Maddow, Moore, and blah blah blah

Regardless of which side you take on the union issue in Wisconsin, calling this a “class war” and an attack on the “working people” is sheer nonsense.  State officials are working people.  State senators and congressional reps typically serve two jobs or more.  A good friend of mine is a state rep. and works very hard for not much money.  “Working people” elected fellow “working” citizens who are doing their jobs and trying to have a workable budget.  But for Michael Moore to rage against wealthy people is a bit silly.  He’ one of them.  But as for “working people”?  He’s not one of them.

As for subverting the democratic process…well, maybe you don’t like every aspect of this bill.  But subverting the process also includes not showing up to vote.  Brave.

See an epic meeting of blowhards here.

P.S. Unionized industries are the most inefficient and lackluster of any.  Think transportation, education, etc.  I’m going to go take a shower now.  I feel dirty.

Muslim who threatened ‘South Park’ creators gets 25

Another shoutout to one of the best animated shows around; this times, it seems that their fight for first amendment rights has been fruitful.  The founder of the ‘Revolution Muslim’ website had most recently become infamous for implying death for Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of South Park who dared to show Muhammad in an episode of the show (alongside Jesus, Moses, Krisha, and several other religious icons).  This was offensive to Muslims, for whom it is verboten to depict the prophet in any manner.  Parker and Stone, quasi-liberterians who are major advocates of free speech, balked at network restrictions and decided to show Muhammad inside a U-Haul van and a bear costume to poke fun at the double standard applied to Islamic sensibilities.  Death threats and controversy continued, but it seems the Federales were paying attention too. The 21-year-old Chesser apparently helped out a terrorist organization, in addition to other charges.  Via the Hollywood Reporter:

“Zachary Chesser will spend 25 years in prison for advocating the murder of U.S. citizens for engaging in free speech about his religion,” U.S. Attorney Neil MacBride said Thursday. “His actions caused people throughout the country to fear speaking out — even in jest — to avoid being labeled as enemies who deserved to be killed.”

Full story over at Ain’t it Cool.  In many ways, this is a continuation of the Danish Cartoon controversy and the discussion over the ‘right’ not to be offended.  As a Christian, of course, I realized long ago my own beliefs are fair game and, moreover, that I need to laugh at myself.  One of the things I most respect about South Park, for instance, is their insistence on making fun of everyone.  We should all be able to laugh at ourselves; there is no reason this cannot coexist alongside a serious faith commitment.  Kudos to prosecutors for insuring that the bullies don’t get their way.

Scientology and Cadillacs

First off, if you’ve never gotten the skinny on Scientology c/o South Park, check this out now.  You will be glad you did.  The only downside: this is why Chef left the show.

What does a Cadillac have to do with Scientology?  In the case of writer/director Paul Haggis (of Crash fame), it seems a Cadillac prevented him from staying in the Roman communion.  This is explained in an excerpt from the excellent (albeit lengthy) new piece in the New Yorker.  The article details the ongoing investigation into the “Church” of Scientology and Haggis’ own personal battle with his former social club.  Yes, I said social club.  I refuse to call what they do church.  Pyramid scheme is also acceptable.    Here goes:

Haggis wasn’t proud of his early years. “I was a bad kid,” he said. “I didn’t kill anybody. Not that I didn’t try.” He was born in 1953, and grew up in London, Ontario, a manufacturing town midway between Toronto and Detroit. His father, Ted, had a construction company there, which specialized in pouring concrete. His mother, Mary, a Catholic, sent Paul and his two younger sisters, Kathy and Jo, to Mass on Sundays—until she spotted their priest driving an expensive car. “God wants me to have a Cadillac,” the priest explained. Mary responded, “Then God doesn’t want us in your church anymore.”

The entire article is worth your read.  Fascinating.  File it under,  “How does ANYONE fall for this???”

Oh, time to go.  I should probably be finding an attorney at this point.

What makes a better pastor, youth or experience?

I have a bone to pick with CNN writer John Blake. His recent article ponders some new statistics about seminaries which, in part, find,

…the nation’s seminaries are enjoying a baby boomers boom – the 50-or-older demographic group is the fastest-growing demographic at U.S. divinity schools, according to the Association of Theological Schools (ATS).

The article glosses over the motivation for older individuals entering seminary.  Not to disparage my late-blooming colleagues, because many of them are excellent pastors, but I don’t think we can overlook the appeal of ministry during an economic downturn.  This, I think, is especially true in the mainline denominations, many of whom provide relatively stable jobs (sometimes, unfortunately, tantamount to tenure) once you have been fully recieved as a pastor in the ecclesial community.  We shouldn’t be ashamed of the economic motivation; pastors are human beings, after all, and we want our kids to have food like everyone else.

But near the end, the article descends into the realm of “maybe…” and annoys me.  Here’s what Blake asks:

The article brought a question to my mind, though. In athletics, age is a liability.  Older athletes lose strength and flexibility.

But could old age equip people to be better ministers?

For example, how can a young minister who has never been married or had children or even lost many friends to death counsel grieving couples?

