I used to write about faith at this blog fairly frequently. I haven't in a long time. A year or so, I suppose.

My religious beliefs have been in flux for a long time. For as long as I can remember, really. I was raised Southern Baptist, and my religious upbringing wasn't a positive experience for me. During my mid 20's I was a militant agnostic: "I don't know and you don't, either." By my early 30's I became nominally pro-religion; I began to think that religion did more good than bad for most people, and although I maintained that it wasn't for me, I generally saw it as a force for good.

Then I got divorced and 9/11 happened and I panicked. For whatever reason I decided that it was important that I nail down exactly where I stood on religion. I started reading the Bible and C.S. Lewis and something clicked. I've gone from content agnostic to enthusiastic Catholic convert in the last few years, and at every stage along the way I've always been very happy to force my beliefs on the people around me.

Never in a positive way, though. My approach, my foundation, has always been "You're wrong! Here's why!"

I think that maybe the only thing I've ever really believed in is the blunt force of my own opinion.

I began to realize over the past year that my religious convictions were a house of cards. 2008 has been an awful year. It began with the culmination of some serious marital problems. Just as it began to look like my marriage might survive, a good friend of mine died out of the blue. Well, what happened was, first my friend's daughter committed suicide, and then about a month later he had a heart attack and died. I was still trying to sort that out when I was diagnosed with cancer in June. I've had three tumor resections since then and I'm going to have another next month.

And, yes, I might be endulging myself with more self-pity than these circumstances really warrant.

The worst of all of this was what happened with my friend. I haven't written about it here for two reasons. One reason is that I didn't want to trivialize the loss of my friend's daughter and his subsequent death by writing about it at a blog that's primarily dedicated to YouTube videos and fart jokes. The main reason that I haven't written about it, though, is that thinking about it hurts so godamn much that I just try to avoid thinking about it at all.

My friend's daughter died and there was absolutely nothing inside of me that enabled me to offer him any comfort. Don't misread what I wrote: I didn't complain that I couldn't comfort him. I was totally incapable of even trying to comfort him. This was a guy I loved and I was totally incapable of making a gesture beyond "I'm sorry for your loss." It ate at me, it kept me up at night, but I only came up empty handed. The truth of the matter was that, deep down, I simply believed that my friend's daughter was gone. Just gone.

And then one morning he was gone, too. And I think the main thing I feel about that is anger.

All of this stuff happened and I realized that there was nothing (absolutely NOTHING) built into the foundation of my faith that prepared me to handle it. I began to think that the reason I'd been drawn to the Catholic Church was really just that I line up very well with the Church's politics. I already believe what the Church teaches with regard to abortion, the death penalty, charity, etc. It was a good match.

But as far as the "spiritual core" of my beliefs, I'm as uncertain and as lost as I've ever been. I do know, though, that I've never had a transcendent experience. Not once. And I don't even want one. I don't want cause to doubt my own sanity any more than I already do. I still have this deep need to figure out where I'm coming from, to figure out what I believe and why, but I just have no idea where to go from here.

Here's the truth of my beliefs. These are the things that I believe deep down, and I don't know how to change them, or if I should change them, or what to do about them. I believe in God. I don't know why he'd feel anything but contempt or maybe pity for humanity, but I do believe in a God of some sort. I believe in altruism and love and kindness, I believe, in fact, that those are the only things that make life worth living. I don't believe in any sort of afterlife. I think that death is the end, that death is final, and that it's always a hair's breath away. I think life is fragile and mostly futile, and that it's still a wonderful, wonderful thing. The most important thing in the entire world to me is my son ... and I believe that all of the immortality that there is going to be for me will be in whatever good I'm able to pass along to him. If I'm able to be a good enough father for him to be able to look back in fifty years and say "I guess the old man wasn't a total shithead," then I think I'll have done well. I'll have been a better father than I ever had, anyway.

