Showing posts with label Essay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Essay. Show all posts

Friday, June 26, 2020

The New World Order with COVID 19

I watched the news about the COVID 19 Pandemic. It was spreading from China to other parts of the world. It reached the Seattle, Washington area. It was only a matter of time before we would see it in our urban Michigan area. And so it came.

We knew the Michigan Governor was going to issue some kind of "stay at home" order, and on Friday, March 20, 2020, the order was issued. Sunday, March 22 we stayed home and watched the livestream service from our church.

That was the 1st Sunday. It is now Friday, June 26 and this coming Sunday will be the 17th Sunday. A few weeks ago we started to again meet in the church building, but with restrictions regarding masks and limited seating to encourage social distancing.

Online social media has become saturated with news, analysis, and opinion about the pandemic to the point where my eyes would glaze over and I just ignored most of it; blocking much of it, especially the "conspiracy theories". Michigan had some of the more stringent emergency orders in place, and that became a political hot point between the Governor and her more extreme political enemies.

Being a political independent removed me from the echo chambers some of my friends and acquaintances were caught up in. It is frustrating to watch it. COVID 19 became very politicalized. To wear or not wear a mask became politicalized. To often basic science was ignored or thrown under the bus to sustain a narrative with not much connection to reality. And on top of all of that, it is a major election year.

At our age, my wife and I are in a "vulnerable group" for COVID 19. When we are places where we will be in proximity to other people, we wear a mask. The mask does not stop oxygen or carbon dioxide flow, or even the virus itself. The mask stops the water droplets that are carrying the virus. Stop the water droplets and you stop the virus. That's why we wear a mask when it is appropriate to do so. It's how we can practice loving our neighbors.

The other issue is the abject failure of our culture and society, and even the church at large, to recognize God's hand in judgement through this pandemic. I'm not talking about specific people of whom I know nothing about who have died from COVID 19. But I am talking about judgement at large against a culture and society that is immersed in a selfish secular materialism bathed in the blood of millions of aborted unborn innocent babies.

How long do we think as a society and culture we can keep shaking our fist at Him and spitting in his face? The COVID 19 pandemic with its economic consequence is the small cloud of what is to come. It is the proverbial warning "shot across the bow". Whatsoever you sow, you shall reap. It is an inevitable consequence which at some point will become unavoidable.

May God Almighty yet have mercy upon us.

Tuesday, December 03, 2019

"Willie Stark Syndrome "

It was probably Monday, June 19, 1972 when I first heard the news reports that there had been a break-in at the Democratic National Committee office at the Watergate Complex in Washington, DC.

My immediate thought at the time was, “That was stupid and totally unnecessary.” Of course my immediate presumption was that somebody related to the Nixon Republican campaign was probably involved.

It was stupid because by all accounts Nixon was projected to whoop the Democratic Candidate George McGovern by more than a healthy margin. And in November that is exactly what happened. There was nothing to be gained and a lot to to put at risk by snooping around the DNC offices.

But of course we know what happened. More and more facts came to light. The evidence brought the investigation closer and closer to President Nixon. Evidence implicating higher ups and a White House connection had been destroyed in a blatant obstruction of justice. In the end, evidence came to light that implicated the President himself. President Nixon’s support in Congress suffered a bi-partisan collapse pointing to impeachment in the House with a subsequent trial and conviction in the Senate.

President Nixon resigned on August 9, 1974; the first POTUS to do so in our country’s history.

Those of us who had supported his election and campaigned and voted for him were betrayed. It was like being kicked in the gut. The rest is history.

In retrospect it is clear President Nixon was betrayed by his own insecurities and pride; pride which the ancient Greeks called hubris, and of such was the subject of the Greek tragedies.

In the 20th century, the updated version of the Greek tragedy plays is found in Robert Penn Warren’s novel “All the King’s Men” published in 1946. It was in this southern tragedy we are introduced to Willie Stark.

Wille Stark comes to power by riding a populist wave of discontent with the current political establishment. As governor of his deep south state, he institutes programs and reforms, playing to the populist base on which his political power was built. And he plays hardball with his political opponents; digging up dirt and blackmailing them into subservience.

In the end Willie is undone by his own conniving and pride. His life ends in the bullets sent his way by one who had been a ally, but whose trust had been betrayed in the bed.

In a YouTube video entitled “Gods and Devils Aplenty: Robert Penn Warren's Civil War” (https://youtu.be/e-JxArcSyYg). Historian David Blight comments that when he asked Warren who “All the King’s Men” was about, Warren replied that it was about Julias Caesar. The Romans had their issues with hubris too.

Hubris, pride, the corrupting influence of power; It’s all there; the "Willie Stark syndrome".

In December 2019, 47 years after Watergate and the events leading to President Nixon’s resignation; once again a sitting POTUS is facing impeachment hearings. As I watch events unfold, I am unable to avoid a sense of deja vu; we’ve seen this before. It remains to be seen how much current events will parallel those of over 40 years ago. It is not so clear how current events will eventually play out. What is not to hard to see though, is that we may well be observing another case of “Willie Stark syndrome”.

Monday, May 28, 2018

The Politics of Rage

We are increasingly bombarded by the political use of the tactic of outrage. And it is easy to be outraged because there are so many stupid or unjust things being done that evoke outrage. Outrage is the meat and potatoes of right wing talk radio potentates like Limbaugh and Hannity, and of the left wing rags such as CNN and USA Today among others. After all “outrage” sells, and sales means money.

So many stupid and unjust things are being done on all sides, that one could easily come to the conclusion that they are done deliberately and with a view and intent of creating outrage that can be manipulated and exploited. Having lost a collective moral bearing where everyone does what is right in their own eyes, what did we expect?

But how long can a continuous string of outrage be maintained? The outraged mob runs from one outrage to another, figuratively lynching the perceived offenders, then off to the next outrage and lynching. What’s worse is some offenders probably do need “lynching” figuratively not literally, but as with a good part of vigilante activity, due process and careful sorting out of the facts gets brushed aside in a rush to judgement.

And it is also true that a continuous torrent of outrage over this and that and whatever eventually takes a toll on the emotions and psyche of a society and culture. The constant arousal of collective emotions of rage begins to dull the collective conscience. Collective emotional batteries run low and there becomes less and less energy to sustain the “good fight”.

At some point comes the real possibility of a collective cardiac arrest.

What happens then?

Monday, December 12, 2016

"The world has changed..."

