 3 part film that does more justice to the story it is telling. "LotR" and "Matrix" opened up the possibility for this kind of thing, as the endings to some of those films are somewhat anti-climactic, and leave you waiting for the continuation. I believe that, had the studio made a longer film and broke it up, the fans would be exponentially happier, the studio would have made exponentially more money, and the "slumping box office" I keep hearing about would have been exponentially boosted. Imagine a two or three part Potter film being released every two or three months in the theaters, and then think about that over the course of the next 3 books, all of which are likely to have similar problems. We are talking about at least six films, all with the potential of world-wide billion dollar box office returns. Why wouldn't they do it that way? I'm sure there is a reason, but no one has explained it to me yet.
One other thing, which is somewhat minor, but addressable nonetheless; they must get rolling on these other films. Get them shot and done before Harry looks 40 in his seventh year at Hogwarts. All of the characters are aging rather badly, none worse than Harry himself, who could easily get served in a US bar as he is, and we are supposed to suspend disbelief and consider him 14 years old. To use the Brits' own term: Rubbish. Of course, we are, and will be waiting awhile for the seventh book to come, but in the meantime - stop being such bloody gits and get to it!
To close, I am a huge fan of bringing books to the big screen. In fact, I have a few favorites in my own mind that I would love to see brought to the movies. But I would not dare do to any of them what has been done to this film. But I am hopeful that in the future, the studios will correct the mistakes made here and follow in the footsteps of other successful projects in making the full story come alive. All the cool effects in the world cannot tell a story, without the story.
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Off-Season Wish List
Baseball season is over. It might have been the best world series ever, or it might have been the worst... we'll never know because no one was watching. I did watch a few innings here and there, but was disappointed by close games with the wrong team on the losing end. I have to say though that it was probably the best played, least watched world series of all time.The boys of summer will be missed, but as the crack of the bat gives way to the crunch of clashing helmets, there is one part of baseball that never goes away: Offseason rumors and the Hot-Stove.
As an aside; I never really understood where the phrase hot-Stove came from. Perhaps it refers to the deals that different teams have "cooking" during midseason before the deadline, and during the winter months. Or perhaps there is some other anecdote about GM's gathering around the fire to discuss deals that I've never heard about. In any case...
As any loyal baseball fan does, I have a dream list of the players available by free-agency or trade that I would like to see come to Shea for next season. It's not likely, but that's why we call it a wish list:
Prospective lineup:
SS Jose Reyes
CF Carlos Beltran
3B David Wright
RF Manny Ramirez
2B Alfonso Soriano
LF Cliff Floyd
1B Aubrey Huff
C Benji Molina
Other possible inserts that would be good, but cause some lineup shuffling would include Rafael Furcal at 2B, or Konerko at 1B.
Rotation:
Pedro Martinez
Barry Zito
Tom Glavine
A.J. Burnett
Steve Trachsel (or Kris Benson)
7th - Aaron Heilman
8th - Danny Baez
9th - Billy Wagner
Wow, what a dream team.
But in all honesty, I really don't want Soriano or Manny Ramirez.. I don't think I like Huff either, or Konerko for that matter. I would be totally content with Furcal at 2B and a platoon of Mike Jacobs and Xavier Nady at 1B, with Nady and Victor Diaz in RF. A lot of the players above don't appeal to me individually, but if they were all on the same roster it could be exciting.
That rotation is defintiely a dream, as it is highly unlikely that Zito or Burnett will come to NY, so insert Benson and Zambrano back to their respective spots.
The bullpen however is very doable, and would probably be the best late inning group out there. The Mets have a pretty decent prospect field to deal from, so they could make it happen.
While this lineup and rotation are a dream, the reality is that if the Mets can get Wagner and a big bat in the lineup like Manny, they could easily be in the playoffs and World Series contenders next year.
But it's only a dream for now.
Tuesday, November 08, 2005
Perfection
I recognize the extreme lameness (lameity?) of this, but as I often do, I found myself filling my time on the porceline throne by playing one of the games on my cell phone. Usually it is Ms. Pacman, but this time I went digital bowling and was rewarded by bowling a perfect game!
Since this will never come close to happening in real life, I figured I better try to take a picture and share my success.
Unfortunately it is nearly impossible to see the series of X's across the board, but you can make out the scrore of 300, and the "Perfect" across the bottom.
The sad part is that this is likely the only time that perfection of any sort will ever be associated with Greg Gentry - at least on this side of the eschaton.
Someday, I may actually post something of substance on this blog again.
Since this will never come close to happening in real life, I figured I better try to take a picture and share my success.
Unfortunately it is nearly impossible to see the series of X's across the board, but you can make out the scrore of 300, and the "Perfect" across the bottom.
The sad part is that this is likely the only time that perfection of any sort will ever be associated with Greg Gentry - at least on this side of the eschaton.
Someday, I may actually post something of substance on this blog again.
Pumpkin Sellouts
Halloween is such an iffy time for Christians. Many refuse to acknowledge the holiday for fear they will encourage the pagan basis on which the holiday was founded, and others have no quams with gettings as bloody and demonic as the next guy.
Me, I like Halloween. I always enjoyed carving pumpkins and getting dressed up for trick or treating. On the other hand, I am sensitive to the pagan side, and the glorification of the demonic that our society embraces (wow, that sounds dramatic), so I try to keep my own celebrations down to the minimalist variety. I like to decorate, but more along the lines of a harvest celebration than that of the gore and guts, ghouls and witches that seems to have enraptured young and old alike.
This year is the first that my wife and I are actually celebrating holidays at our own place. Last year we lived in an apartment on the 24th story, so decorating was mostly pointless. But this year we are living much closer to the ground, and in a neighborhood with quite a few kids, so we had an opportunity to dress up our place a bit, looking forward to the kids coming out in their costumes. So to get things started, we put up a harvest wreath on the door, and got some autumn leaves to decorate the railings, and we wanted to do something that neither of us had done in ages. We wanted to carve pumpkins.
I remember when we used to do it as kids, making a face that was funny or scary and trying hard to make our vision come to life on the pumpkins. But now, there are intricate patterns that take a steady hand and good eye to transfer onto your pumpkin. Part of me thinks that this is a kind of sellout, as if somehow the art of pumpkin carving, if ever there was such a thing, has now been taken over like so many other pure things from my childhood. On the other hand, these patterns they sell are not exactly for kids, as I don't know many who could actually follow them with much success. This is a way for us older kids to stay in the game, which is exactly what my wife and I did.
Here I am with one of the patterns I described, not the most difficult in the package, but nonetheless a challenge for my less than delicate fingers. You can see the progress I am making on the wolf's face.
Here is my wife's finished product before the lights go out. Her design was much more difficult than mine, and she did a great job on her haunted house.
Oooh, Ahhh, the lights go out and the candles are lit and the pumpkins come to life.
Unfortunately the fun lasts only a few nights. Before Halloween even came a squirrel had eaten one of the wolf's eyes, and eaten chunks of the haunted house, not to mention the ant infestation. But Halloween came and went, and fun was had by all. I was happy to see the little super heroes in my neighborhood far outnumbering the ghosts and ghouls. In fact, if memory serves, we had one kid who was the masked monster from the movie "Scream", and one little boy dressed as Satan himself, complete with pointed tail and pitchfork. Other than those two, it was mostly princesses, Batman, Superman and Spiderman. The older kids surprised me with their lack of enthusiasm, or lack of ingenuity... whichever the case may be. But most of them only donned black hooded cloaks with very little else to their costumes. Holidays like this must be a tough sell for teenagers - I suppose it was for me too.
Anyway, now that Halloween is over, our country can go full steam, right over thanksgiving, and begin the madness of the Christmas season. It's already happened in most department stores, even though it's still 65 degrees outside.
Happy Holidays.
Me, I like Halloween. I always enjoyed carving pumpkins and getting dressed up for trick or treating. On the other hand, I am sensitive to the pagan side, and the glorification of the demonic that our society embraces (wow, that sounds dramatic), so I try to keep my own celebrations down to the minimalist variety. I like to decorate, but more along the lines of a harvest celebration than that of the gore and guts, ghouls and witches that seems to have enraptured young and old alike.
This year is the first that my wife and I are actually celebrating holidays at our own place. Last year we lived in an apartment on the 24th story, so decorating was mostly pointless. But this year we are living much closer to the ground, and in a neighborhood with quite a few kids, so we had an opportunity to dress up our place a bit, looking forward to the kids coming out in their costumes. So to get things started, we put up a harvest wreath on the door, and got some autumn leaves to decorate the railings, and we wanted to do something that neither of us had done in ages. We wanted to carve pumpkins.
I remember when we used to do it as kids, making a face that was funny or scary and trying hard to make our vision come to life on the pumpkins. But now, there are intricate patterns that take a steady hand and good eye to transfer onto your pumpkin. Part of me thinks that this is a kind of sellout, as if somehow the art of pumpkin carving, if ever there was such a thing, has now been taken over like so many other pure things from my childhood. On the other hand, these patterns they sell are not exactly for kids, as I don't know many who could actually follow them with much success. This is a way for us older kids to stay in the game, which is exactly what my wife and I did.
Here I am with one of the patterns I described, not the most difficult in the package, but nonetheless a challenge for my less than delicate fingers. You can see the progress I am making on the wolf's face.
Here is my wife's finished product before the lights go out. Her design was much more difficult than mine, and she did a great job on her haunted house.
Oooh, Ahhh, the lights go out and the candles are lit and the pumpkins come to life.
Unfortunately the fun lasts only a few nights. Before Halloween even came a squirrel had eaten one of the wolf's eyes, and eaten chunks of the haunted house, not to mention the ant infestation. But Halloween came and went, and fun was had by all. I was happy to see the little super heroes in my neighborhood far outnumbering the ghosts and ghouls. In fact, if memory serves, we had one kid who was the masked monster from the movie "Scream", and one little boy dressed as Satan himself, complete with pointed tail and pitchfork. Other than those two, it was mostly princesses, Batman, Superman and Spiderman. The older kids surprised me with their lack of enthusiasm, or lack of ingenuity... whichever the case may be. But most of them only donned black hooded cloaks with very little else to their costumes. Holidays like this must be a tough sell for teenagers - I suppose it was for me too.
Anyway, now that Halloween is over, our country can go full steam, right over thanksgiving, and begin the madness of the Christmas season. It's already happened in most department stores, even though it's still 65 degrees outside.
Happy Holidays.
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Apparently I am Ephesians...
You are Ephesians.
Which book of the Bible are you?
brought to you by Quizilla
Maybe I am.. but I sure don't see how they can get this from asking 4 silly questions...
I imagine there are some days when I am Leviticus... other's I am Revelation, or Romans, and there are times when I am Ecclesiastes...
Suffice to say, this quiz is gay.
But feel free to tell me which book you happen to be today.
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Harvest Report
It's fall, and life is maddening. But I thought I'd stop and give a brief update on all things Gentry...
As you can see above, my wife is rather crafty. We went to "Michaels" crafts to buy a wreath for the fall, but they were upwards of $40. So when Natalie saw all that she needed about the store, she decided to make one, which she did beautifully, and for about a quarter of the price! I think it's cute.
We also managed to finish the bedroom. My wife will likely be upset for me showing these pics since they show a messy room, but I don't know anyone who sees this whose own bedroom is any cleaner than ours. Just know that it's not the norm. ;-)
Yes, those are my blue drawers...
Wow, you can see the dust on the TV!
We put our Dr. Suess painting up in the living room too. I had no idea how great it would look with the color of paint we used.
We still have more work to do... my office still has the ugly wallpaper up with the yummy smoke stains, and the hallway is still in tatters. This month, being as crazy as it is, doesn't seem to have room to get it done either. We were hoping to perhaps have a little halloween party, but it's not looking good. I have two sermons to write for the 23rd, midterms and papers as well. It's going to be an interesting couple of weeks.
Yet, somehow I have found time to listen in the car, and before bed, to the Harry Potter books on CD. I always wanted to read them, but knew I would never have time. The first three went pretty quick, but the last three are really long and taking me a bit of time to get through. I'm on the 5th book now, Order of the Pheonix and it's very good. They all are. Rowling is pretty ingenius. As the story continues it gets darker and darker, so I'm not sure I would read the later ones to my kids (when I have some) until they are older. I'm enjoying them though. I even find myself using language from the book - phrases I would not normally use. It's fun. I'm actually listening to it right now as I right this post.. only 2 CD's left!
Spending so much time doing other things has kept me far from the political scene, and I am not very sad about it. The more I hear the happier I am that I don't know enough about what is going on these days to have an informed opinion. The flashes of things I hear are not troubling enough at this point to draw my full attention.
I'm enjoying the baseball playoffs, and football has started again. However, for the first time since I started watching football, I'm really not all that excited about it. But since the Giants are at least pretty good offensively, I'll probabaly get into it a bit more before long. I think I am just a little disappointed by the Mets poor showing this year - even though they did better than most expected - and I don't want to get my hopes up again. It takes a lot of energy to root for a team for 6 months... It's like reading a good long book. When it's over, there is a bit of a mourning period... especially when one of the greatest Mets ever will likely no longer be playing with the team.
But I've spent more time here than I should have already, so I'm off to do the important stuff... like make dinner!
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
The New Place
Well, if you have been wondering what has been keeping me from updating my blog these days, one of the many things on the long list is the fact that on August 1rst we moved out of the city and into a nice little house apartment in the suburbs. It's the first floor of a little house not too far from school.
This however, was not the original plan. The plan was to move into an apartment complex only about a half mile away from Westminster, a place called Chestnut Hill Village. We had visited there and really liked the model they showed us, so we put down a small deposit and filled out the renter's application. We were approved and all was set for us to move in on the 30th of July. I had asked if we could see the unit we were going to move into, but for some reason we were not allowed to see it. It was May at this point mind you, so I figured it was simply because the current tenant would still be there. But when July rolled around and they still would not let us see our unit or any others, a few red flags went up. They wanted us to sign our lease a few weeks before we moved in, but I told them that unless I saw the actual unit I would not be signing anything. They told me the soonest I could see the unit was the day we moved in on the 30th. At that point, having already put in a deposit and paid the application fee, figured we would show up on the 30th and take our chances. Luckily it didn't get quite that far.