Those are the things I believe deep down and I don't know why I believe them, other than those seem like natural conclusions to me. I don't know what to do with those beliefs or how to reconcile them with the Church, with Christianity, with faith or with the world in general. Oh, and get this: I still believe that the Roman Catholic church is the best thing out there. Talk about being conflicted.

I know that one or two of my Christian friends are going to read this and be tempted to send me e-mails to try to reason with me. I appreciate it, but it won't really help. Trust me, I've been trying like hell to reason with myself for the past year.

If you want something poetic or philosophical, this is the best I can offer: I can't explain why or exactly what it is about it, but there's something essential about the things I believe in the lyrics to the Black Crowes song A Thorn In My Pride. That's the best I can offer, and it's typical of me. When in doubt, I come back to rock and roll.

I'm writing all of this because Scott at Spiritual Tramp posted this video that I saw today and it moved me to tears:

Generally, I've come to realize in the past year that the best thing I can do is keep all of this to myself. I made a couple of attempts to discuss these feelings with friends at one point earlier this year and I only managed to offend them. That is the one thing I'm good at. Even when I'm not trying (and I usually am trying), I can offend people like nobody's business. It comes naturally to me, I guess.

But the things Penn Jillette had to say hit me like a wrecking ball. I felt like I had to write something. If you've read this, thank you for indulging me.

Man, I really hope 2009 is a fairly innocuous year.

Labels: Bladder Cancer, Blogs, Faith, Politics, You Tube

This is Zo's famous video on gay marriage ... the one that YouTube couldn't tollerate:

Find a fault in his logic. Go ahead, I dare you.

And not only is his argument seamless, but he's able to tackle the subject without coming off like a hostile ass ... unlike a certain other blogger I know, who just happens to be me.

Labels: Faith, Politics, You Tube, Zo

Hey, look! Somebody took a video camera and went trick or treating at the homes of some of my extended family!

Jack Chick.... (shudder).

Labels: Faith, Humor, Personal, You Tube

Who won last night's somewhat odd, informal Presidential debate at Saddleback Church? That's easy enough to answer.

The clear winner was Rick Warren. Last night's proceedings kept Warren in the spotlight at all times and will certainly help move even more copies of his books off the shelves at your local Wal-Mart.

People simply don't want to read real theology anymore. Real theology is challenging. It's demanding. It usually robs the reader of his or her sense of comfort. People don't want that. They want simple, feel-good Hallmark Card messages. They don't want to be challenged. They want to be comforted with neat little button-down books. Today's "Christian reader" wants Rick Warren, Max Lucado, Rob Bell and Joel Olsteen. Those guys grind out books that are safe, easy to digest and nonthreatening to the modern lifestyle. Today's "Christian reader" has probably never even heard of Thomas a Kempis, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Thomas Aquinas, Augustine of Hippo ... and if they know anything at all about C.S. Lewis, it's only that he wrote a few children's stories.

So I'm sure that last night's televised festivities will help Rick Warren move a few more copies of The Purpose Driven Life and The Purpose Driven Cook Book and The Purpose Driven Do It Yourself Home Repair Guide and whatever else he has jam-packed into those free-standing cardboard displays at your local Wal-Mart.

Congratulations, Pastor Rick Warren, on your big marketing victory last night.

Oh, and, by the way, both of the men who are running for President were there, too.

Nobody should be surprised by this, but John McCain answered Warren's questions with short, clear, direct answers. Whereas Barack "The Chosen One" Obama relied on his usual ability to talk himself around a question, say a lot of things that sound really cute but don't mean anything, and generally hem and haw.

For instance, here's John McCain on abortion:

And here's Obama on abortion:

So if you want a President who believes that abortion on demand is wrong and is willing to say so, you can plan to vote for John McCain. In fact, the National Review believes that McCain carried the night.