Another year is winding down. A year of change in so many ways. The following quote from he Lord of the Rings movie sums up my thoughts on this year:

"The world is changed. I feel it in the water. I feel it in the earth. I smell it in the air. Much that once was is lost, for none now live who remember it." ~ Galadriel

I did not vote for Trump or Clinton. I voted for a 3rd party candidate and am waiting to play the "I told you so..." card. Contrary to all the Trump naysayers otherwise, my 3rd party vote was not "wasted", nor was it a "vote for Clinton". That is simply mathematically and statistically not true and never was true even philosophically.

In the Republican primaries, we voted for other candidates because, if we frankly admit it, Trump scared us. After he tied up the Republican nomination the over all line of thought was "Who do you fear more?" Many who opposed Trump in the primaries voted for him in the general election because they feared Clinton more.

OK.... But one thing has not changed. You feared Trump... Yes, you feared Clinton more, but the fact remains you feared Trump and there has not been a lot other than wishful thinking to change your reasons for that fear.

So now what? Talk to me a year from now after Trump has been in office for most of a year.

What are you going to do do if and when a President Trump does something that really goes over the top as well as far across the line; something you feared?

Yes, Clinton would have been even more egregious, but the point is Trump will be egregious. And when his time is done, the damage will be done and there will be little to none chance of going back and fixing it. And you voted for him...

My reply to you will be I told you so... Don't blame me. I didn't vote for either one of them. God judges nations and America is not immune from that judgement.

"Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against his Anointed, saying, “Let us burst their bonds apart and cast away their cords from us.”

He who sits in the heavens laughs; the Lord holds them in derision. Then he will speak to them in his wrath, and terrify them in his fury, saying, “As for me, I have set my King on Zion, my holy hill.”

I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, “You are my Son; today I have begotten you. Ask of me, and I will make the nations your heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession. You shall break them with a rod of iron and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.”

Now therefore, O kings, be wise; be warned, O rulers of the earth. Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and you perish in the way, for his wrath is quickly kindled. Blessed are all who take refuge in him."

(Psalm 2)

Thursday, June 16, 2016

On Being an Autism Grandfather

For some time I’ve been meaning to sit down and write about my grand-daughter. She was our first grandchild. When we heard some 16 years ago that we had a grand-daughter we were excited. We looked forward expectantly to the Grandparents role with all the assumptions of normalcy; a grand-daughter who I could bounce on my knee, we could buy fancy dolls for, who we would read stories to and all the normal things a Grandfather does with a Grand-daughter.

But our Grand-daughter was not normal. Our daughter, her mother, noticed it when our first grandson came along. He developed differently than his older sister. She was obviously not where she should be in terms of “normal” development. And so we entered the world of autism. Our expectations of “normalcy” in relation to our grand-daughter were shattered. I have grieved and still to some degree grieve what could have been but was not.

We always hear of the "success stories"; the autistic children that respond well to this therapy or that therapy or some "miracle program" and we are happy for them. But as our grand-daughter grew older, hope for "the miracle" has faded considerably. I don't totally rule out a miracle, but neither do I hold my breath waiting and hoping for one.

We observed the strain her autism has been on our daughter’s family as well as ourselves. Her sibling brother at an early age sensed and felt the anxiety and uncertainty autism brought into his family. He too shared the emotional burden and psychological strain. We often were there to provide much needed respite time for her mother. There were some very extremely difficult times, but somehow by the mercy and grace of God we as an extended family pulled through.

Yes I do love her; autism and all. She is very very special. I think she knows I love her, and in her own way has expressed her love for me. If she was on the verbal end of the autism spectrum perhaps it would have been a little easier, but she is on the non-verbal part of the autism spectrum, and though there has been speech therapy and other things, she remains non-verbal. I have never heard her say, “I love you Grandpa…” She has expressed love to me in other ways and for that I am thankful, but I still feel a loss.

I don’t know why this happened. It just is, and despite all, she was created in God’s image and as such, her life has meaning, purpose and value in and of herself as a being created in the image of God. I pray for her just as much as I pray for her two younger “normal” brothers. My hope is that in the resurrection when all things are restored to the fullness of what they were meant to be, that I will finally hear those words I have so longed to hear…

“I love you Grandpa…”

Friday, June 03, 2016

A St. Louis Sunset

Late Afternoon St. Louis Skyline from I-255 in Illinois.

We had been driving all day, a good 8 hours from our home in Michigan, and we still had a few hours to go to get to our overnight in Springfield, Missouri. We were taking I-255 to go around the south side of St. Louis. As we passed by on the Illinois side of the Mississippi River, there low on the horizon was the St. Louis skyline with the famous St. Louis Arch; way off in the distance across the Mississippi River in Missouri. Though St. Louis beckoned, we could not stop. We hurried on; the road ever beckoning. I had "miles to go before I sleep".

Thursday, January 28, 2016

The Next American "Civil War"?

From time to time in the universe of Internet one may come across some comment or discussion of the possibility or probability of a second American civil war. For some, such comments come from a perspective holding to a romanticized "lost cause" view of the first American Civil War of the 1860's; a view that engages in the vain yearning or perhaps more accurately the vain conceit that the "South" will somehow "rise again..."

For some time now, I have viewed such romantic conceit as totally out of touch with the reality of modern warfare and the changing face of what modern civil war has become. My classic case in point for that assertion is the Spanish Civil War of the mid-1930's. I recently started reading Stanley G. Payne's account of the Spanish Civil War published in 2012 by Cambridge as part of their Cambridge Essential Histories series. The following is an extended quote from Payne's introduction on pages 1-4 in which he deals with how the nature of civil war changed in the 20th century.

"By 1918, civil war had broken out in Finland and Russia, and it was not the traditional kind of civil war in which two contestants engage in a power struggle with equivalent goals and similar values, but a new kind of revolutionary civil war of the sort first essayed in France during the 1790's and in 1871. In the new civil wars, sharply contrasting revolutionary and counterrevolutionary programs vied for power, aiming not merely at political domination, but at imposing totally contrasting programs in society, economics, culture, and even religion--two completely antagonistic ways of life, virtually two different civilizations. These civil conflicts were fought with unprecedented bitterness and violence, extending far beyond the field of battle. Red terror and its counterrevolutionary counterpart during the Russian civil war sought not merely to conquer, but to some extent to eradicate the opposition completely, rooting out antagonists physically as well as politically, as though they represented contending religious or metaphysical principles, forces of absolute good or evil that had not merely to be conquered but completely extirpated. The result was unprecedented political violence in many different parts of the former Tsarist empire, while violent internal conflict also broke out in central and southern Europe..."