One week before the move, my wife is looking at Rent.net and looking at the place we were to spend the next year of our lives. Rent.net has a section where people can leave comments about their experience in a community. Much to our surprise, there were at least 100 comments left about Chestnut Hill Village, and there was not one single positive comment left by anyone other than their own management. Every kind of negative comment you can imagine was listed, from rats and cockroach infestations, to poor security (one person claimed to have been mugged in their own foyer!), and really poor service and repairs. My wife immediately started freaking out, as did I, and we decided that we should see if we could find somewhere else to live in the week we had left.
After a few phone calls and a look through the schools housing listings, we found this neat little place in a nice neighborhood that needed some work, but would make us feel a whole lot better than how we felt about Chestnut Hill Village. Deposit or no deposit, we just couldn't live there. Just to confirm that the comments we had read were not aberrations (100 aberrations?) and that we were not overreacting, we contacted people we knew that we found out had lived there before and came to find that all the stories were true. Everyone we spoke to suggested we run, and that is what we did...
Moving out of the Philly apartment was no fun. I really had no idea how much stuff we actually have, so my initial prediction of a quick and painless move quickly went out the window.
We had to book the elevator in our building quite a few weeks in advance in order to insure we'd be able to use it on our moving day. But unfortunately everyone else was moving that day too, so even at 5 weeks ahead of time, the entire day was booked. So instead of a Saturday afternoon, we were forced to do it on a Sunday. Not my ideal, but we had no choice. So after booking the elevator for the two hour allotted time slot, I went online to reserve a U-Haul truck.
Everything seemed in order when the day of the move came. After church my wife and I went to the U-Haul in our area to pick up the truck we reserved, only to find that the company had ridiculously over-booked the weekend. Under normal circumstances this would not have bothered me too much, being that I am so even tempered and all. However in this particular situation, having booked the elevator over a month beforehand, timing was of utmost importance. So, in what was for me an unusually forceful manner, I made our needs known to the person at the counter of the U-Haul place, and also his superiors at the front office over the phone. Those who know me understand that for me, being forceful does not include a raised voiced, but actually a slightly softer voice with a bit of an edge, accompanied by the subtlest of stern looks, which has become known in my family as "the black look". I've never considered myself to be intimidating at all, but if you ask the folks who have been on the receiving end of that look, apparently its a knee buckler... who knew? But I digress...
After a little "sweet talking", we were able to get another truck from a different location in enough time so that we did not lose our elevator slot. The truck was slightly smaller than expected, but it turned out to suit our needs just about perfectly.
I had a couple of friends stop by to help me load the truck with the "big stuff". They were not able to stay long, but we didn't have much stuff anyway, so I didn't think it would be a big deal after the two hours of elevator time had passed and my buds had to take off. Fortunately the person who booked the elevator after us apparently didn't need it. They never came looking for it. This worked out well because it was 3 hours after our time was supposed to be over that had I brought the last load down to the truck and had it all strapped in. We then packed up one of our cars and made the trip to the new place.
I don't know how it happened that I didn't think this far ahead, but eventually we actually got to the new place, and there I was with a full truck of furniture and only myself and my wife to unload it. It was already after 9pm, and the move that I thought was only going to take 4-6 hours had trumped that time by a long shot. And the night was still very young.
So I busted out the cell phone and began calling anyone I knew that might be able or willing to help us out. But it was late on a Sunday night and I did not get through to anyone. I was already very tired and rather frustrated at all the happenings of the day. I made one final call to the man I worked for over this summer, and by God's grace, he came over and helped me move the larger items out of the truck. I cannot describe the feeling of relief I had when I hung up that phone. I was renewed. So much in fact, that I unloaded most of the truck by myself, and when my boss showed up, there was only the largest pieces left to be moved. I was still very thankful. I don't think I'd have been able to do what I did without knowing help was imminent.
So we got all our stuff inside the house. That is, after Natalie and I went back to Philly, packed up both of our cars with what was left and made the last trip to the new place after cleaning up the old apartment. It was 4am before the heads hit the pillows - a very long day.
Now I told you all that, just so I could tell/show you this:
Like I said, when we moved in the place needed a little work. Natalie likes to say the place was "unlivable", but I wouldn't go that far. When we got here, all of the rooms looked like this:
You can't really get the fine point attributes of the room in this photo, but one of the things I like to point out is that the former tenant was a smoker, and if you look close in the above pic, you can see where there was something hanging on the wall. There is a nice outline of a mirror or picture that shows how the smoke seeped into the wallpaper. And with all that smoke, you can be sure there was a nice nicotine scent that wafted through the house and was especially pungent when you first walk in the house. This was also partially made worse by the silk curtains that were once white, but had been stained to a delicious cream color. Unlivable? no, but it wasn't pleasant.
The worst part about about the place was the wallpaper. It was just plain awful and ugly. It was a textured paper that felt like it was made of felt, and it was in every room but the kitchen and bathroom. Here's a close up:
Isn't it yummy?
Well, a little elbow grease goes a long way.
First Natalie pulled off as much paper as she could with just a scraper. We found that not only was the top layer of paper absolutely heinous, but that there was a long history of heinous paper that went back for generations. Here is a peek at that stage:
Then we got down to business a scraped off all the paper with razor blades and "Diff". Here is a shot of the finished bedroom sans the wallpaper.
don't let the green paint scare you - that is what was at the bottom of it all. 4 layers of paper and some dark green paint. Stylish!
But it does turn out nice in the end. Here are some shots of the first two rooms we've finished:
We are pretty happy with how things are shaping up - two rooms down and two to go.
Now, you might ask yourself - "Doesn't Greg only have one year left of school?"
And that is a great question. Yes I only have one year left, and after that I'm off to NJ for an internship and a possible job as an assistant pastor. So, why all the trouble for such a short stay?
Well, the answer is simple. I love my wife and want her to be happy while we're here. It was pretty much my idea to leave the city and the apartment she loved, so I'll do what I can to make this home for her.
And besides, it's a great deal for my landlord - He gets free labor and is reimbursing me for the materials we use, and after we leave, he can raise the rent!
I'll post more pics as the rooms get finished.
This however, was not the original plan. The plan was to move into an apartment complex only about a half mile away from Westminster, a place called Chestnut Hill Village. We had visited there and really liked the model they showed us, so we put down a small deposit and filled out the renter's application. We were approved and all was set for us to move in on the 30th of July. I had asked if we could see the unit we were going to move into, but for some reason we were not allowed to see it. It was May at this point mind you, so I figured it was simply because the current tenant would still be there. But when July rolled around and they still would not let us see our unit or any others, a few red flags went up. They wanted us to sign our lease a few weeks before we moved in, but I told them that unless I saw the actual unit I would not be signing anything. They told me the soonest I could see the unit was the day we moved in on the 30th. At that point, having already put in a deposit and paid the application fee, figured we would show up on the 30th and take our chances. Luckily it didn't get quite that far.
One week before the move, my wife is looking at Rent.net and looking at the place we were to spend the next year of our lives. Rent.net has a section where people can leave comments about their experience in a community. Much to our surprise, there were at least 100 comments left about Chestnut Hill Village, and there was not one single positive comment left by anyone other than their own management. Every kind of negative comment you can imagine was listed, from rats and cockroach infestations, to poor security (one person claimed to have been mugged in their own foyer!), and really poor service and repairs. My wife immediately started freaking out, as did I, and we decided that we should see if we could find somewhere else to live in the week we had left.
After a few phone calls and a look through the schools housing listings, we found this neat little place in a nice neighborhood that needed some work, but would make us feel a whole lot better than how we felt about Chestnut Hill Village. Deposit or no deposit, we just couldn't live there. Just to confirm that the comments we had read were not aberrations (100 aberrations?) and that we were not overreacting, we contacted people we knew that we found out had lived there before and came to find that all the stories were true. Everyone we spoke to suggested we run, and that is what we did...
Moving out of the Philly apartment was no fun. I really had no idea how much stuff we actually have, so my initial prediction of a quick and painless move quickly went out the window.
We had to book the elevator in our building quite a few weeks in advance in order to insure we'd be able to use it on our moving day. But unfortunately everyone else was moving that day too, so even at 5 weeks ahead of time, the entire day was booked. So instead of a Saturday afternoon, we were forced to do it on a Sunday. Not my ideal, but we had no choice. So after booking the elevator for the two hour allotted time slot, I went online to reserve a U-Haul truck.
Everything seemed in order when the day of the move came. After church my wife and I went to the U-Haul in our area to pick up the truck we reserved, only to find that the company had ridiculously over-booked the weekend. Under normal circumstances this would not have bothered me too much, being that I am so even tempered and all. However in this particular situation, having booked the elevator over a month beforehand, timing was of utmost importance. So, in what was for me an unusually forceful manner, I made our needs known to the person at the counter of the U-Haul place, and also his superiors at the front office over the phone. Those who know me understand that for me, being forceful does not include a raised voiced, but actually a slightly softer voice with a bit of an edge, accompanied by the subtlest of stern looks, which has become known in my family as "the black look". I've never considered myself to be intimidating at all, but if you ask the folks who have been on the receiving end of that look, apparently its a knee buckler... who knew? But I digress...
After a little "sweet talking", we were able to get another truck from a different location in enough time so that we did not lose our elevator slot. The truck was slightly smaller than expected, but it turned out to suit our needs just about perfectly.
I had a couple of friends stop by to help me load the truck with the "big stuff". They were not able to stay long, but we didn't have much stuff anyway, so I didn't think it would be a big deal after the two hours of elevator time had passed and my buds had to take off. Fortunately the person who booked the elevator after us apparently didn't need it. They never came looking for it. This worked out well because it was 3 hours after our time was supposed to be over that had I brought the last load down to the truck and had it all strapped in. We then packed up one of our cars and made the trip to the new place.
I don't know how it happened that I didn't think this far ahead, but eventually we actually got to the new place, and there I was with a full truck of furniture and only myself and my wife to unload it. It was already after 9pm, and the move that I thought was only going to take 4-6 hours had trumped that time by a long shot. And the night was still very young.
So I busted out the cell phone and began calling anyone I knew that might be able or willing to help us out. But it was late on a Sunday night and I did not get through to anyone. I was already very tired and rather frustrated at all the happenings of the day. I made one final call to the man I worked for over this summer, and by God's grace, he came over and helped me move the larger items out of the truck. I cannot describe the feeling of relief I had when I hung up that phone. I was renewed. So much in fact, that I unloaded most of the truck by myself, and when my boss showed up, there was only the largest pieces left to be moved. I was still very thankful. I don't think I'd have been able to do what I did without knowing help was imminent.
So we got all our stuff inside the house. That is, after Natalie and I went back to Philly, packed up both of our cars with what was left and made the last trip to the new place after cleaning up the old apartment. It was 4am before the heads hit the pillows - a very long day.
Now I told you all that, just so I could tell/show you this:
Like I said, when we moved in the place needed a little work. Natalie likes to say the place was "unlivable", but I wouldn't go that far. When we got here, all of the rooms looked like this:
You can't really get the fine point attributes of the room in this photo, but one of the things I like to point out is that the former tenant was a smoker, and if you look close in the above pic, you can see where there was something hanging on the wall. There is a nice outline of a mirror or picture that shows how the smoke seeped into the wallpaper. And with all that smoke, you can be sure there was a nice nicotine scent that wafted through the house and was especially pungent when you first walk in the house. This was also partially made worse by the silk curtains that were once white, but had been stained to a delicious cream color. Unlivable? no, but it wasn't pleasant.
The worst part about about the place was the wallpaper. It was just plain awful and ugly. It was a textured paper that felt like it was made of felt, and it was in every room but the kitchen and bathroom. Here's a close up:
Isn't it yummy?
Well, a little elbow grease goes a long way.
First Natalie pulled off as much paper as she could with just a scraper. We found that not only was the top layer of paper absolutely heinous, but that there was a long history of heinous paper that went back for generations. Here is a peek at that stage:
Then we got down to business a scraped off all the paper with razor blades and "Diff". Here is a shot of the finished bedroom sans the wallpaper.
don't let the green paint scare you - that is what was at the bottom of it all. 4 layers of paper and some dark green paint. Stylish!
But it does turn out nice in the end. Here are some shots of the first two rooms we've finished:
We are pretty happy with how things are shaping up - two rooms down and two to go.
Now, you might ask yourself - "Doesn't Greg only have one year left of school?"
And that is a great question. Yes I only have one year left, and after that I'm off to NJ for an internship and a possible job as an assistant pastor. So, why all the trouble for such a short stay?
Well, the answer is simple. I love my wife and want her to be happy while we're here. It was pretty much my idea to leave the city and the apartment she loved, so I'll do what I can to make this home for her.
And besides, it's a great deal for my landlord - He gets free labor and is reimbursing me for the materials we use, and after we leave, he can raise the rent!
I'll post more pics as the rooms get finished.
Monday, August 22, 2005
The new way to spam...
Unbelievable...
I check my e-mail the other day and I get what are the first two comments on my blog that I have received in months. Of course, I am pretty surprised, since it has been at least as long since I have posted anything, so there is immediate suspicion to begin with...
But I open the e-mail to find that someone has posted STOCK ADVERTISING on my blog as a COMMENT....
seriously -- are you guys that ridiculously desperate to get your impressions that you will resort to such flagrant deception? And to what end? Even if for some reason I actually read the e-mail you underhandedly got me to open, do you actually think there is a snowballs chance in hell that I might actually buy into the stock, or any product for that matter, that you happened to dish at me in this manner?
the nerve...
I'd tell you readers to scroll down to see the offending propaganda, but I've deleted it - I wouldn't want to be responsible for poisoning others in this way.
hehe, you readers... I don't think I've had any of those in awhile.
anyway...