Or, if you want a President who doesn't really say anything important at all, doesn't risk offending anyone, but instead just kinda paints with words, ending up with an abstract that doesn't really tell you anything but sure makes you feel good, you can vote for Obama. Or, I suppose, you could vote for Rick Warren.

Labels: Faith, News, Obama Watch, Politics, You Tube

"It's not about the money. It's about sending a message."

So says the Joker in the latest Batman movie. But what exactly is his message, and to whom is he sending it?

If you've seen The Dark Knight you might agree with me that the movie is complex and smart enough to work on a number of levels. Sure, it's good fun as a comic-book action movie ... but director Chris Nolan and his cast have crafted a film with a serious philosophical subtext. Especially with regard to the Joker. The film's villain, brilliantly portrayed by the late Heath Ledger (and yes, I've come to enjoy the taste of crow) is just as thought-provoking and challenging as you might want him to be. There's a lot to think about. And there's a lot to discuss, if you're of a mind to do so.

A number of bloggers and writers are up to the task:

• RC at Strange Culture draws parallels between The Joker and the Anthrax killer, Bruce Ivins:

  There is a significant amount of circumstantial evidence of Ivins' craziness, including his obsession with a sorority, Kappa Kappa Gamma, and his poem version of I'm a Little Teapot.
  
  This mentally unstable poetry to the tune of I'm a Little Teapot with a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde nature sounds like it could totally come out of a Super Villain movie:
  
  "I'm a little dream-self, short and stout.
  I'm the other half of Bruce-when he lets me out.
  When I get all steamed up, I don't pout.
  I push Bruce aside, then I'm free to run about!"
  
  And I find myself drawing this correlation, and wonder if anyone else does?

  I think that correlation is unavoidable. I mean, that twisted nursery rhyme sounds exactly like the kind of thing the Joker might gleefully sing while carrying out one of his crimes.



• Jason Lee Steorts, writing for the National Review, looks at the Joker through the prism of Frederick Nietzsche:
  

  ...the Joker doesn’t do just anything. What he does is destroy. He is not chance, for chance might treat you well. He is, rather, a vandal. Why he wants to vandalize is not clear. Beyond question is that he thinks there is no such thing as right or wrong...
  
  ...“moral relativism” is the regnant doctrine among the most important shapers of popular opinion: Hollywood, the music industry, the media, and the otherwise übercool...
  
  ...In these parts, people like to kick (Nietzsche). Some kick him because he wrote in metaphors, a few of which sound anti-Semitic or bellicose when taken literally. A whole lot of us kick him for three little words he wrote about God. But we rarely bother to look at the pictures that went with those words. We get so carried away in the kicking that we ignore the answer he gave to the problem of God’s death (and it was, for him, a problem). That answer was roughly: “Yes, all is permitted; now go make something beautiful.”

  
  Read the whole article, it's very good.



• Mark D. White and Robert Arp think about the Joker in terms of terrorists and torture at Boston.com:
  

  ...if we say that Batman should kill the Joker, doesn't that imply that we should torture terror suspects if there's a chance of getting information that could save innocent lives? Of course, terror is all too present in the real world, and Batman only exists in the comics and movies. So maybe we're just too detached from the Dark Knight and the problems of Gotham City, so we can say "go ahead, kill him." But, if anything, that detachment implies that there's more at stake in the real world - so why aren't we tougher on actual terrorists than we are on the make-believe Joker?




• There are a number of people you might compare the Joker to ... but Ghandi? Well, before you dismiss the idea, consider what the blogger at A Layman's Philosophy has to say. For all his violence and insanity, the Joker does believe, deep down in his broken mind, that he's making the world a better place:
  

  To the Joker, his scars are important because they remind him of his ideals. He is an anarchist. He doesn’t believe in the conventions of the world, only the conventions that will distract people from the illusions of the world. The joker, despite his trickery, at least makes an attempt to change the world for the better...
  