"...In this perspective, civil war in Spain was not a complete anomaly, but rather the only massive internal conflict to break out in Western Europe during the 1930's. It would reflect all the tensions, hatreds and ideologies found in these other conflicts, while adding further features of its own, characteristic of Spain and to some extent Europe as a whole during the decade before World War II."

Simply put, a modern civil war in the United States would not look much at all like the Civil War of the 1860's. Further more, we have very ample reason to believe that a modern civil war in the United States would very likely make the first Civil War look like a Sunday school picnic by comparison in terms of the level of violence and terror from both sides of the conflict. Also a modern civil war in America would very likely involve two antagonists of whom both would be repugnant and despicable, but in their extremism, there will be no allowance for any middle ground or moderation. In the Spanish Civil War there was nothing to like in either the Franco party on the one hand or the so called Republicans on the other. Both sides had repudiated the democratic process and both sides engaged in their share of violence and terror.

There may very well come a time in the future when the United States falls again into the scourge of another civil war, but if it does, it will have little or nothing to do with the "South rising again..."

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

Propaganda and the Death of Truth

In an age of 143 character quips and 10 second sound bites, the one yelling loudest and longest supposedly "wins". But what do they win? Has anyone ever really changed their opinion on an issue on the basis of tweets and sound bites? Look at who the social media blurbs are addressed to. "Liberals are really going to be mad when they see this!" "Conservatives just don't understand x, y, and z." Ninety nine percent of such social media sound bites are preaching to the choir. Liberals will not be mad, because they will not see the blurb, and if they did, they will not care. Conservatives will not be reading your brilliantly contrived propaganda sophistry, and if they did they will pick it apart in other blurbs you will probably not see, let alone read. Watching all of this going on in social media is like watching a comedy, but sadly, as with much comedy, the roots of that comedy are found in tragedy.. Welcome to the post-modern world. Behold the fruit of your post-modernity...

So this week, once again as they have done so many times before, the propaganda machines from all sides of the political fence are generating "drama" out of some issue or other; said drama calculated to advance the specific agendas, goals, and world views of the groups behind those propaganda machines. Emotions are appealed to on both sides and critical scrutiny and careful dispassionate rational thought and discussion is the casualty of the sophistry and "new speak" used to bend popular political and cultural will and thought into channels that feed the never ending lust for power and control of said groups. ...and all under the rubric of "news"... Of course "propaganda" is a word little used or understood. We can't talk about the nature of propaganda lest we expose the house of lies and deceit the propaganda machines have created. May God Almighty have mercy on us and deliver us from this scourge...

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Losing the Meta-Narrative in Noah

All stories told assume a larger story of which which the specific story is a part of. It is that larger story which gives context and meaning to the people and events of the story being told. It is this Meta-Narrative issue that is particularly highlighted in Darren Aronofsky's March 2014 film release "Noah".

I knew from seeing the very first trailer release for "Noah", that it was going to be a film that at some point I would want to see. I never expected that this would be a film that closely followed the Biblical narrative of Noah and the flood in the book of Genesis. Subsequent reviews and rantings and ravings confirmed that.

I did not really follow how well "Noah" did at the box office. My general sense was that after the usual initial flash of a new "epic" film, it faded to the obscurity of the cheap re-run theaters where I just this week finally went to see "Noah" for myself. We live in a day when so called epic films have very little staying power in the mind of our media soaked and sated pop culture; that shallow culture that seems incapable of taking time to really think deeply about what it is seeing and hearing, and so quickly rushes on to the newest and "greatest" info spot factoid that grabs its attention. Only time will tell if Aronofsky has made a film that becomes a classic.

It was because of the previous reviews and controversy and hype that I went into the theater with low expectations. This film has some strengths. The depiction of the wickedness of the humanity of the world that perished, though colored by Aronofsky's own meta-narrative context, was not sugar coated, and illuminated the depravity of that per-deluge world. It was finally nice to see a Noah who was not portrayed as some kind of half senile bumbling old man. The passing down of the oral tradition from generation to generation is clearly illustrated; that oral tradition that later would be written down by Moses under the direction of the Holy Spirit. The horror of the destruction is not muffled, and the film, in my mind correctly ties the incident of Noah's drunkenness to the resulting post-traumatic distress he had to deal with after the flood.

Darren Aronofsky clearly took liberties with the Biblical story. There are a number of points where the film departs from the facts as told in Genesis. Those have been more then adequately covered in the essays of other reviewers. I would like to focus on what is the one thing missing from Aronofsky's view of the greater meta-narrative that, in my mind, is a crucial and critical departure from the Biblical meta-narrative, and that is the loss of the place of the promise in the story. I would also submit that it is the loss of this critical point, the promise, that explains much of the factual departures from the Biblical story that Aronofsky made.

Consider the words spoken by God to the serpent; the proto-evangelium:

"And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel.” (Genesis 3:15)

Add to that meaning of Noah's own name:

"Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and became the father of a son. Now he called his name Noah, saying, “This one will give us rest from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which the Lord has cursed.” (Genesis 5:28-29)

It was the purpose of God in the bigger story of the Genesis account, the purpose of redemption, that is absent from the film, and it is that loss which is the most disappointing thing about Aronofsky's telling of the Noah story. He gives us a Noah whose purpose in what he does is at best foggy and muddy; a Noah who seems to have no sense of the promise and meaning of his own name; a Noah who instead of believing the promise as Hebrews 11 describes him, is a Noah who despairs to the point of considering total xenocide; who as another "Adam" is put into the place of making a choice which way future humanity will or will not go. So it is that Aronofsky ends up giving us an essentially pagan Noah.

I leave it to others more qualified then myself to speak to the quality of the acting and the cinematography, as well as the special effects.

It is not my intent to tell you, the reader, if you should or should not see this film. Each of you are capable of making that decision for yourself. Whatever film you do or do not see, I encourage you to ask yourself the question, "What is the larger meta-narrative behind this version of this story?" The meta-narrative of the Bible contains as a crucial part of that narrative, the promise, and it is that promise that, in my mind, makes all the difference in the universe.

Monday, April 22, 2013

History, Memory, & Connection

A few reflections on Marilynne Robinson’s novel “Gilead”

John Ames was dying. Of course in this life we are all terminal the moment we exit the womb. So many heartbeats; so many breathes in and breathes out; so many seconds, minutes, hours, days, years. Then we will be gone. Grim prospect that is, but it is what happens between that first and last breath that defines, for better or for worse, what our life is.

