Why I Didn't Care for the Oscars

I remember years ago hearing a speaker talking to youth about their entertainment choices. He told a story about his little boy not wanting to eat raisins. So he decided to try a little experiment. He gave him a bowl of cereal with one raisin in it. He watched his son pick out the raisin and go ahead and eat the cereal. The next day he put a couple of raisins in the bowl, and again the little boy removed them before eating the cereal. The next morning he put in a handful, and then watched as his son carefully picked out every raisin. Finally, he placed a bowl of cereal in front of his son with raisins mixed all through the cereal. The boy started to remove them one at a time, and then just gave up and pushed the bowl away.

The point of the story was to ask teenagers how much offensive material has to be in a movie before you decide it's just not worth trying to pick your away around it. Good question. I'm finding that as I get older, instead of becoming more tolerant of what I see in movies, I'm actually becoming less and less happy trying to ignore offensive material in my entertainment.

My wife and I fast-forwarded our way through the Oscars last night just to see which movies that we have not seen would get awards this year. I wondered why each year it seems like I've seen fewer and fewer of the nominated movies. This year we've only seen one of the films up for Best Picture.

And then it struck me--of the 15 movies up for one of the top awards (Picture, Director, Best & Supporting Actor/Actress), 10 were rated R and 5 were rated PG-13. Not one movie out of the 15 was rated PG or G. According to Kids-in-Mind.com (a very helpful resource for parents about the mature content of films--actually, Judy and I frequently use it to decide what we will see), these 15 movies included a total of over 150 "F" words. That's an average of more than 10 a film! (Granted, two of the films accounted for nearly 100 of that total, but most of the films had at least 2 or 3, if not more.) The only nominee for Best Picture which did not find "F" words necessary to produce quality dialogue was "The Reader"--and it got a 9 out of 10 for the amount of sex!

Some will say that such films are realistic and serious and true-to-life. Maybe. But I can remember when Hollywood was able to make Acadamy Award winning movies without vulgarity, nudity, simulated sex acts, or realistic visual effects of someone's head being cut off.

So when I look at the movie listings on a Friday night, I find myself wondering, "How many raisins can I keep picking out of my cereal?"

The answer seems to be "less than I used to" . . . but even at that, I'm pretty sure I'm putting up with more than Jesus would.

Gracious Speech and Partisan Politics

Have you noticed how partisan politics has become? I heard an NBC reporter this morning discussing the way the current stimulus package debate has drawn President Obama into partisan politics, despite his pledged desire to bring new bipartisanship to Washington. The reporter pointed out how the same thing happened to Bush, who had pledged to be a "uniter" rather than a divider. He said it just seemed to be part of the fabric of Washington.

I'm concerned with the way partisan loyalties seem to be destroying our ability to treat each other fairly and respectfully. Some conservatives accused Democrats of wanting Bush to fail because of partisan loyalties, and said that was un-American. Now some conservatives say they want Obama to fail. Why was it bad for one and not the other?

Party loyalties often appear to overwhelm objective analysis of issues and positions. For example, when a Republican president led a war against Iraq, some Democrats charged that we had no clear national interest at stake and that we had no clearly defined measure of victory and no exit strategy. When a Democratic president sent troops into Bosnia and Somalia, some Republicans said the exact same thing. To the independent observer, it looked like the real issue may not have been national interest or military strategy; the real issue may have been whether or not the President belonged to your party.

Even worse, it seems that the growing political divide in our country is leading us to demonize our opponents, much the way we demonize our enemies in war. It seems we want to believe the worst about our political opponents. They are the enemy. Since we believe in the truth, they must be enemies of the truth. Since they are enemies of the truth, they must be ignorant of the truth or, worse, liars.

So right-wing pundit, Ann Coulter, writes a book entitled, If Democrats Had Any Brains They'd Be Republicans; and left-wing pundit (now senator), Al Franken, writes one entitled, Lies: And the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right. And each side is thoroughly entertained by one and deeply offended by the other.