  If the Joker could find a different way to make the changes he desired in the world, perhaps he would have been likened to Gandhi instead of an insane criminal with issues. The Joker sees the illusion of polarity in the world, he simply tries too hard to help others and not himself. The outcome is violence, torture, pain, and suffering.

  I'm not going to lie to you, I don't share this perspective about the Joker at all. But I was happy to stumble across this blog and find an utterly unexpected idea about the movie.



• I enjoyed what Father Raymond J. De Souza had to say about the Joker and his ideas about good and evil:
  

  “I choose chaos,” the Joker confesses. There is no order built into human nature, no moral law written on the heart. There are rules of common agreement. But they are only manufactured rules, entirely arbitrary, without enduring value. They do not correspond to any truth — and they cannot, for there is no order or design at the heart of reality. There is only chaos, and the Joker embraces it...
  
  Richard Dawkins, call your agent: As a sworn enemy of Godly design, you should be getting royalties...

  
  The only problem with that is that Richard Dawkins is utterly humorless. Whereas the Joker enjoys a good chuckle. Come on, Richie ... let's put a smile on that face!

Personally, I see The Dark Knight's Joker as sort of a Jim Jones figure. The Joker and Jones both used a certain dark charisma to captivate both their followers and those who oppose them. Both of them are nihilists. Both Jim Jones and the Joker are flashy attention-hounds. Both of them pervert innocent symbols to convey their own warped world view: The Joker dresses up as a clown to mock his victims, Jim Jones employed a demented version of Christianity to control his followers. Both of them prey on the weak and emotionally unstable. And both of them are egomaniacs.

Oh, and both of them have high-pitched, odd-sounding voices.

The Dark Knight is an outstanding film; much better, I think, than any of us expected it to be. And how cool is it that a movie this big and loud and gaudy and flat-out entertaining also has interesting, considerable ideas at it's core? Each of us who enjoyed it ought to make an effort to see it in the theater again. Movies like this, with this much to offer, come along maybe once every twenty years.

Labels: Entertainment, Faith, Movies

I'm still losing sleep, but hopefully actually healing post-surgery. So when I lay awake at night letting my thoughts race and compete with each other, I end up mulling over some odd things.

If you've read this blog before, you know that two of the topics that I tend to obsess over are, a) politics and b) movies. So it's natural, I guess, that the two would eventually merge into one in my brain.

So thanks to a long, sleepless night and the general machinations of my soul, I'm proud to present:

The Official SouthCon List Of The Top Ten
Conservative Movies of the Past Ten Years*

10:...The Incredibles

Helen: I can't believe you don't want to go to your own son's graduation.
Bob: It's not a graduation. He is moving from the 4th grade to the 5th grade.
Helen: It's a ceremony!
Bob: It's psychotic! They keep creating new ways to celebrate mediocrity!

I really enjoyed The Incredibles, especially it's Harrison-Bergeron-like elements. In the future conceived by the story, those with above average abilities will be forced to hold back, to reign themselves in, so that nobody will be made to feel unexceptional. But if everyone is exceptional, then nobody is. The resolution: Give it 100%, do the best you can do, and don't hold back. The other guy's inability isn't your problem.

---

09:...Knocked Up

When you get past the vulgarity (and there's a lot of it), when you get past the swearing and the sex jokes (by the tons), two things about Knocked Up are inescapable. It's really, really, really funny ... and it's a story about doing the right thing. Ben and Alison don't love each other when they conceive a baby together. They hardly know each other, in fact. But they decide to try to get together for the sake of the child they've conceived.

The question of abortion is presented as a horrible alternative when Alison's mother tells her that she should abort her child, focus on here career, and later on have a "real baby, when the time is right." Meanwhile, Ben and Alison, who seem to have no common ground to build a relationship on, end up becoming a loving couple and devoted parents. Turns out, whatta ya know, the most important common ground of all is that they share the same priorities when it comes to family and pregnancy. Ben leaves his slacker lifestyle behind and Alison puts her career on the back burner. Knocked Up made me laugh like crazy, and made me happy with it's message.