John Ames, the Congregational pastor in Gilead, Iowa was dying. At the time Marilynne Robinson writes his story in her somewhat strange but moving novel titled “Gilead”, he is in his mid-seventies. He is writing a chronicle for his young seven year old son; the son of his old age birthed by his much younger bride who had brought solace to him so many, many years after his first wife had died in childbirth. John Ames wants to leave his young son something through which after his death, his son can connect to his father and to the heritage that is his through his father. It is that epistle of the dying John Ames to his son that is the content of “Gilead”.

There are a number of story threads woven throughout “Gilead”, but perhaps among the more compelling ones is that relating to John Ames’ abolitionist grandfather; the Congregational minister from New England who was a Kansas Jayhawker and friend of John Brown of “moldering in his grave” fame, as well as acquaintance of that grim chieftain, Jim Lane; the grandfather who went marching off to the war as a Union soldier and came home minus an eye as a result.

John Ames’ grandfather was gripped by a cause; a cause which to him involved the righting of the wrong of a grave and malevolent injustice to fellow human beings created in the image of Almighty God. It was a cause that so gripped him that he engaged in activity that, in reflection, horrified his son for its extremeness; that son who was to become John Ames’ father.

So the stage was set for that Ames family play in which in the second act, the son and grandson watch in horror as World War I unfolds and challenges their pacifist preferences; a pacifism rooted in John Ames’ father’s aversion to what he had witnessed of the grandfather’s involvement in Bloody Kansas and the Civil War.

It is here we come to the matter of history, memory, and connection. John Ames’ seven year old son was entering a life further and further disconnected by time from the tumultuous events leading up to and including the Civil War. He was connected to a great-grandfather who had participated in some momentous historical events. That participation was coming down to him through the filter of his grandfather and the further reflection of his father, John Ames. It would remain to be seen how that young seven year old lad growing up some hundred years after those events, would process and understand his great-grandfather’s involvement in those events.

In the area of history, and the history of the Civil War in particular, there has been in recent decades, a focus in historical studies not just on the events of history, but also a study on how, over time, those events have been understood and remembered not just in history books or Memorial Day speeches, as important as they can be, but in the popular psych of a culture over time. A case in point is how the Civil War is remembered in literature that is not so much about the events themselves, but how the memory of those past events affect the characters involved in the story taking place. It was this history, memory, and connection that made this particular story thread in “Gilead” compelling. It also hit me in a very personal way.

My Great-Grandfather was a Union veteran of the Civil War. He served three enlistments in three different Ohio regiments for varying lengths of service. He died in 1931, when his grandson, my Father, was thirteen years old.

My Dad was old enough to have had some kind of meaningful relationship with his Grandfather. I don’t know if such was the case for the simple reason I never thought to ask him about the nature of his relationship with his Civil War Grandfather. Now my father is gone and what memories he may have had are gone with him. He did not leave my siblings and I any kind of “Gilead” chronicle. Dad never spoke much about his Grandfather. But it is also true that I never really asked him what he could tell me about my Great-Grandfather. Now it is to late.

History, memory, and connection… Don’t take them for granted. This tri-fold composite has not only to do with the very public historical events, but also with the more private events of a family history.

In “Gilead” we are made privy to that relationship of John Ames to the son of his best friend, that son Jack Boughton, whose full given name is John Ames Boughton, so named by the Reverend Boughton of the Gilead Presbyterian church; this Jack Boughton who is Robinson’s portrayal of the classic prodigal son.

This is a thread of the novel that most clearly holds out the hope of redemption, however faint it might seem to be. And it is such a story that John Ames dare not keep it from his son, even though he struggles with the argument in his soul over the telling or not telling of it. In the end that soul argument is laid to rest in a revelation Jack confesses to his namesake, and John Ames with clear conscience gives Jack his blessing. The hope of redemption has not totally been lost.

So it will be that in the future the son of John Ames will read his Father’s account of Jack Boughton, and perhaps make sense of things he saw and heard back when he was too young to understand the import thereof. But when understood at that future time, young Ames will have an understanding and insight into his then deceased father’s character that will be a precious memory. Of such are history, memory, and connection.

~ The Billy Goat ~

Tuesday, November 06, 2012

Resisting Evil

According to some comments made in the heat of the recent Presidential election campaign, I am suppose to stand up to "evil", and that apparently in a way and manner that would involve destroying a recently renewed and cherished friendship. I rather think the evil that needed to be resisted was the one that would destroy and deny me that cherished friendship,and that was the evil I choose to oppose.

Those who know me well at all have a pretty good idea which way my political opinions lean. I don't feel obligated to make those leanings a test of friendship or even Christian fellowship. And as I don't like it when other people shove their politics in my face, I am obligated to treat them as I wish to be treated. And with regard to the times when I have not done so, I confess my need for repentance.

I am very concerned and disturbed about the shrillness of political discourse these days from both sides of the political spectrum; a shrillness that lends itself to increased polarization, anger, and hatred for one another. Sixty second sound bites and media focused political campaigning does not lend itself to dispassionate and thoughtful political discussion.

If the principles of the Sermon on the Mount have any meaning at all, they have meaning for how we participate in political discussion. The implications of that was the focus of a previous post, so I will not repeat all of that here.

The questions remain for each of us in our conscience to answer before God. What is the evil in myself I need to stand up to and confront? Is it possible to stand up to and confront evil in an evil manner? What does the Gospel have to say about the manner and way of my political conversation, and for that matter, all areas of my conversation? In my focus on the political evil I see, am I forgetting my own need of repentance and forgiveness and subtly becoming smug in my self-righteousness?

It is true that we need to stand up to and confront evil. What is not always so clear is what evil it is we personally need to stand up to in a given moment. May God grant us the wisdom and discernment to see clearly what the real evil is that confronts us in our hearts.

Kyrie Eleison!

Friday, April 13, 2012

The Work of Writing

The Work of Writing


Anyone who has ever tried to do serious writing knows it is not easy. I've had occasion to reflect on that truth in the past few weeks as I have sat at the laptop, working on a couple of stories.

If I have a serious hobby at all, it is writing. At one point in my life I entertained the idea of writing the next great American novel. In assessing my desire to write, I came to a point where I realized that if I was to ever do any good writing, I needed to practice. I needed to sit down and write. I still have the notebook containing the pages pounded out out on the old mechanical typewriter that had been in my possession since high school days. Then came the PC, and now the laptop.

I remember someone saying that if you wanted to write, write about the things you know; the things that come from your own life experiences. So it is I have written a number of short memoirs; recalling incidents and happenings from my life. I have tried my hand at poetry and on the left of this page you will find a link to my poetry blog. I've also written a few more lengthy essay type pieces which are found here on the Billy Goat Blog. And yes, blogging itself provides opportunity for practicing the art of writing.