Too often when I talk with people about political and social issues, I hear them paint their opponents in harsh, insulting, and combative ways. Friends have called Cheney and Rumsfeld "warmongers." Clinton was a "whoremonger." Bush is "an idiot." Obama "pals around with terrorists." It's rare that I can sit at a table with someone and find they can treat their opponents fairly and respectfully. Can't we question whether the Bush administration's policies were too hawkish without labeling them as inhumane warmongers? Can't we question some of Obama's political associations without making it sound like he plays racquetball with Bin Laden?

I confess that I once engaged in the same sort of rhetoric. And I admit that I still struggle at times to treat my political opponents with respect. But I'm doing much better. I now consider it something of a personal challenge to enter a controversial discussion and find ways to speak politely of opposing positions—and an even greater challenge to describe someone else's positions with the fairness with which I would want them to represent my own views.

Somehow we Christians must learn to speak "with grace" (Col. 4:6), using speech that "gives grace" to those who hear (Eph. 4:29).

You know, the way we do when we discuss our differences in the church . . .

Who’s Next?

I have just learned that the standard directory of the Churches of Christ (meaning the a cappella branch of the Restoration Movement founded 200 years ago by Barton Stone and Thomas and Alexander Campbell; not the "Christian Churches/Churches of Christ," another branch of the same movement which uses instrumental music in worship; nor the International Churches of Christ, formerly known as the Crossroads/Boston/Discipling Movement, a splinter group that broke off the from Churches of Christ; nor the United Church of Christ, an entirely separate denomination with ties only in the distant past) has removed 21 churches from the 2009 edition of the directory.

Note I said "removed," not "labeled." The directory has long included a wide variety of Churches of Christ in its listings. Past editors have indicated the diversity with labels designating congregations that are one-cup, or non-class, or non-institutional, or predominately African-American, and so on. At one time they had an "ecumenical" label for those congregations that were less sectarian and less traditional than other Churches of Christ (I don't know if that designation is still used). But in this case they chose not to label these congregations. They completely removed them.

Some of those 21 churches have reportedly broken ties with the rest of the a cappella fellowship. In that case, their removal seems justified for a directory that intends to serve that fellowship. But for others, the decision is very disturbing, including the Richland Hills Church of Christ in Fort Worth (the largest Church of Christ in America) and the Farmers Branch Church of Christ in Dallas (where my son has been attending) and the Redwood Church in Redwood City, CA (where a good friend of mine now preaches, who used to serve with me as our youth minister in Houston).

And why have they been removed? Because of their use of instrumental music in one of their worship services on Sunday morning. Those three churches each have an a cappella worship service on Sunday morning, but they have also added an instrumental service (that's right—the largest a cappella Church of Christ in America also has an instrumental service on Sunday morning). And for that they are no longer listed in our directory.

These churches have not broken ties with our fellowship. Their ministers and their members still attend events and go to schools sponsored by Churches of Christ. They still baptize by immersion; keep weekly communion; believe in the authority of Scripture; and proclaim Jesus as Lord (of course, not in that order of importance). And they still value our a cappella heritage and continue to have a cappella services.

But they have decided to be both/and churches rather than either/or churches. They have decided they don't have to choose to be either exclusively a cappella or exclusively instrumental. They can offer both a cappella and instrumental services and give their members and visitors the freedom to choose. For this the editors of the directory, published by 21st Century Christian here in Nashville, have decided they are no longer one of us. (Click here for the story in The
Christian Chronicle.).

So what does this mean? Am I supposed to withdraw fellowship from the preachers at these churches, all of whom are friends of mine? Are the other Churches of Christ in their area supposed to stop inviting them to 5th Sunday Singings and area-wide Bible Bowls? (Do we still do those things?) Do we not tell members moving to those cities that these churches exist?

And who's next? If these churches are out because of Sunday morning services, what about the many Churches of Christ all over the country that have instrumental music in events at other times? That probably includes most of the largest Churches of Christ in the Nashville area. Hey, that includes my church! Are we going to be cut out of the next edition?