I check my e-mail the other day and I get what are the first two comments on my blog that I have received in months. Of course, I am pretty surprised, since it has been at least as long since I have posted anything, so there is immediate suspicion to begin with...
But I open the e-mail to find that someone has posted STOCK ADVERTISING on my blog as a COMMENT....
seriously -- are you guys that ridiculously desperate to get your impressions that you will resort to such flagrant deception? And to what end? Even if for some reason I actually read the e-mail you underhandedly got me to open, do you actually think there is a snowballs chance in hell that I might actually buy into the stock, or any product for that matter, that you happened to dish at me in this manner?
the nerve...
I'd tell you readers to scroll down to see the offending propaganda, but I've deleted it - I wouldn't want to be responsible for poisoning others in this way.
hehe, you readers... I don't think I've had any of those in awhile.
anyway...
Friday, July 08, 2005
"For God's Sake, Please Stop the Aid!"
The Kenyan economics expert James Shikwati, 35, says that aid to Africa does more harm than good. The avid proponent of globalization spoke with SPIEGEL about the disastrous effects of Western development policy in Africa, corrupt rulers, and the tendency to overstate the AIDS problem.
Now that the world population is once again feeling good about themselves, like they've "done they're part" to end world hunger by simply going to a silly concert, they can perhaps actually listen to the voice of someone who actually understands the needs of Africa, instead of encouraging the world to continue to perpetuate the problems.
The above lines are the first in an eye opening interview with a real live African economist. And he wants you to keep your money.
Now that the world population is once again feeling good about themselves, like they've "done they're part" to end world hunger by simply going to a silly concert, they can perhaps actually listen to the voice of someone who actually understands the needs of Africa, instead of encouraging the world to continue to perpetuate the problems.
The above lines are the first in an eye opening interview with a real live African economist. And he wants you to keep your money.
Saturday, July 02, 2005
Submission
Another addition from Bob on a subject often misunderstood.
Enjoy:
As I reflect on the words found in Ephesians 5:22, ("Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.") I realize how easy it is for people facilely to read this admonition and dismiss it out of hand as oppressive and misogynist, but a look at the words that precede it gives us a very different picture: "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."(5:21.) Those words are directed both to men and to women, to children and to parents, to employers and employees; they set the tone for the whole passage, Ephesians 5:21-6:9.
However, this passage really begins with Saint Paul's admonition in Ephesians 5:18, "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit." It begins there, because this life of submission to others for the sake of Christ goes against the grain of human nature. Genuine, cheerful submission to others from the heart is impossible without the on-going ministry of the Holy Spirit. To the extent that I am full of myself, full of the sense of my own importance, my own needs, my own rights, I will not and cannot truly submit to others, at least not without deep resentment.
When people are drunk, they are full of wine; their whole demeanor is marked by their being under the influence, control and domination of alcohol; their responses to situations are characterized by a lack of self control, and they do not act wisely according to their naturally perceived self interests. When believers are full of the Holy Spirit, their focus is on thinking, speaking and acting to the glory of God in Jesus Christ. Their own interests, needs, welfare, desires and rights can be cheerfully subordinated to the welfare of others for the glory of God and the advancement of the Kingdom of his Son. The Christian way of life is not as much a set of rules as it is an attitude of serving others for the sake of Christ. Here is how it is put in Philippians 2:3-8:
"Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-even death on a cross!"
When believers take on the mindset of the Lord Jesus, they become willing to lay down their rights and privileges for the sake of others. How can we think of the Cross but that God almighty in his human nature became the doormat on which we wipe our sins in order to enter heaven? Without the connotation of cowardly silence, we, too, are called upon to be doormats for the welfare and needs of others, humbly entrusting ourselves into the hands of our heavenly Father when we are wronged by others.
Rather than looking for our rights under the law, we voluntarily submit to injustice for the sake of Christ: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps." (1 Peter 2:18-21.)
(Greg: Neither Bob, nor the Bible, is advocating slavery - only responding to a cultural reality at that time - I know this caveat is necessary for some of you)
The meekness of Christ becomes the pattern for all our dealings with others, as Peter says above, not only for people who treat us kindly, but also for those who are mean and ugly: "When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly . . . Wives, IN THE SAME WAY . . . Husbands, IN THE SAME WAY . . ." (1 Peter 2:23; 3:1, 7.) Peter moves from the suffering of Christ to the relationship between men and women in marriage. Christ suffered injustice; he was not treated fairly; why should we expect to be?
Make no mistake about it; in spite of the wonderful blessings of marriage, the marriage relationship will often confront us with situations that are unfair. Marriage is a wonderful thing; indeed, of all worldly things, nothing is better than a good marriage. But a good marriage doesn't just happen; it evolves over years of mutual self-sacrifice. Christian love is self-sacrificing love; it doesn't seek its own interests. Not only is Christian love not self-seeking, it does not keep a record of wrongs. Perhaps that is why it is not so easily angered. (1 Corinthians 13:5.)
Godly self-sacrifice does not keep score, in part, because the more mature believers are, the more they are aware of their own inability to know their own hearts and evaluate their own conduct. (Jeremiah 17:9.) Saint Paul in reflecting on his own life, commented: "I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. MY CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR, BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME INNOCENT. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God." (1 Corinthians 4:3-5.)
Our Lord warned us: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (Matthew 7:3-5.)
As believers mature they become increasingly aware that they have their own blind spots. That is especially true in marriage: no matter who we are and how long we have walked with Jesus, no matter our gender, no matter how long we have been married or how much we love our spouse, we will regularly be assaulted with the thought that we are not getting our share of the bargain. We will think that we are being defrauded and being taken advantage of. We will see our spouse's faults with crystal clarity, while often being utterly oblivious to our own.
It may seem to be a silly thing, but I think about driving. This coming Wednesday Sandy and I will have been married thirty-seven years, and I still get irritated when she offers suggestions about my driving. But Sandy isn't as pure as the driven snow either: as close as she has ever come to losing her temper has been in response to my correcting her driving. The solution? She drives, and I read and really focus on what I'm reading. I try to remind myself that it doesn't make any real difference if we're a couple of minutes late because she chose a different route, and harmony in marriage is more important than only getting half the life out of the brakes because the brake pedal is a convenient spot for a woman's left foot. And when I drive, I need to remember to concentrate on driving rather than getting lost in my thoughts, driving slower and slower.
Cheerful, mutual submission is the hallmark of a marriage between two"Spirit filled" people. But this submission functions slightly differently for males and females: a MAN is to SUBMIT TO THE NEEDS of his wife;(Ephesians 5:25-31.) a WIFE is to SUBMIT TO THE DESIRES of her husband. (Ephesians 5:22-24.) Of course, the Bible warns us that we should never submit to the needs or desires of others when they involve sin, because "We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)
(Greg: not sure I am on board with Bob's distinction here, but carry on..)
Marriage is all about being a servant. If I am not prepared to subordinate myself to the welfare of another, I am not ready for marriage. From personal experience I can say that I never realized how deeply selfishness is a part of me until we had children. Mutual service, not trying to keep a score about who is putting the most effort into the relationship, is the key to a happy and secure family. Indeed, self-sacrifice for the sake of the Lord Jesus, not as a way to score points with God, but as our way of showing him our gratitude for his free gift of salvation in Jesus Christ, is the heart of the true Christian life. It is the way to true happiness and fulfillment, too.
"All moments of unhappiness in life are ultimately due to a person's experience of separation from God. A person who is in real communion with God and with the Lord Jesus Christ is happy. It does not matter whether he is in a dungeon, or whether he has his feet fast in the stocks, or whether he is burning at the stake; he is still happy if he is in communion with God. Is not that the experience of the saints down the centuries? So the ultimate cause of any misery or lack of joy is separation from God, and the one cause of separation from Him is self. And self always means defiance of God; it always means that I put myself on the throne instead of God, and therefore it is always something that separates me from Him. Whenever we are unhappy it means that some way or other we are looking at ourselves and thinking about ourselves, instead of communing with God."
-- D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, M. D.
Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, Volume One, pp.295-296.
Thanks again Bob.
Enjoy:
As I reflect on the words found in Ephesians 5:22, ("Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord.") I realize how easy it is for people facilely to read this admonition and dismiss it out of hand as oppressive and misogynist, but a look at the words that precede it gives us a very different picture: "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."(5:21.) Those words are directed both to men and to women, to children and to parents, to employers and employees; they set the tone for the whole passage, Ephesians 5:21-6:9.
However, this passage really begins with Saint Paul's admonition in Ephesians 5:18, "Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit." It begins there, because this life of submission to others for the sake of Christ goes against the grain of human nature. Genuine, cheerful submission to others from the heart is impossible without the on-going ministry of the Holy Spirit. To the extent that I am full of myself, full of the sense of my own importance, my own needs, my own rights, I will not and cannot truly submit to others, at least not without deep resentment.
When people are drunk, they are full of wine; their whole demeanor is marked by their being under the influence, control and domination of alcohol; their responses to situations are characterized by a lack of self control, and they do not act wisely according to their naturally perceived self interests. When believers are full of the Holy Spirit, their focus is on thinking, speaking and acting to the glory of God in Jesus Christ. Their own interests, needs, welfare, desires and rights can be cheerfully subordinated to the welfare of others for the glory of God and the advancement of the Kingdom of his Son. The Christian way of life is not as much a set of rules as it is an attitude of serving others for the sake of Christ. Here is how it is put in Philippians 2:3-8:
"Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others. Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death-even death on a cross!"
When believers take on the mindset of the Lord Jesus, they become willing to lay down their rights and privileges for the sake of others. How can we think of the Cross but that God almighty in his human nature became the doormat on which we wipe our sins in order to enter heaven? Without the connotation of cowardly silence, we, too, are called upon to be doormats for the welfare and needs of others, humbly entrusting ourselves into the hands of our heavenly Father when we are wronged by others.
Rather than looking for our rights under the law, we voluntarily submit to injustice for the sake of Christ: "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps." (1 Peter 2:18-21.)
(Greg: Neither Bob, nor the Bible, is advocating slavery - only responding to a cultural reality at that time - I know this caveat is necessary for some of you)
The meekness of Christ becomes the pattern for all our dealings with others, as Peter says above, not only for people who treat us kindly, but also for those who are mean and ugly: "When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly . . . Wives, IN THE SAME WAY . . . Husbands, IN THE SAME WAY . . ." (1 Peter 2:23; 3:1, 7.) Peter moves from the suffering of Christ to the relationship between men and women in marriage. Christ suffered injustice; he was not treated fairly; why should we expect to be?
Make no mistake about it; in spite of the wonderful blessings of marriage, the marriage relationship will often confront us with situations that are unfair. Marriage is a wonderful thing; indeed, of all worldly things, nothing is better than a good marriage. But a good marriage doesn't just happen; it evolves over years of mutual self-sacrifice. Christian love is self-sacrificing love; it doesn't seek its own interests. Not only is Christian love not self-seeking, it does not keep a record of wrongs. Perhaps that is why it is not so easily angered. (1 Corinthians 13:5.)
Godly self-sacrifice does not keep score, in part, because the more mature believers are, the more they are aware of their own inability to know their own hearts and evaluate their own conduct. (Jeremiah 17:9.) Saint Paul in reflecting on his own life, commented: "I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. MY CONSCIENCE IS CLEAR, BUT THAT DOES NOT MAKE ME INNOCENT. It is the Lord who judges me. Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God." (1 Corinthians 4:3-5.)
Our Lord warned us: "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (Matthew 7:3-5.)
As believers mature they become increasingly aware that they have their own blind spots. That is especially true in marriage: no matter who we are and how long we have walked with Jesus, no matter our gender, no matter how long we have been married or how much we love our spouse, we will regularly be assaulted with the thought that we are not getting our share of the bargain. We will think that we are being defrauded and being taken advantage of. We will see our spouse's faults with crystal clarity, while often being utterly oblivious to our own.
It may seem to be a silly thing, but I think about driving. This coming Wednesday Sandy and I will have been married thirty-seven years, and I still get irritated when she offers suggestions about my driving. But Sandy isn't as pure as the driven snow either: as close as she has ever come to losing her temper has been in response to my correcting her driving. The solution? She drives, and I read and really focus on what I'm reading. I try to remind myself that it doesn't make any real difference if we're a couple of minutes late because she chose a different route, and harmony in marriage is more important than only getting half the life out of the brakes because the brake pedal is a convenient spot for a woman's left foot. And when I drive, I need to remember to concentrate on driving rather than getting lost in my thoughts, driving slower and slower.
Cheerful, mutual submission is the hallmark of a marriage between two"Spirit filled" people. But this submission functions slightly differently for males and females: a MAN is to SUBMIT TO THE NEEDS of his wife;(Ephesians 5:25-31.) a WIFE is to SUBMIT TO THE DESIRES of her husband. (Ephesians 5:22-24.) Of course, the Bible warns us that we should never submit to the needs or desires of others when they involve sin, because "We must obey God rather than men." (Acts 5:29)
(Greg: not sure I am on board with Bob's distinction here, but carry on..)
Marriage is all about being a servant. If I am not prepared to subordinate myself to the welfare of another, I am not ready for marriage. From personal experience I can say that I never realized how deeply selfishness is a part of me until we had children. Mutual service, not trying to keep a score about who is putting the most effort into the relationship, is the key to a happy and secure family. Indeed, self-sacrifice for the sake of the Lord Jesus, not as a way to score points with God, but as our way of showing him our gratitude for his free gift of salvation in Jesus Christ, is the heart of the true Christian life. It is the way to true happiness and fulfillment, too.
"All moments of unhappiness in life are ultimately due to a person's experience of separation from God. A person who is in real communion with God and with the Lord Jesus Christ is happy. It does not matter whether he is in a dungeon, or whether he has his feet fast in the stocks, or whether he is burning at the stake; he is still happy if he is in communion with God. Is not that the experience of the saints down the centuries? So the ultimate cause of any misery or lack of joy is separation from God, and the one cause of separation from Him is self. And self always means defiance of God; it always means that I put myself on the throne instead of God, and therefore it is always something that separates me from Him. Whenever we are unhappy it means that some way or other we are looking at ourselves and thinking about ourselves, instead of communing with God."