None of what I have written has ever been formally published, but has been self-published in some forum or other on the internet. Irrational as it may be, my greatest fear is the fear of what some editor might do to the things I have written. The stories, essays, and poetry are my life, the revelation of some intimate corners of my soul, and as such are sacred ground.

There have been only a few times that I have tried my hand at writing an original fiction piece. The two projects in the works at this time are both fictional. My inspiration for trying my hand at fiction came about a year or so go when I re-read Ray Bradbury's "I Sing the Body Electric and Other Stories" along with "The Martian Chronicles".

Through his writings, Bradbury taught me that what makes fiction work is in how it pictures the human condition. What made his stories memorable were not the mechanics of projecting the advanced science of science fiction, as interesting as that may be, but the human condition that remained the same in Sci-Fi, historical novels, or any other kind of genre, fictional or real life.

And so I write. I wrestle with words and sentence structure and paragraphing. You struggle with writing in a way so that the story the reader is reading is the story you are telling. You go over what you wrote, asking yourself if a first time reader is getting the same message you think you are telling. It is classic communications class 101 all over again. Life demands its priorities. You have to work a paying job, and there are family responsibilities, and the opportunities to spend any lengthy time on a writing project is limited.

As a writer, I do not "make up" a story. A writer does not create the story; the writer tells the story that he or she discovers is already there. It is not always clear how the story is going to develop. The basic story line is there, but as you fill in the details, you find the development is not going where you thought it was.

Other stories intersect the story you are telling. The one story I am working on could lend itself to a trilogy, but I'm not sure it has been given to me to tell the other two intersecting stories.

In writing, one story develops in a relatively straight forward somewhat logical manner. The other story develops in bits and pieces that are not in any logical chronological order.

How many times through the years I have thought about writing, and than sat down to read a favorite established author, and conclude that in comparison to that author I don't know how to write at all.

But I keep practicing. I keep writing. And if any of my writing is ever formally published or not, I would still write. I would tell the stories, and leave them for my children's children.

I do not want to write for the "Christian market". If I can't write a story that touches all kinds of people, Christian or otherwise, I would rather not write at all. Yes, a Christian view of life gives philosophical foundation for my writing, but I loathe and resist a pop Christian cultural concept of Christian writing. I resist being bound to that mediocrity. True Christian writing should be much, much better then that.

So I write, and as long as I am able, will continue to write. And just maybe, God helping me, I might possibly write something that actually has some literary value for the ages.

Shalom...

(Here is a link to a list of my writings that are published on Scribd. )

Monday, March 26, 2012

Political Theater as Propaganda


The idea of "political theater" is a concept I observed in action many years ago during the university campus anti-war protests of the late 1960's and early 1970's. Over the years it has become much more sophisticated and today is used by all sides of the political spectrum, right as well as left. I see it constantly in the news. I see it on Youtube. I see it in the blogosphere. I see it on Facebook.

It is both amusing and also scary to see how political theater is accepted at face value and without critical scrutiny. (And this observation has nothing at all to do with your agreeing with me about this or that or anything at all.) The unfortunate thing is that political theater has a habit of fogging truth and reality. It encourages a rush to judgement that condemns and executes without regard to waiting for all the facts so the full truth and genuine justice can prevail.

What drives political theater is the agenda of the group or parties directing and producing the carefully calculated acts of the play orchestrated as opportunity gives occasion, to move that agenda forward..

By the way, another way of spelling "political theater" is

"p-r-o-p-a-g-a-n-d-a".

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Aliens and Strangers in this World


I voted in the Michigan Presidential Primary today.

I knew I would not be voting for Scooby-Doo. There was a part of me that wanted to vote for Bullwinkle, but in the end it was Mickey Mouse that got my vote. It is not like I have a lot of enthusiasm or expectations for this one. This is just another election cycle that is proving once again that we live in a culture that is incapable of producing real leadership... We are seeing the fruit of over a century of the influence of secular materialistic thought.

I was thinking today about the contrast of a capitalistic economic system working in a culture still dominated by a Judeo-Christian ethic, versus a capitalistic economy working in a culture dominated by a secular materialistic ethic. The contemplation of that should give us pause regarding blanket uncritical support for such secular materialistic capitalism.

The dirty little "secret" about secular materialism is that it provides no constraint upon the pursuit of a Darwinian survival of the fittest. In fact it feeds and idolizes the survival of the fittest. Forget the Humanist Manifesto! Or any and all altruistic concepts of the greater good.

Like the Jack London character of Wolf Larson, it becomes one's purpose, even duty, to live and squeeze every juicy marrow one can out of one's own life and any who happen to get in the way of that be damned. In the London story, Humphrey Van Weyden's altruistic liberalism paled and wilted in face of the onslaught of Wolf's inexorable unrelenting materialistic hedonistic logic.

This is the world we face. This is the world we as Christians have been called to bear witness to the truth that God is, and He is not silent. A world that loves the darkness because it hides their evil deeds. A world that will not have this Man to rule over them.

That thought should drive us to our knees in earnest prayer. Come quickly Lord Jesus!

~ The Billy Goat ~

Friday, November 18, 2011

Penn State, Joe Paterno, and the Meaning of Justice


Papa Joe is gone; fired from his job as head football coach at Penn State University. Allegations abound of criminal sexual misconduct involving a minor child on the part of an assistant coach, and a cover up of those criminal actions on the part of college administrators. Did I mention the president of PSU was also fired?

The reactions to this whole sordid affair have been pretty intense as one would expect given the emotional punch that sexual abuse of children rightly generates in our culture. As usually happens in these and similar cases, the popular sentiment is the alleged perpetrator is obviously guilty, the school also obviously guilty, and burning at the stake is to lenient a sentence for perpetrators of such atrocities. It is very easy to let the heat of emotion have rule and sway over our comments on this disgusting sordid affair, and for that heat and emotion to color our sense of what justice in this case should look like.

What I want to do in this post is step back from the emotion and heat of the Penn State scandal, and take a look at some of aspects of what justice is that should temper our heat and emotion as we view this affair.

Foremost and fundamentally justice is about truth. Justice is not about what allegedly happened, or about what you and I think happened, but about what actually empirically did happen. Justice is not based on what is reported in the news media, or on what you or I choose to believe happened. That is why in our court system we have rules about what evidence and testimony can be given in any specific judicial court case.

Justice is about culpability and having the consequence of criminal actions involve an accountability for those actions that is in measure with the nature of the criminal activity. The determining of culpability defines guilt or degree of guilt. We are answering the question of who is to be held accountable for what happened, and taking measure of what the appropriate consequence should be. A side caution to the question of culpability is that of guilt by association. We don't hold the bank robber's children accountable for the father's crime, even though there are secondary consequences the children will suffer as a result.

