the view from her

If you've read this blog for any length of time, you know that I'm generally... dissatisfied with "christian" cultural products such as movies. But over the weekend I had the opportunity to watch a preview copy of The Last Sin Eater, and in all honesty, I liked it. And every time I watched it, I liked it more.

I think my general dislike for "christian" movies is because I usually have a sense they're assuming something about me. That assumption translates into some kind of shorthand in the movie, either visually or in the dialog or story. And I kind of resent it. Because I really just want them to tell me a compelling story. Frankly, Christians have a lot of those.

The Last Sin Eater does just that. From the beginning, when you find out a little girl named Cady Forbes bears the burden of some terrible guilt, the story unwinds in unexpected ways. Cady's growing desperation to find someone to relieve her of "the terrible thing I done," pulls the thread that begins to unravel other secrets among her family, friends, and the entire community. The concept of guilt and the search for relief is something every human being can identify with, and the film briefly and gracefully provides the real answer - the forgiveness of Jesus. But that is nowhere near the end of the story.

On the negative side, the digital graphics are not very good. I don't say that to be critical, merely to warn you so you're not sidetracked by them. And personally, I think the poster art looks like a Hollywood marketing company's idea of what makes something "Christian." But the cinematography is beautiful, and the film has a great sense of space.

The release date has been moved back, so The Last Sin Eater opens February 9. Check previous posts for movie backstory and to view the trailer, or to see behind-the-scene pics.

I'm now beginning week four of my full-time, temporary job. I have money to pay my bills, and enough left over for a few extras. The job is open-ended, meaning it could go on for months. God has totally provided for me since I left my previous job.

So what do you think happened over the weekend? (Hint: think Israelites in the wilderness.) My brain chatter started to whine. How long am I going to have to do this? I'm bored... When can I go on to the promised land? - oops - I mean that next cool career job? I started on Saturday to dread going to work on Monday, and was perfectly happy miserably longing for what I didn't have and dismissing as insignificant what I do have.

Then of course, I went to church. And the message was on, well, the Israelites in the wilderness. Of course. You know, sometimes God is all mysterious and enigmatic, and other times He's just so obvious. Because the central point of the message was about the Manna God provided - exactly enough for each day. (I suppose it could have been a minor point - I'm not too sure - I really didn't hear anything else after being blinded by the giant Spotlight of Truth.) And I realized I had been complaining about the manna God had already provided, and whining after the quail I didn't have. sigh.

It's hard to be in the wilderness. It's boring and it all looks the same and you feel like everything important is passing you by. But you know what? The wilderness is also home to lilies of the field and sparrows, who don't give a thought about what will happen tomorrow. Sometimes there are pillars of fire. And there is manna. Daily bread. From a loving Father who knows what we need before we even ask, who is pleased when we choose to continue on - every day - through the boring sameness, accepting the manna and believing in the Promised Land.

Still... in the words of Tom Petty, the waiting is the hardest part.

I'm sure by now you've read about Sheri Klouda, a professor of Hebrew at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary who was denied tenure in 2006. The official reason was something like, "Ooops, we just remembered you're not allowed to teach men. We forgot all about 1 Timothy, but we're clear now! Sorry, our bad."

I'm not really a Bible scholar, but I do often read the intros to books in my Bible, and footnotes. Timothy is known as a Pastoral Epistle. My NIV says the theme is Church Order. Neither of which seems to have any direct application to a qualified professor teaching students in an academic setting. Wade Burleson, a Southern Baptist pastor trying to bring clarity to the situation said in the above article, "Sheri Klouda is not a pastor, she has not been ordained or licensed, she does not perform ministerial duties. She is a professor, for heaven's sake." He considers her removal, based on gender, "a very serious, ethical, moral breach."

My opening paraphrase of the reason for this dismissal was from this article. Van McClain, president of the Southwestern board of trustees said, "With regard to the tightening of the policy of women teaching in the School of Theology, there has been no change in policy, but rather a return to the way it has always been… There was a momentary lax of the parameters, and (the seminary) has now returned to its traditional, confessional and biblical position." (emphasis mine.)

And that is the real point of this post. McClain's sweeping statement must refer to "the way it's always been" with Southern Baptists. Because he's not talking about the history of Christian faith. One thinks of Emeline Dryer, who in 1871 was invited by Dwight L. Moody to teach Bible classes in Moody Church, and later taught both men and women in pastors classes at Moody Bible Institute. Or fundamentalist John Roach Straton who in 1926 wrote Does the Bible Forbid Women to Preach and Pray in Public? (He argued vigorously it does not.) Or Mary Bosanquent Fletcher, a Methodist considered "a pastor to pastors," who preached for most of her life in the late 1700s.