-- D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, M. D.
Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, Volume One, pp.295-296.
Thanks again Bob.
Friday, July 01, 2005
Thursday, June 02, 2005
Some Good Stuff on Raising Christian Children
In an e-mail group I am on there has been a bit of discussion about "Presumptive Regeneration". For those who might not be in the loop on this, it is the idea that for children who are born to believing parents it is often presumed that they are regenerated, ie, 'born again'.
One of the guys on the site was talking about the dangers of this, and my oft quoted friend Bob Vincent gave a few gems, some of which I am posting here. It will be a bit long, so feel free to skim around if you like, but it's mostly fantastic stuff on raising Christian children in general, and being a Christian parent... heck even just a Christian. Enjoy.
Over the years, my wife and I have listened to many young parents humbly boast about how well their children are doing spiritually. I say "humbly," because these young people are trusting in Christ for their children's salvation, even as they are their own. But I say "boast," because so many of them simply buy into the latest Christian parenting fad, naively assuming -- though they would rarely say it -- that the right methodology will produce godly, mentally stable, productive adults, who will marry, be faithful to their marriage vows, and produce godly children themselves, whom they, in turn, will correctly raise to become godly, mentally stable, productive adults, in succeeding generations, on and on, until the Lord returns.
As we have listened to them, my wife and I have often thought, "Everybody thought our children were that way, too, until they went through adolescence." When I think about parenting, especially pre-teen parenting, I am reminded of the King of Israel's words to King Ben-hadad, "Let not him who girds on his armor boast like him who takes it off." (1 Kings 20:11.)And I reflect on a film by Steve Martin about "Parenthood" that we don't get to take the armor off until we have exited this life. I have also observed well-behaved teens and sometimes discovered that they had simply mastered the art of hypocrisy. I've also discovered that some teens who appear to be very obedient and submissive are eaten up with depression and self-loathing. As a pastor, I've performed my share of shot-gun weddings, all the time allowing people to think the best about the couple, keeping their secrets, secret. I've also done the funeral of a young person who put a pistol to his head and blew his brains out.
The bottom line: The biblical doctrine of the Covenant, both by explicit teaching and by biblical example, does not promise that every child born to Christian parents is elect, and without a sovereign work of grace worked in the heart of a child, the best that Christian parents can produce is a profligate or a neurotic hypocrite. I don't care how old you are or how old your children are and how well established, they never outgrow the need for your earnest pleading with God on their behalf.
Here's a longer section with more depth -
After we had been married for several years, God gave Sandy and me our first child, a precious little girl whom we named Lydia; she was named after the biblical character "whose heart the Lord opened to pay attention to the things being spoken by Paul." (Acts 16:14.) In deciding to name her Lydia, we were setting about to remind her and ourselves that she needed a sovereign work of grace in order to believe the gospel.
We had come to see in the confession of David, himself a child born within the covenant, a fitting confession for such children: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5.) Furthermore, simply because Lydia was born of Christian parents, we did not see that she was exempt from David's sobering words: "Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies." (Psalm 58:3.)
We understood Saint Paul to be addressing people who had been born into heathen families, "strangers to the covenants of promise," (Ephesians 2:12.) when he wrote the first two verses of Ephesians two: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience." But we also understood that he did not mean to exclude others, who, like himself, were born to believing parents within God's covenant, because he added in verse three: "Among them we, too, all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest."
Whatever extraordinary thing God might be pleased to work within certain children in the womb, as he did in the case of John the Baptist, (Luke 1:15,41, 44.) we saw that our little girl would still need personally to appropriate the promises of the gospel for herself, and we regularly prayed for her to this end, even while she was in her mother's womb. Back in February of 1971, within a few days of her birth, we presented her to the Lord during the worship service on the Lord's Day; both the congregation and we made vows before God on her behalf when she was baptized. Lydia was raised in Church, dandied on our knees during the worship services to keep her from disturbing others. She participated in family worship, too, and early on was taught the Catechism for Young Children and attended Sunday school.
One Sunday afternoon, as we were waking up from our naps, she came and told her mother: "I asked Jesus in my heart." Since she was three years old, we thought that perhaps her Sunday school teacher had put words in her mouth, and after the evening service, my wife chatted with her teacher about this. Such was not the case. This seemed to be something that Lydia had put together on her own. As she grew, she exhibited traits of being a true believer: she tried to live so as to please the Lord, and when she did wrong, she was remorseful; but having confessed her sins, she believed that God forgave her sins, and she didn't walk in condemnation.
As with most children, Lydia had her ups and downs as she navigated the sometimes blustery seas of American adolescence; however, she always remained loyal to the Lord Jesus. In college she was always with the Lord's people in Church on the Lord's Day, and she also became involved in Campus Crusade for Christ, where on a summer project in Santa Cruz, California, she met her future husband. They married the week after Lydia graduated from college, and five years later her husband John was ordained as a teaching elder by the Palmetto Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America. We very much enjoy the spiritual fellowship we have with both John and Lydia, often telephoning each other with prayer needs and talking things out. They now have three sons and live seven hours away in Memphis, where John is an assistant pastor at Second Presbyterian. It is a joy to be in the same presbytery.
When was Lydia regenerated? I don't know, but I'm sure that she has been. The big question isn't when but that a person is born again. The new birth isn't something that we can discern except by the fruit it bears in repentance and faith. Lydia's whole life for the past almost thirty years is evidence that her wicked little heart was subdued by sovereign grace prior to that confession of faith when she was three. God gave us four more children after Lydia -- two more daughters and two sons; with one exception, all are active members of Christian congregations today.
Each child's spiritual journey was unique, even as each child is unique. As we watched them grow up in the same church and home, we could see that even though each one came from the same genetic pool, each was quite different. What was a besetting sin for one, posed no temptation for another. Some were into sports, others into music and drama, and some were avid readers. One has a degree in sociology; another is an attorney; yet another aspires to become a foreign missionary, another is working towards becoming a professional counselor, and another is the manager of a small business. Each one reacted differently to the adolescent eddies, where the river of childhood flows into the sea of adulthood; each took on some of the water of this world, and yet now, in the mercy of God, none of them is adrift; all are anchored in the safe harbor of the Church of God.
When children are very young, we can all be impressed by what appears to be spiritual aptitude. I remember how impressed other people always were with the structure of our home and with our very polite, obedient children so many years ago. But I also remember meeting with my session in January 1989 and offering to request that presbytery dissolve the pastoral relationship because I needed help to regain control of one of my children. This was less than four months after Sandy had come out of her coma, having been run over by a log truck on October 10, 1988; she was still using a wheelchair, recovering from her hip having been broken in three places. My mother was living with us, too, but touched with a measure of senile dementia, and one child was a toddler. It was a very sad and lonely time. But God was good, and his Church was good. The session paid for us to go once a week for counseling to Jackson, Mississippi. Seven to eight hours a week traveling together in a car helped to rebuild the somewhat fractured relationship between the two of us and our child, and I could once again read 1 Timothy 3:4, 5 and Titus 1:6 without feeling the need to resign from the ministry.
Back in the sixties when I had taken all those psychology courses, I was so sure that I would be a great father; better than my own had been. Now, I am convinced that I don't hold a candle to the man. I wish that he could hear me when I visit his grave; I'd like to tell him that, because I'm sure he picked up on my naive pride when his grandchildren were young. New parents are often quite sure that if they will carefully follow Bill Gothard, James Dobson, Jay Adams or Larry Crabb, they'll never know real anguish with their children; they imagine: if I do X, Y will be the result. But when I think about parenting, I am reminded of the King of Israel's words to King Ben-hadad, "Let not him who girds on his armor boast like him who takes it off." (1 Kings 20:11.) In part, that's because even if our child is elect,we are not guaranteed that effectual calling will be experienced the same way it was with our Lydia.
Bringing children into the world is serious business, especially as we reflect on Acts 2:39: "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off -- for all whom the Lord our God will call." We have covenant promises given before and after Mount Sinai, confirmed to Gentiles under the New Covenant:
"I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you." (Genesis 17:7.)
"The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live." (Deuteronomy 30:6.)"
Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved -- you and your household." (Acts 16:31.)
But we also have the decree of election, a decree that extends both to strangers and in the line of our descendants, but a decree that does not promise us that every child born to believing parents is elect. God commanded Abraham to circumcise both Ishmael and Isaac in Genesis 17, yet Ishmael remained a lost man; it was with Isaac alone that God established his covenant. (Genesis 17:19.) Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau; both received the sign of God's favor, and yet God's favor was on Jacob alone.
This brings us back to Acts 2:39, where we see something of both the continuity and discontinuity between the two Testaments. There is a difference, because God's grace now richly extends far beyond the borders of Israel: "The promise is for . . . all who are far off." There is also continuity, because "The promise is for you and your children." But neither of these precepts is absolute; both are conditioned by God's eternal, immutable decree: unconditional election that is followed by the call to come to Christ. But that call, while effectual for God's elect, is not effectual for all who are far off or for all our children. Peter makes this clear, when he qualifies at the end of Acts 2:39, "For all whom the Lord our God will call."
Putting Acts 2:39 within the larger context of what the Bible teaches about salvation, I can say, if I know that my child has put her trust in the Lord Jesus Christ (Number 4 below), then I also know:
1. She has been unconditionally chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world;
2. She has been effectually called;
3. She has been born again;
4. She has come to God in true repentance and true faith;
5. She has been declared righteous by God based on the finished work of Christ, which she received by means of faith alone;
6. She has been adopted into God's own family;
7. She has been sealed with the Holy Spirit; and, therefore is in the process of being sanctified;
8. She will continue to hold onto Christ and persevere to the end;
9. She will be glorified in both her soul and
10. She will be glorified in her body and enjoy God for all eternity.
The difficulty that the Christian parent faces is how we view our children before we see evidence of Number 4 above. This is a difficulty with which true Christians have wrestled over the past two millennia.
In many theological quarters it isn't really that big a difficulty. For example, many modern Evangelicals see an age of accountability in those years prior to children being able "to examine themselves." (cf. Larger Catechism 174.) Such parents tend not to become particularly anxious until their children begin to reach the end of this imagined age. However, the Scripture knows nothing of such a this-worldly limbo.
Within Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox circles, as long as children have been baptized, original sin has been washed away, and they have been introduced to God's grace. In Tridentine theology, God's grace is given exopere operato (by the work having been performed.).
In some traditional Protestant circles, a judgment of charity is stretched into a presumption of regeneration, and children are encouraged to believe that they are true Christians unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, such as their apostatizing from the Church.
I cannot reconcile any of the above views with what I read in the Bible. While in charity I accept all who are part of the visible Church as Christians, I would never encourage individual professing Christians so charitably to view themselves. There is a very different approach in how we are to assess our own Spiritual condition from how we form our assessment of others. * While we do not wait for positive evidence of faith in others before accepting their professions of faith as genuine, such presumption with regard to ourselves could prove eternally deadly. We must never encourage others presumptively to rest in the hope of salvation apart from self-examination, the kind that regularly takes place under strong, soul-searching preaching.
So how did Sandy and I deal with our children? As with our first child, we taught her siblings the great truths of the Christian message through a variety of means: reading Bible stories to them, interacting with them about everyday events through the eyes of Scripture, catechizing them, putting them in Sunday school and the worship services of the Church. When they sinned, we corrected them and instructed them to seek not only the forgiveness of the humans they had wronged, but, above all, God's forgiveness. And just as we always forgave them, so we encouraged them to believe that God does the same. We encouraged them to look to the Lord Jesus, to turn to him daily from their sins with godly sorrow, and to believe that their sins were forgiven for Jesus' sake: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9.) Yet we pressed them to self-examination and reminded them that it is only those who have the positive fruit of faith and repentance who should regard themselves as Christians. Just as circumcision did in the Old Testament, their baptism laid on them the obligation to make their "calling and election sure." (2 Peter 1:10.)
Above all we prayed with and for them; we still do. When we knelt by the bed of each one individually to pray, we prayed for many things that were on their minds, but we always prayed that the Lord would give them hearts to love and trust Jesus with. We pressed them to believe that when Jesus died on the cross and rose again, he did this for them. We always prayed that God would pardon all their sins for Jesus' sake. We explained the meaning of their baptism and of the holy Supper, and when they expressed a desire to commune, we prepared them for a public profession of faith, so they could participate with us in this wonderful pledge of God's grace in Christ.
As our children grew older, our prayers for them took on a new tone, one little known earlier. There was a growing sense of our own failure as parents, that even when we had done all we had been commanded to do -- which we could never bring ourselves to believe that we had done -- we should still say, "We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done." (Luke 17:10.) Less and less, did we reflect on what we were doing for our children; more and more, our prayers became a bare pleading of God's most gracious, covenant mercy for our children, mercy that extends to a thousand generations.
We taught our children to believe that there is more to the true knowledge of God than anyone in this world knows, and so we pressed them to seek the Lord Jesus with all their hearts and never to stop seeking him, not only to know more about God, the Bible and theology, but to know God himself, experientially, even mystically, and to remember that there is always more.
As our children have moved into adulthood, we have taken great joy in seeing them active in true churches of Christ. We are greatly blessed when they talk with us about decisions they need to make, especially when they make decisions that manifest a willingness to take up the Cross and follow in the footsteps of Jesus. Even in adulthood, our children sometimes call and confess sins. I deal with them as I do others: whenever people confess their sins, I always pray for them and speak God's word of absolution, not sacerdotally, but as a herald of our all-merciful Sovereign.
As with my fellowship with others, I take great comfort in the Christian fellowship I enjoy with my wife and increasingly with our adult children. But even with all that, God has not called me to be sure of anyone's election but my own. (2 Peter 1:10.) The thought that even one of my precious children or grandchildren would spend eternity in a Christ-less hell brings me nothing but anguish, but the God whom I serve is a God who in his self-disclosure tells me that he is "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin." (Exodus 34:6, 7.) It is true that God does not leave the guilty unpunished and that he visits sin within the generations of the wicked, but he teaches us that the dominant motif in the song of his character is his mercy and love. In Christ, when I look at that "multitude that no one could number" of Revelation 7:9, I believe that I can trace the faces of all of my descendants there -- not arrogantly or presumptively, but not with a naked wish, either. My hope is grounded in God's gracious covenant, a covenant signed and sealed to believers and their children in baptism and the Supper.