Justice is also about protecting the innocent; the innocent victims, and the innocent accused. The victim requires justice for the loss suffered. Justice says the innocent are to be acquitted when falsely accused. We also need to again look at the issue of guilt by association. In the above example, the bank robber's children are innocent and not considered as being guilty of the crime of the father.

It gets a little complicated doesn't it?

There is a lot more that could be said for these three aspects of justice and there may be other aspects that could be mentioned.

So what are some conclusions we can draw from this discussion?

A lot of innocent people; students, PSU athletes, faculty, alumni, staff, parents, taxpayers, PSU sports fans, and etc. are and will be to one degree or another impacted by this scandal. Justice would say we need to cut them a break, and avoid guilt by association. It also means we need to give the PSU community room and time to heal and move on, while at the same time giving the victims due and full justice. That will take some real wisdom.

Our statements of opinion on the affair need to be tempered by the fact that all we are hearing about this is from secondary and tertiary sources, and as such is hearsay. It may prove to be true hearsay, but it is still hearsay.

If in the course of investigation the allegations are proven true, all those guilty and culpable need to be made to answer in proportion to the degree of their specific guilt and culpability.

All involved; victims, innocent PSU community members, and the guilty need our prayers. With a understanding of all that justice means, we can't go wrong in praying that justice will be done in the Penn State scandal.

"But let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream."

~ Amos 5:24

[Side Note: The context of my interest in the Penn State scandal is through my alma mater Michigan State University's association with Penn State in the Big Ten conference. The ripples of the scandal reach to all Big Ten schools; just ask Nebraska who played a conference football game with Penn State at Penn State just a few days after Paterno's firing. ]

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Intellectual Integrity Wins!



Have you ever observed people being accused of resisting someones ideas because of fear? Someone writes a controversial book and reviewers critique the book and take exception to the writer's propositions as expressed in the book. Then the author responds that his critics are reacting out of fear.

Oh really? The author knows this for sure? All the criticism of his book is based on fear? Fear is the primary driving motive of the criticism?

But what if it is not? What if the criticism was based on the reviewer's properly critical rational examination of the author's own words and arguments as presented in the book? What if the criticism is based on an objective scholarly analysis of the author's own words and assertions?

What if the criticism comes from a basis of intellectual integrity, and the reviewer in his or her analysis detects that the author has not been entirely intellectually honest with the data; that critical points of context and other relevant information and data have been ignored or overlooked?

And why is the author responding to his critics with an ad hominem argument? Were the critics suppose to leave their brains at the door of their office before sitting down and reviewing the author's book? Are all critical rational thinking facilities to be laid aside when it comes to examining this writers assertions and claims?

And why use such emotional words such as "fear" or "afraid" in labeling one's critics? After all, does the author want dialogue or monologue?

What if in the end it is not fear that drives the criticism, but on the contrary it is application of the rigor of intellectual integrity?

In that case intellectual integrity and honesty wins.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Contrasts


They died in the same week.

The one's death was heralded in news headlines across the country.

The other's death went larger unnoticed except for the family and friends who had known and loved her.

The one lived most of his life in the public eye; for better or worse, a cultural icon and entertainment idol.

She lived her life in relative obscurity, content in loving her husband, children, and grand children, and great-grand children. Content to serve her God, her family, and others.

He was cut off at a relatively young age. The full facts of what happened to him are not yet publicly known, and maybe never will be known.

She lived to a ripe old age and as her end neared, she was ready to "go home"; trusting her Lord and Saviour, giving Him all the praise and glory, her family around her, loving her, singing hymns with her, and being with her at the very end as she slipped from this life.

Which one of the two's legacy will endure the passing of time and the generations to come? Which of the two was truly happy? Which of the two lived a life truly worth living?

I did not know him nor did I spend much time following or evaluating his career. The death of any person, great or small, is a serious matter, and a reminder that the existence of death is a consequence of the fall. For better or worse this man has gone to meet his Maker.

I did get a glimpse of her life, and in that glimpse saw the image of Christ being formed. The spiritual legacy she received from her grandfather when a young child has been passed on to her children, grand children, and is now in the process of being inculcated in the lives of her great-grand children.

Who's legacy will endure and have the most meaning? Who really lived a life worth living?

Rest in peace dear Christian lady and elder sister in the LORD. Your children rise up and call you blessed. We your friends who knew and loved you will miss you, but in our tears at your leaving is also much joy. Solo Deo Gloria!

~ The Billy Goat ~

Friday, June 08, 2007

Growing up with Forrest Gump :
The Conception and Birthing of Post-Modernity


The seeds of post-modernity were sown in the blood soaked earth of the no man’s land and trenches of France as well as on the beach of Gallipoli and untold number of other places wrenched and torn by that bloody conflict that raged from 1914 to 1918; that “Great War” as it was called, the war to end all wars. Those four bloody years of violence shredded the optimism of the rationality of the modern age.

Optimism and hope took it on the chin again with the economic collapse of the Great Depression. The gods of the materialism of the Roaring Twenties failed to deliver on the promise of ever growing prosperity.

If the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain, it was the rain of bombs and terror, atrocity and betrayal waged by fascist and republican alike in the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939) that watered those seeds and young shoots of post-modernity emerging out of the cultural earth of the 20th century.

And between the wars and amidst the savagery of the Spanish Civil War that foreshadowed that second massive war, the art and music and writing of Western culture began to reflect the emerging pessimism that was to become the mark as well as the impetus for the growth of post-modernity in that culture. Impressionism and abstract began to dominate the art gallery. Hemingway and Faulkner and Steinbeck and others voiced their disillusionment in writing and the beginnings of anti-hero began to emerge. Dissonance and abstract form came into our symphonic music, and in the theater Samuel Beckett was “Waiting for Godet”.

Where was God in all this? He was there, and He was not silent.

The conservative Evangelical church came through the fundamentalist/modernist controversies of the 1920’s and 1930’s in a state of disarray and retrenchment, especially among those who found themselves outside of the mainline denominational structures they had been part of. There was generally within much of Fundamentalism a pessimism regarding the prevailing secular materialistic culture, and the future in particular. This pessimism cut across all eschatological perspectives, and was not peculiar to just dispensational pre-millennialism.

In all of this, the Evangelical Christian worldwide mission movement continued to gather steam. In some denominations the liberal/ fundamentalist fight had come to a head in battles over control of the denominational mission boards. The Evangelical response was creation of the independent mission boards, responsible to supporting local churches, but outside of denominational structure.