And what will get you cut out? Does it have to be a live instrument? What if you show a music video in the worship service? Will that get you kicked out? Or what if you show a clip from a movie during the sermon, and the movie has a sound track that includes a musical instrument? What if your Sunday School uses a CD of songs for children? What if your teens are listening to their ipods during church? (Ok, ok. Now I'm being sarcastic. But I just want to know what the rules are.)

And who gets to decide? Do the editors of this directory (apparently they think they do). Maybe we need to appoint a denominational board to rule on who is in and who is out. But wait, that won't work—we aren't a denomination . . . Right?

Conflicted Feelings over the Inauguration

What an incredible day for our nation! I did not vote for President Obama, but I still found myself stirred by watching the son of an African immigrant take the oath of office to become the first African-American president in our history.

Earlier this morning I watched an interview with Congressman John Lewis, a noted civil rights leader who had worked alongside Dr. King. Congressman Lewis recalled that not 50 years ago he was beaten while struggling for the right to vote, and now he had lived to see an African-American become president. His emotion was not only understandable, it was contagious.

When I was student body president of my high school in Murfreesboro, TN in 1975-76, we had a "White Vice-President" and a "Black Vice-President" (that's what they were actually called). It was the only way a black student could be elected to an executive office. I helped elect a black student to succeed me as the first African-American student body president at a predominately white high school in state history (at least, that's what we were told at the time). That led to the end of the office of a Black Vice-President. But we were still decades away from seeing the same thing happen in national politics.

How could anyone, white or black, Democrat or Republican, who had lived through any of the history of our nation's struggle with racism, not be profoundly moved to witness this event? (And Aretha singing "My Country 'Tis of Thee" was pretty cool, too!)

But I must also confess that I found myself troubled at the same time. I truly wanted to rejoice without reservation. But my deep misgivings over some of President Obama's positions kept me from sharing the elation that so many understandably felt over this event.

Just over the last week I learned of new questions raised by conservative groups over two issues of importance to me. One report said that while Mr. Obama was running for the Illinois senate, he had pledged support for homosexual marriage. (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=387986) Even more troubling to me are the reports that the new congress is preparing to pass the Freedom of Choice Act and that last year Mr. Obama already promised to sign it. (http://www.fightfoca.com/) According to pro-life groups, this legislation will eliminate all restrictions on abortion nationwide, overturning any state laws on parental notification or partial birth abortion, and would even force faith-based hospitals to provide abortions. I don't know if these reports are true; but if they are, they are deeply disturbing.

During the campaign, I remember President Obama expressing support for marriage between a man and a woman and I remember him saying we need to find common ground on abortion and work to reduce the number of abortions. My deep skepticism of all politicians (which is a big part of why I am an independent) makes me wonder whether he was completely honest in those remarks, or whether the other statements may have been politically motivated, or both. I don't know if his positions have honestly changed, or whether these conservative groups are quoting him out of context. All I can say is that I am not optimistic.

And so I find myself in the conflicted position of celebrating the election of an African-American President and glad to have lived to see this day, and on the other hand, wishing the first African-American President had been someone who would not lead us in the radical direction I fear this President will want to go.

So I will pray for him and treat him with respect, as the Scriptures call us to do. And I will pray for my country, because, truthfully, whether President Obama had been elected or not, I believe we were headed down this path any way.

I'm Abandoning Sports Forever!

Football season is over! Well, maybe not for everybody, but I think it is for me. The biggest game of the year is still a couple of weeks away, but I don't think I care.

Since I was a boy I have been a huge fan of the Minnesota Vikings (remember the Purple People Eaters and "Injun Joe Kapp" and the amazing Fran Tarkenton?), and almost as big a fan of the Oklahoma Sooners. Since returning to Tennessee five years ago, I've also joined the frenzy of home town fans cheering for the Titans. Last week promised great excitement as all three of my favorite teams were playing in postseason games. The Vikings were hosting a first round playoff game for the first time in several years. The Sooners were taking the highest scoring offense in college football history to the BCS championship game. And then the Titans, arguably the best team in the NFL, would host a second round playoff game they were sure to win.