* The most striking illustration of this comes from a comparison of what Jesus says in Matthew 12:30 with what he says in Mark 9:40. In Matthew 12:22-37 Jesus encounters strong opposition: the Pharisees accuse him of being in league with the devil. After answering their charges Jesus goes onto warn them of the great danger they are in: "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:30, 31.) After further warning Jesus tells them about the necessity of Spiritual fruit. Notice the focus on self judgment -- "He who is not with me is against me." (Matthew 12:30.) If I see no positive evidence that I am for Christ, I must conclude that I am against him.
How different is this standard of self-judgment from that by which we measure others. In Mark 9:38 we read, '"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us."
'What is Jesus' response? Jesus said, "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward."(Mark 9:39-41.) When we look at others, a different standard is to be used: "Whoever is not against us is for us." (Mark 9:40.) If a person professes to be a follower of Christ, either with his lips or by wearing the mark of Christ's ownership, baptism, we must accept him as such, unless we see positive evidence to the contrary.
This is what we may call a judgment of charity. Paul used the judgment of charity when he wrote to the church at Corinth. He addressed all of them as saints and brethren. (1 Corinthians 1:2, 10.) He regarded every one of them as fellow believers whom God had called, including, we may add, Stephanas' children. (1 Corinthians 1:9, 16.) Did he mean that every person there was a true Christian? No, in fact he warns them to take a close look at themselves: "Examine your selves to see whether you are in the faith; test your selves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you -- unless, of course, you fail the test?" (2 Corinthians 13:6.)
Thanks again Bob - you are single-handedly keeping my blog alive.
One of the guys on the site was talking about the dangers of this, and my oft quoted friend Bob Vincent gave a few gems, some of which I am posting here. It will be a bit long, so feel free to skim around if you like, but it's mostly fantastic stuff on raising Christian children in general, and being a Christian parent... heck even just a Christian. Enjoy.
Over the years, my wife and I have listened to many young parents humbly boast about how well their children are doing spiritually. I say "humbly," because these young people are trusting in Christ for their children's salvation, even as they are their own. But I say "boast," because so many of them simply buy into the latest Christian parenting fad, naively assuming -- though they would rarely say it -- that the right methodology will produce godly, mentally stable, productive adults, who will marry, be faithful to their marriage vows, and produce godly children themselves, whom they, in turn, will correctly raise to become godly, mentally stable, productive adults, in succeeding generations, on and on, until the Lord returns.
As we have listened to them, my wife and I have often thought, "Everybody thought our children were that way, too, until they went through adolescence." When I think about parenting, especially pre-teen parenting, I am reminded of the King of Israel's words to King Ben-hadad, "Let not him who girds on his armor boast like him who takes it off." (1 Kings 20:11.)And I reflect on a film by Steve Martin about "Parenthood" that we don't get to take the armor off until we have exited this life. I have also observed well-behaved teens and sometimes discovered that they had simply mastered the art of hypocrisy. I've also discovered that some teens who appear to be very obedient and submissive are eaten up with depression and self-loathing. As a pastor, I've performed my share of shot-gun weddings, all the time allowing people to think the best about the couple, keeping their secrets, secret. I've also done the funeral of a young person who put a pistol to his head and blew his brains out.
The bottom line: The biblical doctrine of the Covenant, both by explicit teaching and by biblical example, does not promise that every child born to Christian parents is elect, and without a sovereign work of grace worked in the heart of a child, the best that Christian parents can produce is a profligate or a neurotic hypocrite. I don't care how old you are or how old your children are and how well established, they never outgrow the need for your earnest pleading with God on their behalf.
Here's a longer section with more depth -
After we had been married for several years, God gave Sandy and me our first child, a precious little girl whom we named Lydia; she was named after the biblical character "whose heart the Lord opened to pay attention to the things being spoken by Paul." (Acts 16:14.) In deciding to name her Lydia, we were setting about to remind her and ourselves that she needed a sovereign work of grace in order to believe the gospel.
We had come to see in the confession of David, himself a child born within the covenant, a fitting confession for such children: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5.) Furthermore, simply because Lydia was born of Christian parents, we did not see that she was exempt from David's sobering words: "Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies." (Psalm 58:3.)
We understood Saint Paul to be addressing people who had been born into heathen families, "strangers to the covenants of promise," (Ephesians 2:12.) when he wrote the first two verses of Ephesians two: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience." But we also understood that he did not mean to exclude others, who, like himself, were born to believing parents within God's covenant, because he added in verse three: "Among them we, too, all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest."
Whatever extraordinary thing God might be pleased to work within certain children in the womb, as he did in the case of John the Baptist, (Luke 1:15,41, 44.) we saw that our little girl would still need personally to appropriate the promises of the gospel for herself, and we regularly prayed for her to this end, even while she was in her mother's womb. Back in February of 1971, within a few days of her birth, we presented her to the Lord during the worship service on the Lord's Day; both the congregation and we made vows before God on her behalf when she was baptized. Lydia was raised in Church, dandied on our knees during the worship services to keep her from disturbing others. She participated in family worship, too, and early on was taught the Catechism for Young Children and attended Sunday school.
One Sunday afternoon, as we were waking up from our naps, she came and told her mother: "I asked Jesus in my heart." Since she was three years old, we thought that perhaps her Sunday school teacher had put words in her mouth, and after the evening service, my wife chatted with her teacher about this. Such was not the case. This seemed to be something that Lydia had put together on her own. As she grew, she exhibited traits of being a true believer: she tried to live so as to please the Lord, and when she did wrong, she was remorseful; but having confessed her sins, she believed that God forgave her sins, and she didn't walk in condemnation.
As with most children, Lydia had her ups and downs as she navigated the sometimes blustery seas of American adolescence; however, she always remained loyal to the Lord Jesus. In college she was always with the Lord's people in Church on the Lord's Day, and she also became involved in Campus Crusade for Christ, where on a summer project in Santa Cruz, California, she met her future husband. They married the week after Lydia graduated from college, and five years later her husband John was ordained as a teaching elder by the Palmetto Presbytery of the Presbyterian Church in America. We very much enjoy the spiritual fellowship we have with both John and Lydia, often telephoning each other with prayer needs and talking things out. They now have three sons and live seven hours away in Memphis, where John is an assistant pastor at Second Presbyterian. It is a joy to be in the same presbytery.
When was Lydia regenerated? I don't know, but I'm sure that she has been. The big question isn't when but that a person is born again. The new birth isn't something that we can discern except by the fruit it bears in repentance and faith. Lydia's whole life for the past almost thirty years is evidence that her wicked little heart was subdued by sovereign grace prior to that confession of faith when she was three. God gave us four more children after Lydia -- two more daughters and two sons; with one exception, all are active members of Christian congregations today.
Each child's spiritual journey was unique, even as each child is unique. As we watched them grow up in the same church and home, we could see that even though each one came from the same genetic pool, each was quite different. What was a besetting sin for one, posed no temptation for another. Some were into sports, others into music and drama, and some were avid readers. One has a degree in sociology; another is an attorney; yet another aspires to become a foreign missionary, another is working towards becoming a professional counselor, and another is the manager of a small business. Each one reacted differently to the adolescent eddies, where the river of childhood flows into the sea of adulthood; each took on some of the water of this world, and yet now, in the mercy of God, none of them is adrift; all are anchored in the safe harbor of the Church of God.
When children are very young, we can all be impressed by what appears to be spiritual aptitude. I remember how impressed other people always were with the structure of our home and with our very polite, obedient children so many years ago. But I also remember meeting with my session in January 1989 and offering to request that presbytery dissolve the pastoral relationship because I needed help to regain control of one of my children. This was less than four months after Sandy had come out of her coma, having been run over by a log truck on October 10, 1988; she was still using a wheelchair, recovering from her hip having been broken in three places. My mother was living with us, too, but touched with a measure of senile dementia, and one child was a toddler. It was a very sad and lonely time. But God was good, and his Church was good. The session paid for us to go once a week for counseling to Jackson, Mississippi. Seven to eight hours a week traveling together in a car helped to rebuild the somewhat fractured relationship between the two of us and our child, and I could once again read 1 Timothy 3:4, 5 and Titus 1:6 without feeling the need to resign from the ministry.
Back in the sixties when I had taken all those psychology courses, I was so sure that I would be a great father; better than my own had been. Now, I am convinced that I don't hold a candle to the man. I wish that he could hear me when I visit his grave; I'd like to tell him that, because I'm sure he picked up on my naive pride when his grandchildren were young. New parents are often quite sure that if they will carefully follow Bill Gothard, James Dobson, Jay Adams or Larry Crabb, they'll never know real anguish with their children; they imagine: if I do X, Y will be the result. But when I think about parenting, I am reminded of the King of Israel's words to King Ben-hadad, "Let not him who girds on his armor boast like him who takes it off." (1 Kings 20:11.) In part, that's because even if our child is elect,we are not guaranteed that effectual calling will be experienced the same way it was with our Lydia.
Bringing children into the world is serious business, especially as we reflect on Acts 2:39: "The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off -- for all whom the Lord our God will call." We have covenant promises given before and after Mount Sinai, confirmed to Gentiles under the New Covenant:
"I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you." (Genesis 17:7.)
"The Lord your God will circumcise your hearts and the hearts of your descendants, so that you may love him with all your heart and with all your soul, and live." (Deuteronomy 30:6.)"
Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved -- you and your household." (Acts 16:31.)
But we also have the decree of election, a decree that extends both to strangers and in the line of our descendants, but a decree that does not promise us that every child born to believing parents is elect. God commanded Abraham to circumcise both Ishmael and Isaac in Genesis 17, yet Ishmael remained a lost man; it was with Isaac alone that God established his covenant. (Genesis 17:19.) Isaac in turn had two sons, Jacob and Esau; both received the sign of God's favor, and yet God's favor was on Jacob alone.
This brings us back to Acts 2:39, where we see something of both the continuity and discontinuity between the two Testaments. There is a difference, because God's grace now richly extends far beyond the borders of Israel: "The promise is for . . . all who are far off." There is also continuity, because "The promise is for you and your children." But neither of these precepts is absolute; both are conditioned by God's eternal, immutable decree: unconditional election that is followed by the call to come to Christ. But that call, while effectual for God's elect, is not effectual for all who are far off or for all our children. Peter makes this clear, when he qualifies at the end of Acts 2:39, "For all whom the Lord our God will call."
Putting Acts 2:39 within the larger context of what the Bible teaches about salvation, I can say, if I know that my child has put her trust in the Lord Jesus Christ (Number 4 below), then I also know:
1. She has been unconditionally chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world;
2. She has been effectually called;
3. She has been born again;
4. She has come to God in true repentance and true faith;
5. She has been declared righteous by God based on the finished work of Christ, which she received by means of faith alone;
6. She has been adopted into God's own family;
7. She has been sealed with the Holy Spirit; and, therefore is in the process of being sanctified;
8. She will continue to hold onto Christ and persevere to the end;
9. She will be glorified in both her soul and
10. She will be glorified in her body and enjoy God for all eternity.
The difficulty that the Christian parent faces is how we view our children before we see evidence of Number 4 above. This is a difficulty with which true Christians have wrestled over the past two millennia.
In many theological quarters it isn't really that big a difficulty. For example, many modern Evangelicals see an age of accountability in those years prior to children being able "to examine themselves." (cf. Larger Catechism 174.) Such parents tend not to become particularly anxious until their children begin to reach the end of this imagined age. However, the Scripture knows nothing of such a this-worldly limbo.
Within Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox circles, as long as children have been baptized, original sin has been washed away, and they have been introduced to God's grace. In Tridentine theology, God's grace is given exopere operato (by the work having been performed.).
In some traditional Protestant circles, a judgment of charity is stretched into a presumption of regeneration, and children are encouraged to believe that they are true Christians unless there is clear evidence to the contrary, such as their apostatizing from the Church.
I cannot reconcile any of the above views with what I read in the Bible. While in charity I accept all who are part of the visible Church as Christians, I would never encourage individual professing Christians so charitably to view themselves. There is a very different approach in how we are to assess our own Spiritual condition from how we form our assessment of others. * While we do not wait for positive evidence of faith in others before accepting their professions of faith as genuine, such presumption with regard to ourselves could prove eternally deadly. We must never encourage others presumptively to rest in the hope of salvation apart from self-examination, the kind that regularly takes place under strong, soul-searching preaching.
So how did Sandy and I deal with our children? As with our first child, we taught her siblings the great truths of the Christian message through a variety of means: reading Bible stories to them, interacting with them about everyday events through the eyes of Scripture, catechizing them, putting them in Sunday school and the worship services of the Church. When they sinned, we corrected them and instructed them to seek not only the forgiveness of the humans they had wronged, but, above all, God's forgiveness. And just as we always forgave them, so we encouraged them to believe that God does the same. We encouraged them to look to the Lord Jesus, to turn to him daily from their sins with godly sorrow, and to believe that their sins were forgiven for Jesus' sake: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." (1 John 1:9.) Yet we pressed them to self-examination and reminded them that it is only those who have the positive fruit of faith and repentance who should regard themselves as Christians. Just as circumcision did in the Old Testament, their baptism laid on them the obligation to make their "calling and election sure." (2 Peter 1:10.)
Above all we prayed with and for them; we still do. When we knelt by the bed of each one individually to pray, we prayed for many things that were on their minds, but we always prayed that the Lord would give them hearts to love and trust Jesus with. We pressed them to believe that when Jesus died on the cross and rose again, he did this for them. We always prayed that God would pardon all their sins for Jesus' sake. We explained the meaning of their baptism and of the holy Supper, and when they expressed a desire to commune, we prepared them for a public profession of faith, so they could participate with us in this wonderful pledge of God's grace in Christ.