In Western culture at large, further impetus to the growth of post-modernity came in the betrayal that rent the fabric of the socialist movement when Comrade Stalin made his pact with Herr Hitler, carving up Poland and plunging the world into war once again. How could the man who was the hero and epitome of socialism make a pact of truce with an arch fascist enemy? With dismay and disillusionment, there were those who began to despair of their idols of modern rationalistic ideology.

That Second War bred its own versions of savagery and atrocity; the blitzkerg, the concentration camps and the gas chambers, the fire bombings and the carnage all resulting from the failure of the “isims”, the failure of the ideologies of the modern age. So blood was spilled on the beaches of Africa and Europe, and the lonely unknown islands of the Pacific. And to end it all was unleashed the mushroom cloud of the atomic bomb that made us realize for the first time in history that our reason and rationality brought before us the possibility and potential for us to destroy ourselves. Along with the bomb came the intercontinental ballistic missiles to deliver those bombs. Here in the United States our oceans no longer provided the protection that had insulated us from the ravages of 20th century warfare. Such was the legacy the modern age had left us.

So in the 1950’s and early 60’s we grew up in the shadow of the very real possibility of nuclear warfare. As children, the Red specter of the East haunted the outskirts of our otherwise safe and peaceful childhood. Our parents had just fought a long bloody war against a Nazi Germany and an Imperialistic Japan. We saw the black and white images of that war played across the grainy screens of a new modern wonder we called a television. But the Red menace of atomic warfare and mutually assured destruction hung in the background and left a certain uncertainty in our minds, a shade of fear that could not be ignored.

The Berlin crises came. A wall was built in that city. The Cuba missile crises came, and we held our breath. A silly old man, a leader of that Red monolith was at the UN pounding on the desk with his shoe as he threatened to bury us,. Such was the personification we had of that threat. So in that vague fear we went through the 1950's and early 1960's. It would be another 30 some years before that Red specter collapsed under the weight of its own inconsistencies and illusions.

Where was God in all this? He was there, and He was not silent.

In the Evangelical community, some such as George E. Ladd, Carl F. Henry, Francis Schaeffer, and others poked their heads out of the fundamentalist foxholes and began the process of engaging the culture around them; and this just as major cultural shifts that were beginning to break upon Western society at large. Evangelicalism split between this Neo-evangelicalism and the more die hard fundamentalists. Men like Billy Graham, and Bill Bright started ministries that sought to reach across traditional denominational boundaries, engendering more controversy by their methodology.

The war: In the mid to late 1960’s it was increasingly in the news. It increasingly became a part of our conversation. More and more it came to loom in the back of our minds; another dark cloud off on the horizon that keep drawing nearer and dominating the horizon of our thoughts; that war going on in a small Southeast Asian nation called Vietnam. We didn't understand it. Why didn't we just go in and clean up on those guys and get it over with? We thought of it in terms of the conventional kind of war fought by our fathers’ generation only a very short time before. We thought we were right being there, but people were getting killed over there, and there were anti war protests. How could this be? It was very bewildering.

Early my junior year of college the draft was changed to a lottery system. If your birthday was drawn with the short number you could kiss your college days goodbye, and plan on forwarding your mail to Vietnam. On our dorm floor we all put a bit of money in the kitty. The guy ending up with the lowest number would take it all.

I don’t remember his name. He was one of the boys from Flint. A group of those Flint boys had kind of ended up living in the same dorm floor. This guy had just gone through a hassle with his local draft board regarding his student deferment. He had just had that deferment restored. We gathered together to watch the drawing as it was broadcast on TV. When that first lottery drawing was over, he had the lowest number of any of us. He got the kitty. I can still picture his dropping shoulders, the dejected look of dismay on his face. My own number was one of the highest of those on the floor. He’d be going. I’d be staying. What could I say to him?

I sat with one of my friends on a low hill along the main street running along side of the campus. The marchers went by; led by the acting University President who has just given a speech declaring his opposition to the War. They marched by carrying their banners and signs. How many of them I know not, but clearly a number in the thousands. It was the high point of the protest movement, the apex of the radicalism of the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, the “Age of Aquarius” with its false hopes and empty dreams.

The budding flower of post-modernity began to show itself in the music we sang. Woody Guthrie and a host of others warned that “The Times they are a Changing.” Were we on “The Eve of Destruction” or the “Dawn of Correction”? “You read your Emily Dickinson and I my Robert Frost. We mark our place with bookmarkers and measure what is lost.” in our “Dangling Conversation” and “our superficial sighs”, “Richard Cory” put a bullet through his head. Were the answers “Blowing in the Wind?” But why did it seem we were running “Against the Wind”? Or is it that all we are is “Dust in the Wind”? “Are you Going to San Francisco?” then put some flowers in your hair, but “Where Have all the Flowers Gone?” And Don McLean told us about “The Day the Music Died”. Where were “Abraham, Martin, and John”? We listened to “The Sounds of Silence” as “the words of the prophets were written on the subway walls and tenement halls...”

Long held moral principles were left in the dust of so called “free love”. Drugs, mostly illegal, were supposed to take us to new levels of consciousness. Eastern pantheism flooded in to fill the void left by the betrayals of rationalistic modernism. Paganism, for so long mostly dormant, again raised it’s head in Western culture.

President John Kennedy died on the streets of Dallas. His brother Robert was also gunned down, and in the steamy Mississippi River town of Memphis, Tennessee, Martin Luther King Jr. took a fatal bullet, and several guys I knew came back from ‘Nam in body bags.

Where was God in all this? He was there, and He was not silent.

“..A patient Alchemist! --He bides His time,
Broods while the south winds breathe, the
North winds blow,
And weary self, at enmity with self,
Works out its own destruction, bitter slow,
Our gallant highways petered out in mire,
Our airy castles crumbled into dust,
Leaving us stripped of all save fierce desire,
He comes, with feet deliberate and slow,
Who counts a contrite heart His sacrifice.
(No other bidders rise to stake their claims,
He only on our ruins sets a price.)
And stooping very low engraves with care
His name, indelible, upon our dust;
And from the ashes of our self-despair
Kindles a flame of hope and humble trust…”
(Patricia St. John)

God was there, and He was not silent. Whatever one may think about some of the methodology or even theology of all that was happening in the Evangelical world, the Evangelical church was proclaiming and continued to proclaim, “God is there, and He is not silent.”