On Sunday the Vikes fumbled the game away. On Thursday the Sooners did the same. And on Saturday the Titans joined the parade of disaster. All three! In one week!

And this is the second time this happened this year! I've been fortunate to live in three major league baseball towns. Over the years I've been a fan of the Cubs and White Sox in Chicago, the Brewers in Milwaukee, and the Astros in Houston. At the end of the baseball season, three of those teams made the playoffs. That meant I had a 3 in 8 chance of one of my teams making the World Series. How exciting!

In their opening series, the Cubs, Sox, and Brewers managed to win one game. Not one series . . . one game! Not one game a piece, one game period.

How do I describe the feelings? Heartbreak . . . disbelief . . . anger . . . frustration . . . depression . . . despair . . . A season of excitement and anticipation and hope crashing into the agony of defeat. Not once, but three times at the end of two seasons! Aaaarrrrgggghhhh!!!

Why do I subject myself to this? The odds are that no matter who you cheer for, your team will only occasionally make the playoffs and almost always lose their last big game (you know, in most sports only one team each year wins their last game). Sports brings lots of fun and excitement, but lots of disappointment too (at least I'm not a Detroit Lions fan!).

I wonder what it would be like if I regularly found myself as excited and passionate about worship, about the kingdom, about time with God as I get about sports. (Do even Pentecostals get that excited about worship?) I'm pretty sure God would not leave me as disappointed at the end of each season. I love the sign on a Wisconsin church that says, "Jesus will never leave you for the Jets!" (If you don't get that, you're probably not a sports fan. Try googling "Brett Favre.")

So I've decided to devote more time and energy to more fulfilling, life-enriching, spiritually enhancing pursuits. And to never again get this wrapped up in sports.

At least not till March Madness.

Christians, Americans, and “English-Only”

As an American citizen, I share the concern of many citizens over the issue of illegal immigration. The flood of undocumented people into our country presents a number of disturbing problems. How can our economy absorb all the people looking for work? How will our health care and education institutions meet the needs of these individuals and their children? Will our welfare system be able to manage the demands placed on it? How does the lack of border security affect safety and security in an age of terrorism? These are troubling questions and I claim to have no answers.

On the other hand, I am also increasingly concerned about the tensions, prejudices, and even hostility I see in our community over immigration issues. Sometimes the language used to discuss these problems sounds like racial prejudice in thin disguise. America has always been a nation that claimed to welcome immigrants (“give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”). But in reality, immigrants quite often have faced much prejudice and hatred—whether the Chinese working on the railroads, the Polish in Chicago, the Vietnamese boat people in Texas, and on and on.

The city of Nashville is about to vote on an “English-Only” amendment. The law would prohibit the city government from publishing official documents in any other language or from hiring translators to communicate with citizens, except to protect public health or safety. The proponents have some good points to make about the importance of immigrants in any country learning the official language so they can function and prosper (http://www.nashvilleenglishfirst.com/). But the opposition raises some very troubling points about the impact this legislation will have on the poor, on recent immigrants who have not yet had time to learn the language, and on the image of our city in a global economy (http://www.nashvilleforallofus.org/).

Sorting out all the social, political, and economic implications of this amendment is beyond my pay grade. For me, though, there is one question that seems pretty clear: What would Jesus do?

Jesus seems to have been little concerned with the politics of his day. For example, he swept aside the debate over Roman taxation with the simple exhortation to “give Caesar what is Caesar’s, and God what is God’s”—which didn’t answer the questions about whether the Romans had any right to be there or whether their tax system was just. Throughout his ministry Jesus made it abundantly clear that he was more concerned about the kingdom of God than worldly kingdoms—and that meant he was very concerned about the poor, the outcast, and the foreigners, even the hated Samaritans. I think Jesus would be less concerned about the cost to the city of providing translations than he would be about the impact on poor immigrants of refusing to do so.

Jesus said one of the two greatest commands is to “love your neighbor as yourself,” quoting Leviticus 19:18. Just a few verses later, God commanded the same thing regarding foreigners:

“‘When foreigners reside among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigners residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34)

According to Moses, God loves the foreigners residing among his people, and they must do the same (Deuteronomy 10:18-19).