As our children grew older, our prayers for them took on a new tone, one little known earlier. There was a growing sense of our own failure as parents, that even when we had done all we had been commanded to do -- which we could never bring ourselves to believe that we had done -- we should still say, "We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done." (Luke 17:10.) Less and less, did we reflect on what we were doing for our children; more and more, our prayers became a bare pleading of God's most gracious, covenant mercy for our children, mercy that extends to a thousand generations.
We taught our children to believe that there is more to the true knowledge of God than anyone in this world knows, and so we pressed them to seek the Lord Jesus with all their hearts and never to stop seeking him, not only to know more about God, the Bible and theology, but to know God himself, experientially, even mystically, and to remember that there is always more.
As our children have moved into adulthood, we have taken great joy in seeing them active in true churches of Christ. We are greatly blessed when they talk with us about decisions they need to make, especially when they make decisions that manifest a willingness to take up the Cross and follow in the footsteps of Jesus. Even in adulthood, our children sometimes call and confess sins. I deal with them as I do others: whenever people confess their sins, I always pray for them and speak God's word of absolution, not sacerdotally, but as a herald of our all-merciful Sovereign.
As with my fellowship with others, I take great comfort in the Christian fellowship I enjoy with my wife and increasingly with our adult children. But even with all that, God has not called me to be sure of anyone's election but my own. (2 Peter 1:10.) The thought that even one of my precious children or grandchildren would spend eternity in a Christ-less hell brings me nothing but anguish, but the God whom I serve is a God who in his self-disclosure tells me that he is "The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin." (Exodus 34:6, 7.) It is true that God does not leave the guilty unpunished and that he visits sin within the generations of the wicked, but he teaches us that the dominant motif in the song of his character is his mercy and love. In Christ, when I look at that "multitude that no one could number" of Revelation 7:9, I believe that I can trace the faces of all of my descendants there -- not arrogantly or presumptively, but not with a naked wish, either. My hope is grounded in God's gracious covenant, a covenant signed and sealed to believers and their children in baptism and the Supper.
* The most striking illustration of this comes from a comparison of what Jesus says in Matthew 12:30 with what he says in Mark 9:40. In Matthew 12:22-37 Jesus encounters strong opposition: the Pharisees accuse him of being in league with the devil. After answering their charges Jesus goes onto warn them of the great danger they are in: "He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters. And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven." (Matthew 12:30, 31.) After further warning Jesus tells them about the necessity of Spiritual fruit. Notice the focus on self judgment -- "He who is not with me is against me." (Matthew 12:30.) If I see no positive evidence that I am for Christ, I must conclude that I am against him.
How different is this standard of self-judgment from that by which we measure others. In Mark 9:38 we read, '"Teacher," said John, "we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us."
'What is Jesus' response? Jesus said, "No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. I tell you the truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ will certainly not lose his reward."(Mark 9:39-41.) When we look at others, a different standard is to be used: "Whoever is not against us is for us." (Mark 9:40.) If a person professes to be a follower of Christ, either with his lips or by wearing the mark of Christ's ownership, baptism, we must accept him as such, unless we see positive evidence to the contrary.
This is what we may call a judgment of charity. Paul used the judgment of charity when he wrote to the church at Corinth. He addressed all of them as saints and brethren. (1 Corinthians 1:2, 10.) He regarded every one of them as fellow believers whom God had called, including, we may add, Stephanas' children. (1 Corinthians 1:9, 16.) Did he mean that every person there was a true Christian? No, in fact he warns them to take a close look at themselves: "Examine your selves to see whether you are in the faith; test your selves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you -- unless, of course, you fail the test?" (2 Corinthians 13:6.)
Thanks again Bob - you are single-handedly keeping my blog alive.
Saturday, May 14, 2005
What is it about finals?
Granted - I am not the most motivated person in the whole world.
In fact it is safe to say that on the list of 'things i'd like to be doing', studying doesn't appear to be very high on the list. Somewhere just above yardwork, and perhaps a few below washing the car. But like those other things, I do it. Yet for some reason, when I sit down to take a test that I have studied for, it is as though I haven't sat in class for one day, took a single line of notes, or cracked a single book in preparation. Every semester it is the same. No matter how hard I study, it never translates to the test grade. It's been a serious source of frustration for me and is beginning to make me not want to bother trying so hard.
On the other hand - for me 'trying so hard' is probably one of the biggest overstatements known to man. I've never really known how to study and never really had good study habits, so for me - when I say trying so hard - it really means trying period.
I've never had a lot of discipline. However, i must say that being at seminary has instilled a good deal mroe than I have ever had before. Unfortunately that is not saying very much at all. Every year I seem to work harder, but at the same time the work I am doing is more difficult, therefore shutting down any chance at noticing any improvement.
And of course the fact that I am sitting here writing this blog post instead of studying for the recidulously hard final I will be taking on Monday (not to mention to two subsequent exams tuesday and wednesday) speaks volumes about how I feel about the whole endeavor as it stands.
I think my biggest problem, along with procrastination and wasting time (is that redundant?), is that I have no skill for synthesizing information. I find it absolutely impossible to take 3 months of information and somehow cram it all in my head in a way that keeps it there so that I can spit it all out onto my little blue test booklet.
Whatever - it doesn't matter how much I study. I'm going to sit down at these tests and my mind is going to go blank lke it always does and I will have to BS my way through a half assed answer in order to try to get a C and save my grade for the class. It happens every semester, twice a year - why should this time be any different?
yay school.
In fact it is safe to say that on the list of 'things i'd like to be doing', studying doesn't appear to be very high on the list. Somewhere just above yardwork, and perhaps a few below washing the car. But like those other things, I do it. Yet for some reason, when I sit down to take a test that I have studied for, it is as though I haven't sat in class for one day, took a single line of notes, or cracked a single book in preparation. Every semester it is the same. No matter how hard I study, it never translates to the test grade. It's been a serious source of frustration for me and is beginning to make me not want to bother trying so hard.
On the other hand - for me 'trying so hard' is probably one of the biggest overstatements known to man. I've never really known how to study and never really had good study habits, so for me - when I say trying so hard - it really means trying period.
I've never had a lot of discipline. However, i must say that being at seminary has instilled a good deal mroe than I have ever had before. Unfortunately that is not saying very much at all. Every year I seem to work harder, but at the same time the work I am doing is more difficult, therefore shutting down any chance at noticing any improvement.
And of course the fact that I am sitting here writing this blog post instead of studying for the recidulously hard final I will be taking on Monday (not to mention to two subsequent exams tuesday and wednesday) speaks volumes about how I feel about the whole endeavor as it stands.
I think my biggest problem, along with procrastination and wasting time (is that redundant?), is that I have no skill for synthesizing information. I find it absolutely impossible to take 3 months of information and somehow cram it all in my head in a way that keeps it there so that I can spit it all out onto my little blue test booklet.
Whatever - it doesn't matter how much I study. I'm going to sit down at these tests and my mind is going to go blank lke it always does and I will have to BS my way through a half assed answer in order to try to get a C and save my grade for the class. It happens every semester, twice a year - why should this time be any different?
yay school.
Sunday, April 10, 2005
JP II RIP
The number one response that I have been approached with concerning the recent departure of The Pope was how we are to respond to the Pope's death and his eternal state?
Most people automatically assume that because heis the Pope he gets a one way ticket to the promise land no questions asked. But, if like myself, you are a protestant and believe in the seriousness of Scripture and the concept of "salvation by faith alone", then thinking about the eternal circumstances of this man takes on a different perspective.
Let me begin by saying that I do not presume to know the eternal state of any human, living or dead, save one, the Lord Jesus Christ who is seated at the right hand of God. Apart from that, I have only educated guesses and mere speculation.
What I do know is what the Bible says about how we are saved.
The classic Roman Catholic statement on salvation looks something like this:
Salvation = faith + good works
My faith gets me started, and through it and the sacraments given only through the church I receive a certain amount of grace that I must maintain by doing 'good' deeds that earn me merit before God and cause me to be in his favor. The number and kind of good deeds I do in this life denotes how long I have to spend in purgatory, working off the remaining sinfulness that my own deeds did not cover. Then I get to go into heaven. (I am stating this as simplistically as I can think to say it)
The Classic Reformed Protestant statement (which happens to be my own) looks like this:
Salvation = Faith, which is a gift from God
Jesus of Nazereth, the incarnate Son of God, accomplished salvation through his life, death and resurrection, conquering sin and death for all His elect. I believe this to be true through the faith God works within me through His Holy Spirit, which is His grace towards me. (Grace = underserved favor - in this case, it is undeserved favor given to someone who completely despises you.) That faith unites me to Christ and makes me His adopted brother in the family of God. In that union, God declares me innocent of all my sin, not because of what I have done, or any goodness in me, but based only on what His Son has done in my behalf. So now when God sees me, he does not see my sinfulness any longer, but only the goodness of His son who has obeyed Him perfectly in all things. This is the basis of my own salvation and the only way for me to be saved. There is nothing I can add to it or take away from it. And now that I am united to Christ, I do good works that God has set before me to do, not for my own need to add something to my faith, but only to bring glory to God's name and to live according to the name by which I am now called, Christ's.
This is the fundamental difference that has separated RC and protestants. RC's believe that they have a hand, nay a responsibility, to add to what Christ has done in order for them to be saved. Reformed Protestants believe thatit is Christ's work and His work alone that saves us.
Again - so much more can be said for both sides... but back to the discussion at hand.
Sometimes, in order to start a conversations about these things we'll ask a hypothetical question: "When you go before the throne of God and He asks you 'why should I let you into heaven?' What will you say?"
From a protestant standpoint, the answer is clear - that I rest in Christ's person and work and what He has accomplished for my sake.
For an RC, the answer must be a list of deeds that the person has done that they hope will be enough to get them in, or at least enough to keep their time in purgatory as short as possible. (fyi - reformed protestants know of no place called purgatory or the concept - no mention of any such thing in the Bible)
So, all things being what they are, a consistent Reformed Protestant would say that if a consistent Roman Catholic person went before God touting his deeds as his way to gain God's favor, then God would not, could not accept them based on their own works. And so, if we assume that John Paul was a consistent Roman Catholic person, as his life and His writings bear out, then the same would be true of him.
Now, that does not for one second take anything away from the wonderful things that the man did while he was here on earth. He did more than many, more than any perhaps, who have lived during his life. His good deeds are of the kind that live long after the man has passed away. However, as far reaching and as good and many as his deeds are, they pale in comparison the the surpassing work of Christ, who alone can please God.
I confess that when it is put in these dogmatic terms it seems cold. So I turn back to my initial disclaimer in which I stated that I do not claim to know anything for certain in regards to anyones eternal state. I can only say what the Bible teaches on the matter. It is certainly possible that the Pope is with the Lord as I write this, just as it was possible for the thief on the cross along side Jesus to be promised that very thing.
While I'm being rather clinical in this very brief post on the subject, a pastoral approach would be vastly different, though ultimately no further from the truth.
(If I thought you would look up the references, I would have provided scripture backing for all my statements here, but do you know how much work that would be?)
I can imagine the comments that will follow...
Most people automatically assume that because heis the Pope he gets a one way ticket to the promise land no questions asked. But, if like myself, you are a protestant and believe in the seriousness of Scripture and the concept of "salvation by faith alone", then thinking about the eternal circumstances of this man takes on a different perspective.
Let me begin by saying that I do not presume to know the eternal state of any human, living or dead, save one, the Lord Jesus Christ who is seated at the right hand of God. Apart from that, I have only educated guesses and mere speculation.
What I do know is what the Bible says about how we are saved.
The classic Roman Catholic statement on salvation looks something like this:
Salvation = faith + good works
My faith gets me started, and through it and the sacraments given only through the church I receive a certain amount of grace that I must maintain by doing 'good' deeds that earn me merit before God and cause me to be in his favor. The number and kind of good deeds I do in this life denotes how long I have to spend in purgatory, working off the remaining sinfulness that my own deeds did not cover. Then I get to go into heaven. (I am stating this as simplistically as I can think to say it)
The Classic Reformed Protestant statement (which happens to be my own) looks like this:
Salvation = Faith, which is a gift from God
Jesus of Nazereth, the incarnate Son of God, accomplished salvation through his life, death and resurrection, conquering sin and death for all His elect. I believe this to be true through the faith God works within me through His Holy Spirit, which is His grace towards me. (Grace = underserved favor - in this case, it is undeserved favor given to someone who completely despises you.) That faith unites me to Christ and makes me His adopted brother in the family of God. In that union, God declares me innocent of all my sin, not because of what I have done, or any goodness in me, but based only on what His Son has done in my behalf. So now when God sees me, he does not see my sinfulness any longer, but only the goodness of His son who has obeyed Him perfectly in all things. This is the basis of my own salvation and the only way for me to be saved. There is nothing I can add to it or take away from it. And now that I am united to Christ, I do good works that God has set before me to do, not for my own need to add something to my faith, but only to bring glory to God's name and to live according to the name by which I am now called, Christ's.
This is the fundamental difference that has separated RC and protestants. RC's believe that they have a hand, nay a responsibility, to add to what Christ has done in order for them to be saved. Reformed Protestants believe thatit is Christ's work and His work alone that saves us.
Again - so much more can be said for both sides... but back to the discussion at hand.
Sometimes, in order to start a conversations about these things we'll ask a hypothetical question: "When you go before the throne of God and He asks you 'why should I let you into heaven?' What will you say?"
From a protestant standpoint, the answer is clear - that I rest in Christ's person and work and what He has accomplished for my sake.
For an RC, the answer must be a list of deeds that the person has done that they hope will be enough to get them in, or at least enough to keep their time in purgatory as short as possible. (fyi - reformed protestants know of no place called purgatory or the concept - no mention of any such thing in the Bible)
So, all things being what they are, a consistent Reformed Protestant would say that if a consistent Roman Catholic person went before God touting his deeds as his way to gain God's favor, then God would not, could not accept them based on their own works. And so, if we assume that John Paul was a consistent Roman Catholic person, as his life and His writings bear out, then the same would be true of him.