And might an older minister do better at dealing with the temptations of ego, sex, and money?

Is it better to be a rookie minister when you have gray hair?

I shall respond to each question in turn:

A)  Possibly, at first.  An older pastor can potentially relate to older church members better.  Also, there is a feeling that an older person has the “wisdom of age” even if they don’t have church experience.  But my experience has been that, at under 30, I love spending time with my older members and have an excellent report with them. 

B)  I’m not sure what this question is asking.  It looks like it may be asking specifically about counseling a couple grieving the loss of a child.  But really, the question is nothing new.  It’s the same old, “How do Catholic priests counsel married couples?” issue, which misunderstands the nature of pastoral counseling.  A pastor is equipped to be present with people at any stage of life, pray with and for them, and share with them the wisdom of the Church as handed down through Scripture and tradition.  Serious counseling should only be done by pastors with serious training.  But, old or young, new or veteran, a good pastor can sit and grieve with anyone.  We are always dealing with situations we’ve never faced (because there are a lot of different things that go wrong in this life!); that’s the nature of the calling.  We might just as well ask, “How can a pastor who was married at 23 counsel a person who is single at 45?”  As pastors, we must do our work in the hope that the Lord will provide what He requires.  That’s faith.

C)  No.  Dumb question.  As we age, the temptations of ego, sex, and money do not go away.  Look at Hugh Hefner.  Look at Silvio Berlusconi.  There are a lot of ego-driven, sex-crazed, greedy old men around.  And women.  Think about all those “real housewives” shows.  I hope they use the term ‘real’ lightly.

D)  Perhaps.  But there is one big drawback: it takes time to learn the ropes of ministry.  You can read all the books you want to, get all the degrees you want to, but nothing replaces time in the pastoral office for understanding and effectiveness.  “Life experience” does not replace actual pastoral experience.   Pastors, old and young, can of course serve with faithfulness and effectiveness.  It is never too late to hear the call, and I appreciate all most who heed it.  But there is no denying that starting out early gives the pastor a chance to learn, over a lifetime, what the ministerial vocation is all about.  Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither are pastors.

The Chicago Code and Gender Studies

Shawn Ryan, creator and writer on The Shield (best show ever) is a gifted fellow.  I was particularly struck by this line on Monday’s premiere of his new show on Fox:

“Do you know the problem with men?  If they can’t eat it, drink it, snort it, smoke it, pawn it…they destroy it.”

-Det. Wysocki in the Pilot episode of The Chicago Code

Egypt and Carter-bama

Some folks will hate this comparison, but I’ll go for it anyway.  Victor Davis Hanson, the classicist, military historian, and political commentator reminds me a lot of the polemical theologian Stanley Hauerwas.  They are both fairly angry, fairly old white dudes.  Both are very intelligent and wide-ranging.  And I enjoy both of them, though each occasionally veers off into ideological extremes which I don’t care to follow.

VDH (as his fans call him) has just written a very interesting new piece for National Review comparing Jimmy Carter circa 1979 to President Obama in the midst of the Egyptian crisis.  In both instances, he argues, a so-called new-era idealist liberal has been roughed up by a nasty world that does not share his pretensions.  Here’s a highlight:

Yes, our third year of Obama hope and change is beginning a lot like 1979 (I’ll skip the domestic parallels), as an unjust and imperfect world rejects the utopian visions of another liberal idealist, and sees magnanimity as weakness to be exploited rather than as kindness to be reciprocated.

I call THAT real…

This is officially my new favorite country song.  And I haven’t listened to much country lately.  I used to listen almost exclusively to country, but more and more I find that it is only parroting the worst aspects of other popular forms of music like rock & hip-hop.  Being a big Johnny Cash fan, I know country has always had elements of drug use and sexuality.  I’m not sure if I’ve gotten more sensitive to this stuff or if it is more and more pervasive.  Either way, I just don’t have much patience for it anymore.  I think the music you listen to shapes you.  It’s not about “not being stained” or thinking that everything secular is dirty.  For me, I guess, it’s about what keeps me focused on God and the man God has called me to be.  It seems to me that country today is just as likely to celebrate very ungodly lifestyles as any other kind of music, and I just don’t need to fill my head with that on a regular basis.

But, James Wesley just gave me a reason to celebrate country music again.  Given all the reality TV on CMT (isn’t it owned by MTV, also a fine purveyor of “reality” trash?), it will be a miracle if this gets much air time.  But man we need to hear this message:

500 Channels and there ain’t much on tonight
But reality shows about some folks so called lives
A pretty girl cries cause she don’t get a rose
But she’ll find love next year on her own show
And they call that real

Real, is the hand you hold 57 years
Real, is a band of gold trembling with fear
And it’s the first long tear down an old man’s face
Watching his angel slipping away
His heart so broke, it’s never gonna heal
I call that real

Where I live, housewives don’t act like that
And the survivors are farmers in John Deere hats
Our Amazing race is beating the check
Praying that the bank ain’t ran it through yet

Real, like too much rain falling from the sky
Real, like the drought that came around here last July
It’s the damn old weevils and the market and the weeds
The prayer they prayed when they plant the seeds
And the chance they take to bring us our next meal
I call that real

Real, like a job you lose ‘cause it moves to Mexico
Like a momma and a baby with no safe place to go
Like a little dream house with a big old foreclosed sign
Like a flag draped coffin and a 21 gun goodbye
I call that real

This hit me especially this morning because Snooki visited nearby recently (on a Sunday! Surely there should be a law…) to a packed Barnes & Noble.  As a society, we are idolatrously glorifying the lives of people who literally contribute nothing to society.  Moreover, the  lifestyles celebrated in “reality” shows have nothing to do with how 99.9% of people actually live.