It was at this time that in its hesitancy towards cultural involvement, the Evangelical church in the United States missed an opportunity in working for basic justice in the area of civil rights, especially the civil rights of Americans of African descent. Sad to say, in some parts of the Evangelical world there was even out right hostility towards that civil rights movement. So it was that an opportunity to demonstrate how the gospel breaks down racial barriers was lost.

In the late 1960’s and early 1970’s there was a spiritual awakening among the disillusioned young people burned out on drugs and the sexual revolution with it’s false promises of free love. This was the Jesus movement. It did not just impact disillusioned radical hippies, it also reached down into existing Evangelical churches where young people in their youth groups and gatherings began to take the Christianity of their parents, and make it their own.

Some of those who came into the Jesus movement brought their more liberal politics with them. Broader Evangelicalism was increasingly put in the place of having to deal with the place of Christians in culture and politics.

Evangelical activism was finally galvanized by the Supreme Court ruling on Roe vs. Wade which legalized abortion. It was in this atmosphere the Moral Majority was brought into being. Evangelicals began participating in politics, starting pro-life organizations, and developing crisis pregnancy counseling centers to reach out to and assist women who were dealing with unplanned pregnancies. This ministry was to also latter expand to minister to women who were dealing with the aftermath of having had an abortion.

In all of this, both in missions and home ministries there was a growing recognition of the need to minister to the whole person. Another development happening in missions was the realization of the necessity and importance of getting the local national churches to the point of self-sufficiency, and not letting Western culture be the definition of what it means to be Christian.

The church was never told it would win the cultural wars before Christ comes again. It was and is however called to be a witness to all fallen cultures, including modern and postmodern cultures. In asserting that God is there, and He is not silent, the church is counter-cultural. The fundamental assertion, “God is there.” directly challenges a secular materialistic modernism that effectively denied His existence or relevance. The assertion, “He is not silent.” challenges the emerging secular post-modern epistemology that effectively denies objective reality of any kind.

In the emerging post-modern popular culture, we had been told not to trust anyone over thirty. Those who told us that turned thirty and became stockbrokers. There was a return of optimism during the Reagan years, but sadly materialism remained the false idol in Western culture at large, and the dry rot continued. With the fall of the Berlin wall, we finally saw the last death gasps of the age of ideology that with its secular modern assumptions had plagued the 20th century with wars and rumors of wars.

It was also at this time it was recognized the Western world had left the modern age behind, and the seeds sown back in the bloodshed of WW-I now were bearing full fruit in the realization of the post-modern age that was now in full force upon us; a new world order. The events of 9/11 and its aftermath reminded us that in this fallen and yet to be fully redeemed world, there will always be enemies, uncertainty, and the need for the Evangelical church to continue to bear witness that, “He is there, and He is not silent."
~ The Billy Goat ~
© 2007, All rights reserved.

Monday, August 15, 2005

The Occult and the Principle of Justice In case you have not noticed, we are about to be assaulted by a wave of occult TV shows and movies. It's already happening, and the hype is already starting for the Fall TV line up.

In the several TV movies I've seen, and in the ads for "The Ghost Whisperer", it would seem there are those spirits of the dead who have unfinished business here on earth. They want to leave a last word of love to a grieving loved one they left behind. More often they are seeking justice for the foul murderers that propelled them from life in this world to the world of the dead.

And the mediums thorough whom they seek that reconciliation or justice are just going about their lives, not seeking to be psychics but finding they are and having to come to grips with what they believe they can not change about their connection to the world of the dead. Oh! Did I mention that if organized religion is mentioned at all, it is in a negative light?

I find it odd that such a connection of the occult and the concept of justice exists. Justice is meaningless unless there is an absolute that can give it definition. The Bible speaks of a day of ultimate justice. That justice is dealt out by an all knowing, omnipresent Creator God. As Paul reminds us in Romans, "Justice is mine says the LORD. I will repay." Perfect justice. Final justice. Appropriate justice.

Odd isn't it? Those who would deny the existence or relevance of the God who is the source of justice, still embrace the principle. The problem is that justice shorn from it's foundation will quickly descend into excessive vengeance which becomes not justice, but injustice.

In the only account of an occultic event in the Bible, the seance did not turn out well at all for the person who sought it. Those who play around with the occult know not what fire they are playing with. It is sad that our culture has degenerated to the point where the occult is becoming common accepted TV fare. It is a time for much earnest prayer.

Jesus reigns!

~ The Billy Goat ~

Sunday, June 12, 2005

Some Thoughts Upon Seeing "Revenge of the Sith"

This past Friday night I went to see "Revenge of the Sith". Now we we know "the rest of the story". Over all, episode three did a good job conecting episodes one and two with four, five, and six. I'll leave others to debate the quality of acting and special effects and so on. My thoughts are of a little bit different nature. These thoughts will somewhat random.

As a Christian, I beleive there is a "dark force" in the universe. Notice that is a different thing then saying I beleive in a "dark side of the force", as though there is one force with a side of light and a side of darkness. That oriental dualism of two sides to an impersonal force is the religion of the Star Wars series.

In contrast, God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. He is not an impersonal being, but a person in His existence as the One and the Three. The "dark force" also is not impersonal, but a being with personality, but as a being, inferior to the God of Light.

There was an irrationality to Anikian's turn to the dark side. Anikin killed Count Dacu at (sp)Palenteen's urging. Anikin as a Jedi should of been aware of Count Dacu's connection to the Sith Lord. Yet when he discovers (sp)Palenteen is the Sith Lord, he didn't seem to put it together that the Sith Lord's urging him to kill Dacu was a betrayal of Dacu. The same Sith Lord who betrayed Count Dacu goes on to betray Anikan. Anikan does not get what he was looking for and promised, and in the Sith Lord's lie regading Padme's death, Anikin's despair plays into the Sith's hand and soldifies his hold on Anikin as Darth Vador.

Of course we know the "rest of the story". In the end through the love of his son Luke, Darth Vader becomes Anikin once more and supposedly finally fullfils the prophecy regarding restoration of balance to the force by destroying the Sith Lord himself. Did you notice that Sith Lords are always done in by their apprentices? But in the final episode, Darth Vador who is at that point Anikin Skywalker again, also dies taking with him the knowledge of the dark side of the force that made Siths, Siths.

Star Wars is a story; a narrative of a cosmic story with a fall, and an eventual redemption of sorts. As such it is a distorted copy of the true Meta-Narrative given to mankind in the Bible. There was a real fall, and there will be a final and completed redemption. The "dark force" and his followers will eventually be banished from the universe once and for all. The redemption found in Jesus Christ will in that day be realized through out the whole Cosmos.

Come quickly Lord Jesus,

~ The Billy Goat ~