---

08:...World Trade Center

I'd call it a minor miracle. Oliver Stone, a left-wing director known for his obsessions with conspiracy theories, somehow managed to turn out a movie about all that's good about America.

I was worried when I heard that Stone was directing World Trade Center. I anticipated a "truther" movie; some ridiculous fable about George W. Bush, Haliburton and Isreal plotting together to destroy the Twin Towers and start a rich man's war. Wonderfully, that wasn't the case. World Trade Center is really the true story of two Port Authority policemen who're trapped in the rubble of one of the fallen towers on 9/11, and it's about the efforts of their rescuers to save their lives. The movie celebrates the selflessness, strength and love of the principle characters ... and of Americans in general. Whether you consider yourself a Ronald Reagan conservative (hand up, here) or a Howard Dean liberal, or anything in between, World Trade Center is poignant, beautiful reminder of what it means to be an American.

---

07:...The Exorcism Of Emily Rose

In the worst case scenario, The Exorcism Of Emily Rose could have been a movie that exploited religious faith or simply mocked it. Thankfully, ...Emily Rose turned out to be a best case scenario; a movie that that seriously, carefully compared and contrasted the religious perspective and the scientific perspective of a young woman's controversial death. The scientific perspective is treated here with cold logic. Thankfully, the religious point of view is handled with sensitivity and profound thoughtfulness.

...Emily Rose was loosely based on the true story of a young woman who believed she was under attack by demons. When medical treatment didn't provide her relief, her family brought her home, where she eventually died. The central question of the movie was this: was her devout Catholic family responsible through negligence for their Emily's death, or had they really done all they could do? There are no easy answers, and thankfully, the movie doesn't settle for an easy ending. It's up to you, the viewer, to reach your own conclusions. What a wonderful rarity; a movie primarily focused on Christian faith that expects it's audience to think for themselves.

By the way, the German feature Requiem is a subtler, quieter film that's based even more directly on the true story of Anneliese Michel. The two films (...Emily Rose and Requiem) compliment each other nicely, showing two different approaches to the story, one done at a higher level of suspenseful drama and the other done as a quiet character study. I'd say that both movies succeed on their own terms and I'd recommend Requiem to fans of ...Emily Rose. You can see the trailer for Requiem by clicking here. If you're stout of heart and would like to hear and see real images and sounds from the real exorcisms of Anneliese Michael, you can click here for part 1 and for part 2. Further episodes are available on YouTube. But I'll warn you, some of this is somewhat upsetting.

---

06:...Saving Private Ryan

Stephen Spielberg is an amazing film maker, but he's not known as a particularly conservative one. When he produced a movie about World War II, he could have turned out a revisionist mess. He didn't. Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan is a wide-eyed, reverent, profoundly grateful tribute to those who've sacrificed all in service to their country. And it begins and ends with solemn, beautiful shots of Old Glory, giving the flag appropriate weight and meaning. Saving Private Ryan is often difficult to watch, but it's a film that every American should see.

---

05:...Signs

What an anomaly; a major motion picture, with big-name stars, from a major director and a major studio, that celebrates and glorifies the power of religious faith.

As of now, Signs was the last genuinely good movie that M. Night Shyamalan has turned out. And it's one of his best. This science fiction account of an alien invasion of the Earth is scary, bordering on terrifying at times, and just on the surface it succeeds simply as a thriller.

But there's more to Signs than what's on the surface. This is the story of a clergyman who, due to tragedy, has lost his religious faith. Then, events take place that seem to be counter to everything we know about our existence, and everyone involved is forced to examine themselves at the core and find the source of their resolve. Mel Gibson, as the lapsed pastor, finds that the core of his being is rooted in a faith that he can't really cast aside. The movie's final scene, involving a roman collar and a crucifix, is one of the most unapologeticly pro-Christian moments in recent cinema. It might make you a little verklempt. It certainly got to me, anyway.