If I were an immigrant in another country, I would want to learn the language as quickly as I could. But I wonder how welcome I would feel if the citizens said their city would offer me no help until I could master their language well enough to navigate my way through the system. (Well, actually I don’t wonder that at all. I think I know exactly how I would feel.)

And I wonder what Jesus would say to us as we head for the polls. I can’t say for sure, but I think it might be something like: “Treat others the way you would want to be treated.”

The Night Before Christmas Eve in the Inn

'Twas the night before Christmas Eve, and all through the activity center, hardly a creature was stirring—just an occasional homeless man shuffling to the bathroom or slipping outside for a midnight smoke. I would settle down for a long nap, but I'm a very light sleeper. Unfamiliar noises will disturb my shallow sleep. And well before dawn there will arise such a clatter in the kitchen when Santa arrives (everyone in our church knows Santa), that I'll be wide awake in spite of myself.

So this seems a good time to sit quietly and reflect on the evening just past, and the evening to come, and the evening that inspired these evenings.

Tonight was the annual Christmas party for the guests in our Room In The Inn ministry. Each Tuesday evening through the winter, 24 homeless men come to spend the night in our church's gym. They receive a hot meal, a hot shower, clean clothing, and a safe and friendly place to spend the night before returning downtown. It's part of an interdenominational effort in our city to provide shelter from the winter nights.

A fried chicken dinner was served by a busy team of friendly elves (well, friendly church members). In addition to the usual clothing distributed in our benevolence center, Santa brought each man a brand new winter coat and a small gift bag with gloves and socks and the like (he wasn't wearing his outfit, but I could imagine him doing what he did in a red suit).

At dinner I chatted with L.W. and James, mostly about where they grew up and how they came to our city (but inside, I was mostly curious about the causes of the limps and scars which were painfully obvious). In the background was a television showing a Christmas special. One of the guys asked who the singer was (it was Faith Hill) and said he really liked the song (it was "A Baby Changes Everything"). I wondered why he liked it. Was it the beautiful singing? Or had the baby changed something in his life? Or was he drawn to the hope that it might?

After supper, I swapped jokes with Howard and Willie. I learned that some 25 years ago Willie used to be the custodian at our church. Now he has no job, no home, and no family except for an 88-year-old aunt. Everyone here has a story, but I think Willie's will bother me for awhile. Twenty-five years ago he was cleaning our church . . . now he's sleeping in it.

Patrick came to me privately with a 5 dollar bill in his hand and said he wanted to pay his tithes. I told him to keep it, but he insisted that God had given it to him and he was going to pay his tithes. If I didn't take it, he would find a church that would. So I thanked him and passed his offering on to those who will use it for other guests in the inn. And it occurred to me that he gave more than any of us had given last Sunday, who "contributed out of our abundance."

Later Cole and Joe taught me how to play a game of dominoes (or more accurately, "taught me how to lose a game of dominoes"). We laughed a lot. They got a kick out of trash talking with the pastor.

I found myself wondering where they would play tomorrow night.

Tomorrow night I will spend Christmas Eve with my family—with my wife, with my daughter and her new husband, with my son who just flew in yesterday from Texas, with my parents, with my mother-in-law, with my brother and his family who will arrive tomorrow from Texas, and with my other brother and his family who are driving in from Illinois where they narrowly escaped a blizzard (he is gladly leaving behind a white Christmas for a tender Tennessee Christmas!). We will eat too much in anticipation of eating even more on Christmas Day. We will open a few gifts in anticipation of opening even more on Christmas Day. We will attend a Christmas Eve service with many other faithful who have come to adore him. And like them all, we will leave the warm glow of the candlelight to nestle snug in our beds for the silent night.

That's where I'll be tomorrow night.

I don't know where L.W. and James and Howard and Willie and Patrick and Cole and Joe will spend Christmas Eve.

On the holy night, when the children fall asleep to visions of sugar plums, I think I may find I'm still wondering about Willie.