Now, that does not for one second take anything away from the wonderful things that the man did while he was here on earth. He did more than many, more than any perhaps, who have lived during his life. His good deeds are of the kind that live long after the man has passed away. However, as far reaching and as good and many as his deeds are, they pale in comparison the the surpassing work of Christ, who alone can please God.
I confess that when it is put in these dogmatic terms it seems cold. So I turn back to my initial disclaimer in which I stated that I do not claim to know anything for certain in regards to anyones eternal state. I can only say what the Bible teaches on the matter. It is certainly possible that the Pope is with the Lord as I write this, just as it was possible for the thief on the cross along side Jesus to be promised that very thing.
While I'm being rather clinical in this very brief post on the subject, a pastoral approach would be vastly different, though ultimately no further from the truth.
(If I thought you would look up the references, I would have provided scripture backing for all my statements here, but do you know how much work that would be?)
I can imagine the comments that will follow...
Friday, April 01, 2005
Briefly weighing in... Terri Schiavo
I'm going to echo some sentiments that have been widely expressed, but that I think are at the heart of this case. And that is about all I'll do. If someone knows any of this to be false, fill me in. I, like everyone else, have to go with what is out there.
I have been very surprised to find the amount of "illiteracy" about Terri Schiavo's situation/condition.
1. Terri Schiavo could swallow her saliva which, by itself, nearly militates against a PVS diagnosis.
2. Until her situation deteriorated recently, Terri Schiavo was able to eat cake and pudding orally. Some doctors say this still might be possible were she truly PVS, but this still is an important detail in rebutting the idea that she was unable to orally eat. The hospice was under "orders" from Michael Schiavo, even in the last days of her life, not to feed Terri Schiavo orally.
3. In any other legal case, Michael's common-law wife and three kids by her would be considered an insurmountable conflict of interest and a forfeiture of his guardian rights.
Other sidenotes that may or may not have conflict of interest written all over them...
George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney, is a member of the Hemlock Society, and an otherwise religious weirdo (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pfeiffer200503301030.asp).
The hospice was handpicked... its board was a George Greer campaign contributor in his last election. At least one board member has been a member of the Euthenasia Society of America.
This wasn't about leaving Terri Schiavo to die a natural death. It was about whether or not her quality of life warranted feeding her.
I find some peoples support of that consideration to be appalling.
(Thanks Chad)
I have been very surprised to find the amount of "illiteracy" about Terri Schiavo's situation/condition.
1. Terri Schiavo could swallow her saliva which, by itself, nearly militates against a PVS diagnosis.
2. Until her situation deteriorated recently, Terri Schiavo was able to eat cake and pudding orally. Some doctors say this still might be possible were she truly PVS, but this still is an important detail in rebutting the idea that she was unable to orally eat. The hospice was under "orders" from Michael Schiavo, even in the last days of her life, not to feed Terri Schiavo orally.
3. In any other legal case, Michael's common-law wife and three kids by her would be considered an insurmountable conflict of interest and a forfeiture of his guardian rights.
Other sidenotes that may or may not have conflict of interest written all over them...
George Felos, Michael Schiavo's attorney, is a member of the Hemlock Society, and an otherwise religious weirdo (http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/pfeiffer200503301030.asp).
The hospice was handpicked... its board was a George Greer campaign contributor in his last election. At least one board member has been a member of the Euthenasia Society of America.
This wasn't about leaving Terri Schiavo to die a natural death. It was about whether or not her quality of life warranted feeding her.
I find some peoples support of that consideration to be appalling.
(Thanks Chad)
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Because I have to... desert weather
Forgive the past highly unprolific month of non-posting.
I have to post something here, mostly because as a Seminary student, I can't have a post that remotely condones illegal drug use headlining my blog for 2 weeks, as it has...
But I also feel like I need to post something if for no other reason than to drive myself through this lack of creativity and lack of impetus to get my thoughts out of my head and onto 'paper'.
I don't know what it is.. maybe I am outgrowing the blog phase, or maybe I just don't feel I have anything meaningful to say... but I think it's really just that I have had so much output in recent weeks that I just don't feel like I have anything left to put out.
I am uninspired by politics, the things that are in the news are so over done by the mainstream media that even the important issues, like the Shiavo fiasco, are just leaving me cold. I have no interest in discussing them, which is wierd for me.
I am over-inspired by things at school. Meaning simply that I could probably fill pages and pages of this blog with things that I think are really great and cool, but most of it I have not come to fully understand myself, so my relating it here is immature at this point.
No one cares about the Mets but me, so posting on them is pointless.
I don't post about my marriage.
So hopefully there will be more to come...
But not right now. It's dry season.
I have to post something here, mostly because as a Seminary student, I can't have a post that remotely condones illegal drug use headlining my blog for 2 weeks, as it has...
But I also feel like I need to post something if for no other reason than to drive myself through this lack of creativity and lack of impetus to get my thoughts out of my head and onto 'paper'.
I don't know what it is.. maybe I am outgrowing the blog phase, or maybe I just don't feel I have anything meaningful to say... but I think it's really just that I have had so much output in recent weeks that I just don't feel like I have anything left to put out.
I am uninspired by politics, the things that are in the news are so over done by the mainstream media that even the important issues, like the Shiavo fiasco, are just leaving me cold. I have no interest in discussing them, which is wierd for me.
I am over-inspired by things at school. Meaning simply that I could probably fill pages and pages of this blog with things that I think are really great and cool, but most of it I have not come to fully understand myself, so my relating it here is immature at this point.
No one cares about the Mets but me, so posting on them is pointless.
I don't post about my marriage.
So hopefully there will be more to come...
But not right now. It's dry season.
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
"High Times"
Check out this link to discover your true identity - Your "stoner" name.
I knew I had an alter ego back in my college days, but I did not know it was...
Jurassic Jointmaster
How sweet is that?
I could think of several negative connotations, since I'll be 30 this year - but I left that guy back in 1999 - so I guess the connotations just don't matter now.
Hit this site and tell me what your stoner name is - it's good for a laugh, even if you've never been a stoner.
I knew I had an alter ego back in my college days, but I did not know it was...
Jurassic Jointmaster
How sweet is that?
I could think of several negative connotations, since I'll be 30 this year - but I left that guy back in 1999 - so I guess the connotations just don't matter now.
Hit this site and tell me what your stoner name is - it's good for a laugh, even if you've never been a stoner.
Saturday, March 19, 2005
oh the frustration...
Monday I sat in class taking notes on my laptop, which is the normal order of business. Some of my friends still kick it old school and hand write their notes, but I can't even read my own hand writing, and I never really learned how to take notes correctly. So for me it is a fast paced exercise in trying to type, as closely as I can, everything the professor says...
That being said, it is pointless for me to carry on about how important my laptop is for me at school, so I'll just carry on...
Well, there I was, typing away feverishly when it happened. I never saw it coming... I did not feel a breeze or wisp of air as death reach over my shoulder and touched my laptop.. I only saw the briefest 'blue screen' of death and then nothing... a deep, black void replaced my MS word and the last few words out of my professors mouth never made it passed the no longer blinking cursor of life...
I knew what it was as soon as it happened. I knew what was wrong and I knew I was in trouble.
But I didn't think it was as bad as it turned out to be.
I through my hands in the air and had to seriously dig deep to resist the immediate urge to chuck my laptop the length of the auditorium and scream out in primal rage... instead I packed up my gear and left with 20 minutes left in class... without my laptop it was pointless for me to be there.
I went directly to circuit city, which turned out to be a wasted trip, for although my laptop is still under warranty (one of the only times I have ever done that by the way - bought the extended warranty) - but they no longer send out the machines from circuit city. So I went back out to my car and called the customer service line. The lady was nice enough and she had me do a few trouble shooting operations, which were absolutely useless, because when your mother board fries (which was what happened to me) you computer doesn't do anything. It turns on, the cd-rom spins, and then nothing... not even crickets. But I humored her to expedite the process, and I received a box the next day to ship my ailing machine out to the PC doctor to get new guts. When I sent it out, I filled out the paperwork and asked specifically that they not change any of the data on my hard drive, if they could any way help it. When a mother board dies, it should not effect any of the rest of the equipment inside - there was no reason for me to fear for my data - but I asked anyway, pleaded really... and then I waited.
Today that wait ended.. I got my laptop back and quickly went to plug it in a start it up to see how much better it was running.. and it is quite remarkable how much faster it is running and how much smoother it loads... and how different my OS looks... and how much space there is on my cleanly wiped hard drive...
I could be upset about the 7 gigs of music I had stashed on my drive... I could be upset about gigabytes of programs i had installed and how tuned i had my registry and how happy i was with the overall setup of the system... but I'm not... not really...
I'm only upset about the 2-300K I had in MS word documents that marked the progress of my semester.. I feel like the last 2 or 3 weeks of my work have been erased, and that is pretty frustrating. I am generally good at backing things up like that - I copy my school work to my desktop at home for just such emergencies, and I do it just about every week.. but for some reason, ordained before the foundation of the world, I hadn't backed up for a couple weeks...
My own fault... but it doesn't make it any less of a HUGE pain in the butt... and I'll probably spend most of my break trying to get it back to normal working order... sheesh, how annoying.
i know.. i'm just whining right now... i'll be over it tomorrow.
That being said, it is pointless for me to carry on about how important my laptop is for me at school, so I'll just carry on...
Well, there I was, typing away feverishly when it happened. I never saw it coming... I did not feel a breeze or wisp of air as death reach over my shoulder and touched my laptop.. I only saw the briefest 'blue screen' of death and then nothing... a deep, black void replaced my MS word and the last few words out of my professors mouth never made it passed the no longer blinking cursor of life...
I knew what it was as soon as it happened. I knew what was wrong and I knew I was in trouble.
But I didn't think it was as bad as it turned out to be.
I through my hands in the air and had to seriously dig deep to resist the immediate urge to chuck my laptop the length of the auditorium and scream out in primal rage... instead I packed up my gear and left with 20 minutes left in class... without my laptop it was pointless for me to be there.
I went directly to circuit city, which turned out to be a wasted trip, for although my laptop is still under warranty (one of the only times I have ever done that by the way - bought the extended warranty) - but they no longer send out the machines from circuit city. So I went back out to my car and called the customer service line. The lady was nice enough and she had me do a few trouble shooting operations, which were absolutely useless, because when your mother board fries (which was what happened to me) you computer doesn't do anything. It turns on, the cd-rom spins, and then nothing... not even crickets. But I humored her to expedite the process, and I received a box the next day to ship my ailing machine out to the PC doctor to get new guts. When I sent it out, I filled out the paperwork and asked specifically that they not change any of the data on my hard drive, if they could any way help it. When a mother board dies, it should not effect any of the rest of the equipment inside - there was no reason for me to fear for my data - but I asked anyway, pleaded really... and then I waited.
Today that wait ended.. I got my laptop back and quickly went to plug it in a start it up to see how much better it was running.. and it is quite remarkable how much faster it is running and how much smoother it loads... and how different my OS looks... and how much space there is on my cleanly wiped hard drive...
I could be upset about the 7 gigs of music I had stashed on my drive... I could be upset about gigabytes of programs i had installed and how tuned i had my registry and how happy i was with the overall setup of the system... but I'm not... not really...
I'm only upset about the 2-300K I had in MS word documents that marked the progress of my semester.. I feel like the last 2 or 3 weeks of my work have been erased, and that is pretty frustrating. I am generally good at backing things up like that - I copy my school work to my desktop at home for just such emergencies, and I do it just about every week.. but for some reason, ordained before the foundation of the world, I hadn't backed up for a couple weeks...
My own fault... but it doesn't make it any less of a HUGE pain in the butt... and I'll probably spend most of my break trying to get it back to normal working order... sheesh, how annoying.
i know.. i'm just whining right now... i'll be over it tomorrow.
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
They Never Told Us About This in Seminary
Bob Vincent is providing me with a valuable service. Not only is he giving me and others the head-sup on what to expect in ministry, but he is also giving me good blog material while I am bogged down in mid-terms.
So enjoy this new kernal of wisdom and visit Bob at http://www.rbvincent.com
(Don't let the midi file scare you - there's good stuff there)
"I think that most seminarians cannot comprehend the kinds of things they will encounter from some parishioners once in the pastoral ministry. Hearing it is one thing; experiencing it, quite another.
The strain on a pastor'sfamily from living in a "glass house" can be devastating . . .
(1.) On a pastor's wife:
Virtually all congregations used to provide their pastor with a manse(parsonage, rectory, vicarage) in which to live, and wise congregationswould treat the manse as the pastor's home, keeping their distance unlessinvited. Sadly, that is not always the case. In one church that I served, mywife decided to make new curtains for the living room. I paid for the fabricout of my own pocket, and she slowly labored with her sewing machine forseveral weeks. They looked great. But one day several of the "Women in theChurch" decided to drop by to "visit" -- that is, to engage in manseinspection. When they saw the new curtains, they became upset and verycritical of my wife, demanding why she had taken it on herself to do this.
Over the years my wife and I have listened to a lot of pastors and their wives. Many pastors' wives are terribly depressed, some having problems with alcohol or prescription drugs. An affair is not unknown. It's tough on women when their husbands are out night after night, often leaving them alone with small children: Sunday night service, Wednesday night service, session meetings, deacons meetings, committee meetings, visitation nights . . . to say nothing of all the events that you're supposed to attend for people in the church and their families: wedding rehearsal dinners, funeral visitations, dinners for people's anniversaries, birthdays, retirement and various awards . . . stuff that's not strictly speaking "work," but stuff which if you don't do, you'll end up on somebody's black list. Never underestimate the power of somebody to blackball you with subtle comments once you've ticked them off.