This is the vanity of generations, if you will: we assume things to have always been the way we know them and have heard of them. It speaks volumes that in the last 50-60 years a woman's "role" in ministry has become such an issue - even elevated to equal importance with doctrines of grace, justification, biblical inerrancy and the Trinity - while in preceding years the most urgent issue was evangelism, with both men and women recruited to preach the Gospel to a lost world.

It makes you uncomfortably hot, feels like it burns right through you, and makes you stop whatever you're doing.

My Mom had one of those. We called it THE LOOK.

Joe Carter has a must-read perspective on sex before marriage: Pre-Marital Adultery: The Marital Obligations of Single Christians.

"Regardless of whether they come from a secular or religious worldview, people in the West generally share the idea that there is one specific person—the “true love”, soul mate, etc.,-- for each of us. Whether chosen by God or fate, this is the person we are supposed to share the rest of our lives with in a state of marital bliss.

"If there truly is one person, one true love, for each of us then there is much that we owe this person."

Read the whole thing. It is worth considering that living in abstinence while waiting for marriage is more than just a choice, or a situation in which we happen to find ourselves. It is honoring today the marriage vows you hope to take tomorrow.

I have a question for you today. And while it comes within the peculiar trappings of online dating, it's really a question about articulating one's faith in today's world.

I've occasionally been subscribed to online dating websites, and have met several nice gentlemen for that all-important first coffee. Though I normally attempted to ascertain their spiritual convictions ahead of time, occasionally there was someone who I couldn't get a clear read on, and if interested enough, I'd meet them anyway and figure it out in person. If I discovered a lack of faith or spiritual understanding, I'd decline future invitations. And I specified it was because I perceived we were incompatible on issues of faith, which I considered fundamental to any relationship.

Sometimes this only intrigued them more, though I don't know why. Occasionally they'd get defensive. HIM: It's arrogant to say who goes to Heaven and who doesn't. ME: I'm not arrogant, just observant. I know lots of people who don't want to go to Heaven. They joke about partying with their friends in Hell. Don't you know people like that? HIM: ...well, yes. ME: Well if they don't want to go to Heaven, it would be terrible for God to make them. Being in Heaven might be like...hell for them. HIM: Maybe we should discuss this over dinner.

Anyway, it occurred to me that verbally rejecting someone for not sharing my faith could certainly be interpreted as arrogant. Though I was always careful to articulate respect for them and their own views, I wonder if they aren't still somehow diminished in the comparison. And worse, am I only offering further evidence of Christianity as judgmental and exclusive?

I believe it's important - even in the small exchanges - to treat people with love, as the valuable human beings God created. So what say you - in this or other situations where your faith compels you to decline? Better to clearly verbalize a difference in faith as incompatible? Or to give some other truthful reason that doesn't impinge on Christianity itself?

Are the following:

1. Nancy Pelosi - for referring to Jason Dunham, a Marine who covered a live grenade with his body to save the lives of other soldiers and was posthumously awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, as "Jason and his little friends." (Okay, I paraphrased. But only a little.)

2. The New York Times - With an important story about Nancy Pelosi - one of the two most powerful political women in the country - and her fashion style. "During her first week on the job, Mrs. Pelosi clinched votes in the House on the minimum wage, financing for stem cell research and Medicare drug prices...And she did it looking preternaturally fresh, with a wardrobe that...has seldom spruced the halls of Congress. (She can bring home the bacon - AND fry it up in a pan!)On...Tuesday, she wore an impeccable black and white tweed skirt suit, with strong shoulders and the jacket nipped at the waist; on Wednesday, she draped a red shawl insouciantly around a red suit outside the White House; and on Thursday, she appeared in a mod, deep-blue velvet, slimming pantsuit."

Puh-leeze. I'm trying to imagine that paragraph describing former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill. "On Tuesday, he wore an impeccable black and white tweed jacket, with strong shoulders and nipped at the waist; on Wednesday, he appeared in a mod, deep-blue velvet, slimming suit." We simply don't evaluate men this way. (Aurgh! She buried her face in the faux-fur throw to stifle a scream.)

3. That I didn't know what "insouciant" meant, but I wasn't too "blithely unconcerned or nonchalant" to look it up.

4. That the "Related Searches" at the end of that article are: United States Politics and Government, Women, Apparel, Hair.

One of the most interesting characters on television returns tonight on Studio 60. In case you're not familiar, the show is about a Saturday Night Live-type show, and the writers, producers and comedians who put it together every seven days. Beliefnet thinks the entire theme of Studio 60 is redemption. I think Harriet Hayes is utterly unique in all of television because she's a conservative Christian who is smart, funny, complex, and engaged in the lives of the people around her. But it seems as if many Christian viewers would prefer Harriet as a cardboard caricature.