I serve a congregation of wonderful people.  None of us are perfect.  Some of us have lost children; some have had cancer; some of us have suffered from mental illness.  We’ve lost jobs.  We’ve raised good kids.  We’ve had arguments, but found healing.  We’ve worked hard, even for bad people, and continued to serve each other in retirement.  I love these people.  I love how real they are.

So please, media, stop trying to sell me something that is fundamentally sinful, wrong, malformed, and galactically unreal.  Thank you James Wesley (awesome last name BTW) for a country song I can celebrate once more.

On Loving Luke Timothy Johnson

I just remembered why I love LTJ (cue awesome nickname) so much.  There are many reasons, of course.  His wit.  His unapologetic Catholicism (I mean really, how often do you meet a Catholic who isn’t apologizing for it?).  His teaching at a Methodist seminary (Candler at Emory).  His great little book The Creed, which I read for my theology class and still love.

But the main reason I love LTJ: this lecture, in which he skewers the Jesus Seminar.  Like many religion undergrads over the last 20 years or so, I was presented Jesus Seminar scholarship as if it was the latest and (by definition) greatest take on Jesus.  I smelled a rat but I couldn’t articulate it until Johnson ripped them a new one in a loving, scholarly, Christian way.  I first encountered that lecture early in seminary and I still love it.

On my viewing tonight, I noticed something that hadn’t struck me before: LTJ has serious issues with N.T. Wright’s scholarship.  This I did not know.  My own primary interest is not NT studies, and while I like N.T. Wright (and got to see him speak last year!) I can’t claim to have read any of his substantial works.

The debate seems to involve the nature of the historical discipline.  In this lecture, given at the National Cathedral a while back, Johnson indicates that he finds the Jesus Seminar less offensive than Wright.  While the Jesus seminar may be doing poor history, he says, the good Bishop does not “rise to the level of history.”  Interesting.  If only I had more time to read!

Watch the video and leave your thoughts below!

P.S. I almost forgot – LTJ’s Teaching Company courses are great too!

Somewhere in the world something important is happening

…and the local news tonight tells me about Oprah’s newly discovered half-sister and gives me a preview of the next American Idol.

 

Just a quick thought: do we get the news we deserve?  I’m beginning to think that CS Lewis had the right idea by avoiding the daily news.

 

::sigh::

The Sad State of Journalism: NBC Sports Skewers Dana White and His “UFC Tree Fort”

Just read an ::ahem:: “article” over on the NBC Sports site dubiously titled “Dana White Doesn’t Want Icky Girls In His UFC Tree Fort.” If you don’t know who Dana White is, well, you aren’t even a casual MMA fan.  The foul-mouthed Bostonian (are there any other kinds?) is President and part-owner of the UFC, and the man most responsible for turning around not only his corporation but the entire sport.  He’s not polished, but he is smart, and I like his product.  He has flaws.  These are readily viewable with a simple Google search.  But that is no excuse for this.  The author, Rick Chandler, concludes his short piece – based on a ONE WORD answer White gave to the ever-invasive cameras of TMZ – with the following scintillating analysis:

OK, I think we get the picture. We now take you to the scene of another 6-year-old mentality, via Calvin & Hobbes, already in progress:

Calvin: Our top-secret club, G.R.O.S.S.– Get Rid Of Slimy girlS!
Susie: Slimy girls?!
Calvin: I know that’s redundant, but otherwise it doesn’t spell anything.

Of course, the head of the UFC must be a misogynistic, immature dolt.  Many people, ignorant of the sport, would say the same about us fans.  But this is ridiculous.

The primary reason that the UFC does not have a women’s division (and likely won’t for quite some time) is a relatively low number of female fighters.  The UFC is the major-league, marquee MMA organization.  They will never have a women’s division until there are enough high-quality female fighters (in a particular weight class) to justify its creation in the top-shelf promotion.  This same logic applies to why there will not be (also for a long, long time) a super-heavyweight (265 lbs. +) division: very few – if any –  high-quality fighters in that bracket.

But I didn’t need to tell you all that.  Hopefully, all you needed to see was the title of this article to know that this was a pathetic excuse for sports journalism.  To run to the opposite extreme, where is Ariel Helwani when I need him?

P.S. Sue, if you read this, feel free to correct me!  Aside from college newspaper experience (ha!) I am no expert in this field.  But as a fan, I was offended by this hack piece.