---

04:...Team America: World Police

Nobody in today's world of entertainment does a better job of mocking liberalism and all of it's silly conceits than South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone. So it's no surprise that Team America: World Police, the duo's obscene puppet show, skewers liberalism with gleeful abandon.

Team America doesn't hold back, naming Hollywood's worst liberal elites by name. I laughed so much at this movie, allowing it's running jokes to brand themselves on my psyche, and to this day I can't see Matt Damon without saying "MATT DAMON!" in my deepest, dumbest voice. The movie ends with a speech about the necessity of (occasional) war that rings true and is yet the most vulgar, politically incorrect monologue you'll ever hear. (" If you don't let us ____ this _______, we're going to have our _____ and _______ all covered in ____!") And best of all, Team America even lampoons all that's bad about our country, taking a "warts and all" approach to patriotism. America! Eff Yeah!

Language Warning For This Clip

---

03:...The Dark Knight

In my full review of The Dark Knight, I referred to Batman as "the ultimate Republican." And I can't think of a better way to describe the caped crusader. After all, he's an unapologetic millionaire and successful businessman. Plus, he's a self-appointed citizen soldier who goes after corruption and crime with unrestrained zeal. Batman is willing to do what it takes to stop the bad guys, even creating his own "patriot act" style surveillance system, allowing him to monitor every cell-phone in Gotham city.

Unethical? Maybe. Batman doesn't attempt to argue with his invaluable friend and supporter Lucius Fox, who promises to leave if the machine isn't destroyed. And in the end, the machine does appear to self destruct. But Batman has no qualms about using it for what he sees as the common good when he's stuck between a makeup wearing terrorist (The Joker) and a rigid, crusading politician (Harvey "Two Face" Dent). Batman does what he must to stop the bad guys. Let the chips fall where they may.

---

02:...The Passion Of The Christ

Mel Gibson may be the only person in Hollywood with both the interest in making a major motion picture about the crucifixion of Christ and the power to get the movie made and distributed. And Christians around the world responded with a record turnout for The Passion Of The Christ.

Now, movies about Christ have been made in the past. But they usually focus on revisionism, such as the utterly unwatchable Da Vinci Code ... or muddled, perverse symbolism, like The Last Temptation Of Christ ... or satire, like Monty Python's Life Of Brian. The Passion is one of a kind: An unflinching, visceral look at the crucifixion of Christ that draws from the Bible and 2000 years of Christian Tradition as it's source and inspiration. Wow. What are chances of Hollywood turning out that kind of movie?

---

01:...The Lives Of Others

You can't swing a hammer and sickle in Hollywood without hitting a pro-communism movie. At least two movies praising the murdering thug Che Guevara have been recently produced, for instance. Michael Moore's latest pile of refuse (I won't link to it, sorry) glorified Cuba. It's no surprise that if you want to see a movie that shows communism for what it is, you have to look outside of the American movie industry.

In fact, you have to look to movie makers who actually lived under Communism and can show it for what it is.

The Lives Of Others greatly effected me when I saw it, and I've thought about it occasionally ever since. And make no mistake, for all the twisted connections that some critics would like to make to the Patriot Act, The Lives Of Others is about, very specifically, life in Communist East Germany in the 80's. It's a dark, honest, evocative film, and one everyone should see.

The movie features a remarkable performance from Ulrich Muhe as an East German secret agent who becomes more humane and less Soviet as his surveillance of a young couple begins to touch his heart and soul. The progression of his character, along with the relationship between the man and woman under his surveillance, make for gripping, compelling story-telling. And the movie ends with a post-script that's touching and beautiful. Don't miss The Lives Of Others. It tells a story about life, love, and the evil of repressive government that you'll never forget.