In one episode, Harriet struggles with whether or not to pose for a lingerie photo shoot. Many Christian viewers decried the obviousness of this as something a Christian would never do. But what makes Harriet real is how she honestly wrestles with the issues of a successful career woman - is it possible this opportunity could advance her career without compromising her principles? Women, Christian or otherwise, consider these things.

Harriet's fictional Christian character was really called into question after an episode in which she discussed premarital sex with a reporter. The reporter, Martha, was grilling Harriet about what lines she might cross for the sake of entertainment. She asked, "Would you have a problem doing a sketch about premarital sex?" Harriet replied, "I don't have a problem having premarital sex! It might be the only sex I ever have." Beliefnet thought that was flippant, and didn't like her "tone." Bloggers were compelled to clarify the Bible's position on premarital sex (lest Christian singles ever possibly forget), and questioned her character's salvation.

Some girlfriends and I discussed it briefly. One laughed and said, "Well, premarital sex is probably the only kind I'll ever have!" You see, the statement is not about having sex, it's really about the probability of marriage. Harriet makes sense to a single person.

Most real-life Christians I know wrestle with living their faith in their everyday lives, and we often do it imperfectly. That's because we're real human beings. It's when we simplistically label things black and white that we come across as cardboard caricatures. Harriet is believeable as a Christian because she's flawed.

Gosh, I've been on a bit of a TV theme lately. I think I'm done for now, at least until February 7th.

That's a little redundant.

I think I must be the only person in the country who's already losing interest in 24, now that they detonated a nuke. (Wait! The situation is going to get much worse! How, exactly? Well...there are more bombs! Another one might explode! Oh.) I guess it's kind of true what they say - one nuclear bomb really can ruin your whole day. Anyway, the season opened with a two-night, four-hour premier so crammed with plot points it was a little like seeing the entire season on fast forward, with the nuclear bomb as the cliffhanger finale. It reminds me of the 30-second bunnies, who cram all the major plot points of your favorite movie into 30 seconds. And they're funny.

I'm also a fan of American Idol. I don't so much enjoy the auditions, because they're just so painful. A quote from a 16-year-old, crying because he failed the audition (via Ann Althouse): "16 years old and I want to start out famous."

Here's what I notice. The auditions mainly feature the freaks, geeks, and self-styled wanna-be's. I'm intrigued by their confidence. They are confident they will be the next idol. And they declare this confidence is because they are different.

"I've seen every episode since it first started, and they've never had anyone like me."
"I think I'm what they're looking for - you don't see that many redheads on TV anymore."
"I can definitely be the next American Idol because I'm different than everyone else."

I'm actually touched by the revealing earnestness of their comments. Like all of us, they want to stand out, to be recognized, to matter. But my goodness, it's as if they've never even watched the show. Being unique is actually of very little use in becoming an American pop music celebrity.

Getting to know people involves asking questions. The trick is, knowing the right questions. There are the questions you should have asked. (A television in the bedroom? Do you even have to ask?) And then there are the really hard questions.

Here are The Five Toughest Questions a Woman Can Ask a Man. (HT: IWT) Personally, I wonder about any woman who would ask a man what he's thinking. In my experience, it's usually one of four things: (1) sports-related, (2) car-related, (3) work-related, or, (4) desperately trying not to think because we just walked by a tall blond in a low-cut blouse.

Anyway, in rebuttal I offer The Five Questions a Man Should Never Ask a Woman.

#1. Is that what you're wearing?
If she has it on, she's wearing it. A much better approach would be, "Wow, you look great! I better go change!"

#2. Where's the remote?
Admit it. What you really mean is, "Did you happen to see where I took the remote?" Because we both know you never let it out of your hands for fear of relinquishing, well...control. Thus, the remote could be in the bathroom, the garage, or the refrigerator.

#3. Honey, where's my yellow tie/ green sweatshirt/ cellphone/wallet/ manpurse/ fill-in-the-blank?
You are so out of your depth. We easily recognize this as a shameless attempt to exploit our superior organizational skills by luring us into going to find the missing item for you.

#4. What's for dinner?
Um...what year is it? Oh yes, 2007. That would be the Twenty-first Century. The one where men and women discuss and share roles, including what to have for dinner and how to get it. Try rephrasing it like this: "Honey, I stopped on the way home and picked up some vegetables and thought I'd throw together a little lowfat teryaki stir-fry for dinner." With an offer like that, she'll probably offer you...dessert.

And #5. What do you mean?
While it sounds like you're listening intently and are deeply interested in more clearly understanding, it's really a ploy to buy time until you figure out what she was saying while you were distracted with sports, cars, work, or not thinking about the blond with the low-cut blouse.

January is a time when we organize and make adjustments for the year ahead. If you work with a church or ministry, you may be considering new staff, updating materials and websites, or just looking for some new ideas. I can help you with that. Or rather, I have some really talented friends who can help you with that.