1. On one occasion, I put in eighty hours in one week. That's just insane. But what do you say when the phone rings attwo in the morning, and somebody's boy has shot himself in the head? You splash water on your face, comb your hair, throw on a suit and chug down a cup of lukewarm water with three tablespoons of instant coffee in it, hoping you don't throw up.
I am very grateful for the church that I currently serve. Other than asking about possible repairs and maintenance, they treated the manse as our house. Nobody here has ever been critical of my wife's not attending Sunday School. She would dress our children and drop them and me off at the church and then return home, put some music on and spend the time in prayer before heading back for morning worship. Our children are now grown, and we do much of the non-preaching work of the ministry together. Doing visitation and then going out to eat can be a kind of date, no kidding. I now do all counseling of females with my wife. Not only does she pick up on things that I don't, shekeeps me out of trouble.
(2.) On a pastor's children:
My mother was a child of the manse, her father having been a Presbyterian minister. She used to tell me that even in adult life people would say, "But you're a preacher's daughter." Mama's now dead, but her last remaining sibling, my beloved Aunt Ruth, still quotes the phrase with such sarcasm in her voice -- it must have really stung. People may sometimes mean well, but critical comments made to pastors' children have pushed some children away from church for good. It's one thing that I urged people never to say to my children: don't correct them by the standard of being a "preacher's child;" correct them because of the standards to which the Lord holds all Christians. However, on one occasion, feeling quite desperate with one of my children during the teen years, I said, "If you keep acting like this, you're going to make me lose my job." It wasn't completely untrue -- I had gone to the session and confessed that I wasn't in control of one of my children and offered to tender my request to resign to presbytery -- but it was a really stupid thing to say to a teenager and put an enormous power in the hands of achild.
(3.) On a pastor himself:
(3.1.) You find certain types of people in most congregations: the huge group of the less than committed, the smaller group of the visibly committed who do a lot of the work and a handful that you try to pour your life into. It's no big deal when somebody in the first group decides to leave and join the big church on the other side of town: you lose some to them; they lose some to you. But it really is devastating to lose somebody you were slowly grooming for leadership. They don't all move away; sometimes they get caught in some scandal. Years ago one of my elders came by the office to see me.
What's wrong?" I asked.
"I got fired."
"Fired!? You've been the plant manager for years. What on earth happened?"
"I got caught stealing. I'd been embezzling money for years. My secretary caught me and turned me in."
"Why?! How could you sit in church and listen to sermons and serve people communion? Didn't your conscience eat you up?"
"I was trying to please my wife and keep up with our friends."
I was crushed. He was one of the elders who showed real aptitude for doing the work of the ministry.
(3.2.) "What have you done for me today?"
That's a comment my Daddy used to make -- he was a health officer and knew that his job sometimes hung in a political balance. He meant that people quickly forget the things you did for them in the past and always want more. I remember a family in whom I had invested well over a hundred hours: the husband had been mangled in a wreck and took over a year to heal. I faithfully visited him in the hospital and in their home after he was discharged. Their live-in grandson got involved with drugs and stealing. When they were out of town for a couple of weeks, and their grandson got arrested for possession of marijuana, I bailed his sorry behind out of jail and took him into my home until they returned. Some years later the boy got into real trouble and went to the penitentiary. I would go to visit him, but it was over two hours one way, plus almost an hour waiting for them to bring him out -- in short, it ate up pretty much a whole day. So I became less frequent. One Sunday night at the end of the service, his grandmother came up to me:
"When was the last time you visitedJoe?" she demanded.
"About six months ago," I said.
She then proceeded to bless me out, and the family eventually left our church.
Going back to an earlier satire <http://www.rbvincent.com/tareswheat.htm> on a comment a fellow pastor once made to me:
Charismatic churches attract psychotics; Reformed churches attract neurotics. That is true -- really and sadly true, and some of these nut cases end up on church sessions.
(3.3.) Money.
There are certain lifestyle expectations that come with being friends with others. I eat lunch with various men in my congregation every week. Not wanting to be a mooch, I like to pick up the tab if I've asked the other person for lunch. If it's regular, we alternate. It's just that when I spring for a twenty-dollar lunch tab, it's out of my pocket, and there's alot less in my pocket than in some of my guests. Evening meals are even more expensive, so we are cautious there because we can't afford the reciprocity. When my wife and I have attended pastors' functions in certain communities, we've both marveled at what some of those clothes had to cost. But my wife buys some of her stuff at Goodwill, and I'm happy for a second hand suit. This past year I received two fine suits from a dead man -- two grand a piece -- I love them; they're beautiful. But I usually buy my dress shirts at Sam's -- pressed, under a two thousand dollar suit, who can tell I paid around ten dollars?
Don't get me wrong. I'm blessed financially. It's just that it's easy for a preacher to get himself head over heels in debt, trying to keep up with his congregation.
What's the old loan company saying about to whom you shouldn't loan money? Was it the infamous "P"s: preachers, plumbers, policemen,politicians?
(3.4.) Women.
I've ministered to more than one pastor who fell into adultery. Women scare me to death -- not women themselves -- my awareness of the potential for sin that's still inside me. Very few people suddenly start stealing after a lifetime of honesty, or getting drunk after decades of sobriety. But it's not that way with sex. A man can live a very disciplined life for years and then be hit with something (like falling into real pride, for example.) that can eventually lead to adultery. I know more than one minister who has experienced women in his congregation making romantic overtures toward him. In the mercy of God, it hasn't been that way for me --my wife tells me that it's not because I'm not handsome. (Smart woman! But I need to warn her about flattering me too much.) She says that it's that I don't "send off signals." Whatever . . . it's grace . . . that's for sure. But some women are attracted to power, and they see real power in the influence wielded by preachers. They're seduced by that power, and they try to seduce the preacher in turn. One pastor friend confided in me that he had had an emergency call a couple of months back. The woman deceived him into coming over late at night by telling him that her husband was desperate to talk or something like that. Only her husband wasn't at home. When the pastor arrived, she opened the door and was buck-naked. He turned and fled.
My wife and I wish that we could take a week every so often and do a seminarfor seminarians and their wives. It isn't that the ministry isn't terribly fulfilling. It is. It's just that it isn't anything at all like we expected back in the sixties. <http://www.rbvincent.com/pastortrials.htm>
Thanks again, Bob
back to the books!
So enjoy this new kernal of wisdom and visit Bob at http://www.rbvincent.com
(Don't let the midi file scare you - there's good stuff there)
"I think that most seminarians cannot comprehend the kinds of things they will encounter from some parishioners once in the pastoral ministry. Hearing it is one thing; experiencing it, quite another.
The strain on a pastor'sfamily from living in a "glass house" can be devastating . . .
(1.) On a pastor's wife:
Virtually all congregations used to provide their pastor with a manse(parsonage, rectory, vicarage) in which to live, and wise congregationswould treat the manse as the pastor's home, keeping their distance unlessinvited. Sadly, that is not always the case. In one church that I served, mywife decided to make new curtains for the living room. I paid for the fabricout of my own pocket, and she slowly labored with her sewing machine forseveral weeks. They looked great. But one day several of the "Women in theChurch" decided to drop by to "visit" -- that is, to engage in manseinspection. When they saw the new curtains, they became upset and verycritical of my wife, demanding why she had taken it on herself to do this.
Over the years my wife and I have listened to a lot of pastors and their wives. Many pastors' wives are terribly depressed, some having problems with alcohol or prescription drugs. An affair is not unknown. It's tough on women when their husbands are out night after night, often leaving them alone with small children: Sunday night service, Wednesday night service, session meetings, deacons meetings, committee meetings, visitation nights . . . to say nothing of all the events that you're supposed to attend for people in the church and their families: wedding rehearsal dinners, funeral visitations, dinners for people's anniversaries, birthdays, retirement and various awards . . . stuff that's not strictly speaking "work," but stuff which if you don't do, you'll end up on somebody's black list. Never underestimate the power of somebody to blackball you with subtle comments once you've ticked them off.
1. On one occasion, I put in eighty hours in one week. That's just insane. But what do you say when the phone rings attwo in the morning, and somebody's boy has shot himself in the head? You splash water on your face, comb your hair, throw on a suit and chug down a cup of lukewarm water with three tablespoons of instant coffee in it, hoping you don't throw up.
I am very grateful for the church that I currently serve. Other than asking about possible repairs and maintenance, they treated the manse as our house. Nobody here has ever been critical of my wife's not attending Sunday School. She would dress our children and drop them and me off at the church and then return home, put some music on and spend the time in prayer before heading back for morning worship. Our children are now grown, and we do much of the non-preaching work of the ministry together. Doing visitation and then going out to eat can be a kind of date, no kidding. I now do all counseling of females with my wife. Not only does she pick up on things that I don't, shekeeps me out of trouble.
(2.) On a pastor's children:
My mother was a child of the manse, her father having been a Presbyterian minister. She used to tell me that even in adult life people would say, "But you're a preacher's daughter." Mama's now dead, but her last remaining sibling, my beloved Aunt Ruth, still quotes the phrase with such sarcasm in her voice -- it must have really stung. People may sometimes mean well, but critical comments made to pastors' children have pushed some children away from church for good. It's one thing that I urged people never to say to my children: don't correct them by the standard of being a "preacher's child;" correct them because of the standards to which the Lord holds all Christians. However, on one occasion, feeling quite desperate with one of my children during the teen years, I said, "If you keep acting like this, you're going to make me lose my job." It wasn't completely untrue -- I had gone to the session and confessed that I wasn't in control of one of my children and offered to tender my request to resign to presbytery -- but it was a really stupid thing to say to a teenager and put an enormous power in the hands of achild.
(3.) On a pastor himself:
(3.1.) You find certain types of people in most congregations: the huge group of the less than committed, the smaller group of the visibly committed who do a lot of the work and a handful that you try to pour your life into. It's no big deal when somebody in the first group decides to leave and join the big church on the other side of town: you lose some to them; they lose some to you. But it really is devastating to lose somebody you were slowly grooming for leadership. They don't all move away; sometimes they get caught in some scandal. Years ago one of my elders came by the office to see me.
What's wrong?" I asked.
"I got fired."
"Fired!? You've been the plant manager for years. What on earth happened?"
"I got caught stealing. I'd been embezzling money for years. My secretary caught me and turned me in."
"Why?! How could you sit in church and listen to sermons and serve people communion? Didn't your conscience eat you up?"
"I was trying to please my wife and keep up with our friends."
I was crushed. He was one of the elders who showed real aptitude for doing the work of the ministry.
(3.2.) "What have you done for me today?"
That's a comment my Daddy used to make -- he was a health officer and knew that his job sometimes hung in a political balance. He meant that people quickly forget the things you did for them in the past and always want more. I remember a family in whom I had invested well over a hundred hours: the husband had been mangled in a wreck and took over a year to heal. I faithfully visited him in the hospital and in their home after he was discharged. Their live-in grandson got involved with drugs and stealing. When they were out of town for a couple of weeks, and their grandson got arrested for possession of marijuana, I bailed his sorry behind out of jail and took him into my home until they returned. Some years later the boy got into real trouble and went to the penitentiary. I would go to visit him, but it was over two hours one way, plus almost an hour waiting for them to bring him out -- in short, it ate up pretty much a whole day. So I became less frequent. One Sunday night at the end of the service, his grandmother came up to me:
"When was the last time you visitedJoe?" she demanded.
"About six months ago," I said.
She then proceeded to bless me out, and the family eventually left our church.
Going back to an earlier satire <http://www.rbvincent.com/tareswheat.htm> on a comment a fellow pastor once made to me:
Charismatic churches attract psychotics; Reformed churches attract neurotics. That is true -- really and sadly true, and some of these nut cases end up on church sessions.
(3.3.) Money.
There are certain lifestyle expectations that come with being friends with others. I eat lunch with various men in my congregation every week. Not wanting to be a mooch, I like to pick up the tab if I've asked the other person for lunch. If it's regular, we alternate. It's just that when I spring for a twenty-dollar lunch tab, it's out of my pocket, and there's alot less in my pocket than in some of my guests. Evening meals are even more expensive, so we are cautious there because we can't afford the reciprocity. When my wife and I have attended pastors' functions in certain communities, we've both marveled at what some of those clothes had to cost. But my wife buys some of her stuff at Goodwill, and I'm happy for a second hand suit. This past year I received two fine suits from a dead man -- two grand a piece -- I love them; they're beautiful. But I usually buy my dress shirts at Sam's -- pressed, under a two thousand dollar suit, who can tell I paid around ten dollars?
Don't get me wrong. I'm blessed financially. It's just that it's easy for a preacher to get himself head over heels in debt, trying to keep up with his congregation.
What's the old loan company saying about to whom you shouldn't loan money? Was it the infamous "P"s: preachers, plumbers, policemen,politicians?
(3.4.) Women.
I've ministered to more than one pastor who fell into adultery. Women scare me to death -- not women themselves -- my awareness of the potential for sin that's still inside me. Very few people suddenly start stealing after a lifetime of honesty, or getting drunk after decades of sobriety. But it's not that way with sex. A man can live a very disciplined life for years and then be hit with something (like falling into real pride, for example.) that can eventually lead to adultery. I know more than one minister who has experienced women in his congregation making romantic overtures toward him. In the mercy of God, it hasn't been that way for me --my wife tells me that it's not because I'm not handsome. (Smart woman! But I need to warn her about flattering me too much.) She says that it's that I don't "send off signals." Whatever . . . it's grace . . . that's for sure. But some women are attracted to power, and they see real power in the influence wielded by preachers. They're seduced by that power, and they try to seduce the preacher in turn. One pastor friend confided in me that he had had an emergency call a couple of months back. The woman deceived him into coming over late at night by telling him that her husband was desperate to talk or something like that. Only her husband wasn't at home. When the pastor arrived, she opened the door and was buck-naked. He turned and fled.
My wife and I wish that we could take a week every so often and do a seminarfor seminarians and their wives. It isn't that the ministry isn't terribly fulfilling. It is. It's just that it isn't anything at all like we expected back in the sixties. <http://www.rbvincent.com/pastortrials.htm>
Thanks again, Bob
back to the books!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