First, take a run up to Eleventh Floor Creative. These guys come up with some of the cleanest, most creative design around for print and web. But personally, I have to say some of their real genius is in really smart, movie-quality film production. Check out "CSI Jersalem" in the film section, as a cool sample.

If you're looking at staffing or structural changes, or wondering how you can have more impact specifically in the areas of communication or worship, you need to bookmark Slingshot as a resource. These are experts with a broad range of credentials - to get a better idea of what they do, check out some examples of issues where you might benefit from their expertise. Plus, they're really the nicest guys you'll ever meet, and their bottom line is they love Jesus and want to do everything they can to tell people about Him.

For any questions about technical production in general, and audio in particular, check out The Soundbooth. The blog is a little behind, but that's only because Van is everyone's Audio 911. Word is he's sandbagging a pretty cool podcast. (There's a couple where I had the privilege of recording some voiceover, but I'm sure the others are pretty good, too. Heh.)

There. My friends are your friends. Talk amongst yourselves.

Depending on your age, you might be interested in reading Newsweek's January 15
cover story, "Understanding Menopause." But no matter how old you are, I
personally think you might be really interested in just trying to read the pictures.
I know I was.
Allow me to explain.


This is the online graphic for the main story, The New Prime Time. The story covers how
menopause affects specific areas of life: sleep, sex, moods, bones, heart. In the magazine, this graphic is the illustration for the "Sex" section. The "time is running out" concept makes sense, but I still find it just a little bit...awkward. Sue says exactly what she thinks about it. The hard copy has a different photo for the cover story - I couldn't find it online - a group of about ten women mingled together, smiling, laughing, hands casually touching each other's sholders or elbows. They don't look very worried about time running out. In fact, they look relieved - maybe even glad.

On the other hand, a related story asks, Is Male Menopause Real? And this is the accompanying
photograph. Oh dear. The men are clearly not so happy to find out they can look forward to a predicted drop in testosterone levels. The first guy on the left is just in denial. Hey, there's nothing wrong with my testosterone, baby. Next to him, Guy With Glasses looks a little defensive. No sweetie, it's not you, it's me. I'm just so...hormonal. Sweater-vest guy in the middle can't even look at anyone. Is he ashamed? The guy behind him seems angry. I think the guy on his left is just trying to remember when he last had the oil in his car changed.

What are the others thinking? And why do I find this so funny?

Bonnie over at Intellectuelle has tagged me for a "Five-ish Things I'd Like to Know About You" meme. I'm not sure there are five things anyone would care to know about me, so you can either skip today or link wildly and tell all your friends. Oh, and be sure to read Bonnie's five-ish things, too.

1) What's the most fun work you've ever done, and why? (two sentences max)
I hate to say it after this week's posts, but it was planning creative elements for weekend church services. Because like Jesus' parables, we got to come up with innovative ways to get around people's defenses with deep spiritual truths.

2) A. Name one thing you did in the past that you no longer do but wish you did. (one sentence max)
Kiss a husband good night. sigh.
B. Name one thing you've always wanted to do but keep putting off. (one sentence max)
Fly in a hot air balloon.

3) A. What two things would you most like to learn or be better at, and why? (two sentences max)
To speak Spanish, because it's California's second language. And to dance, because I suspect it might be nice to be graceful.
B. If you could take a class/workshop/apprentice from anyone in the world living or dead, who would it be and what would you hope to learn? (two more sentences, max)
A writing/reasoning/philosphy workshop with C.S. Lewis.

4) A. What three words might your best friends or family use to describe you?
Funny, smart, story-teller.
B. List two words you wish described you: patient and...graceful.

5) What are your top three passions? (can be current or past, work, hobbies, or causes-- three sentences max)
Creatively relating spiritual truths to everyday life, connecting unrelated ideas into something new, and doing both of those things togther!

Five people to tag: (Because they visit here frequently, and I'd like to get to know them better!) Karen, Laura, Bryon, SkyePuppy, and Mr. Tall.

I'm a big fan of the television series, The Office. If you haven't heard of it, it's a sort of "mockumentary" sitcom where a camera follows the employees of a paper company, recording their activities and comments, on work and each other. It's one of the dryest and funniest shows around. There's also an American version starring Steve Carell. The characters are intriguingly quirky, and it mocks the office workplace so ruthlessly, it's almost like a live-action Dilbert.

The Fast Company blog has discovered a new take on The Office, called God, Inc. "Best described as The Office in heaven, the comedy revolves around the various departments that work for God, like Population Control and Miracles."

There's some colorful language. But overall I thought it was a pretty funny take on applying everyday office and employee issues to God. After all, if you only looked at today's world, staffing-up in the Disasters Department and laying-off in the Miracles Department would explain a lot.