---

*Could anyone build a good argument that only some or maybe none of these movies really qualify as "conservative?" Could someone, in fact, build a case for the "liberalism" of any or all of these films? Well, of course. So don't take this too seriously. This list really tells you more about me, and about my perspective, than it does about the movies themselves.

Labels: Faith, Movies, Politics

I had two topics I was going to blog about this evening. Well, I was going to blog about one of two possible topics.

If I had a serious frame of mind when I sat down I was going to write something about having to deal with chronic pain. The cancer/surgery process I'm going through now involves a great deal of constant physical pain ... and I don't do well with pain. My preference is to deal with physical pain by way of a constant stream of narcotics. But doctors don't like to give you a constant stream of narcotics these days. Marcus Welby, where are you when I need you?

These days, you're supposed to deal with chronic pain through any number of processes known collectively as "pain management." Like "anger management" and "self esteem," "pain management" is one of those new-age psycho-babble concepts. It makes health-care administrative types feel good about themselves because they're creating fewer Vicoden addicts, but doesn't really do anything for the guy with the hot coals burning in his lower abdomen. It's difficult to concentrate on closing my eyes and "going to my peaceful place" while running to the bathroom every ten minutes to bleed into the toilet.

So I'm dealing with my pain by taking twice as much actual Vicoden as I'm supposed to. Eventually my prescription will run out and I'll have to figure out something else. Boy, THEN I'll be screwed! But I'll worry about that then. Whoo hoooo!

Anyway, the other possible blog topic for tonight was going to be something about comic-book inspired movies. I've actually written some of that post and saved it as a draft and I thought I might sit down and finish it this evening.

But before I did any blog writing I decided to do some blog reading. And after a few minutes of surfing I noticed that for some reason I couldn't get streaming video to work this evening.

It turns out that it was apparently a Firefox problem, because when I loaded Rhodester's blog into Internet Explorer I was able to finally watch his "Vlog" video.

And when I loaded The Cubical Reverend's blog in Internet Explorer, I was able to watch the three YouTube videos that he posted on the 18th. The three videos were of a shared theme; something to do with irreverent reverends.

I was so effected by those three videos I decided to post them myself. First, there was this old chestnut, the farting preacher:

OK, clearly somebody monkeyed with the audio in that clip. But then there's this guy. The audio on this video is pretty low, you'll have to turn it up to hear it. And if you do so, about a minute and ten seconds into the praise chorus you'll here the preacher just flat out LOSE. HIS. EVER. LOVIN'. MIND.

And then ... there's this guy. Let me make it clear that this video comes with a HUGE LANGUAGE WARNING. I don't know what this guy's denomination is, but I'm guessing it's something like The First Church Of The Divine Gangsta.

Wow. Wow. Just ... wow. Kinda makes Jeremiah Wright come off like Jerry Falwell, huh? I just, I ... uh ... man. What was THAT?

I mean, I was half way through my second viewing of that before I even noticed the haircut.

I'd write more but I just flat out don't know what to say. And besides, it's time to crawl to the bathroom again.

Labels: Bladder Cancer, Blogs, Faith, Humor, Personal, You Tube

Ted Koppel gave an interesting commencement speech at Duke University some years ago, and someone sent me an excerpt from the speech today. Snopes verifies the authenticity of the following, and you can read the entire speech at MediaWatch. The speech is largely concerned with the Ten Commandments.

I'll bold the good stuff. In part, Koppel said:

Look at MTV or Good Morning America and watch the images and ideas flash past in a blur of impressionistic appetizers. No, there is not much room on TV for complexity. You can partake of our daily banquet without drawing on any intellectual resources; without either physical or moral discipline. We require nothing of you; only that you watch; or say that you were watching if Mr. Nielsen's representative should call. And gradually, it must be said, we are beginning to make our mark on the American psyche. We have actually convinced ourselves that slogans will save us. "Shoot up if you must; but use a clean needle." "Enjoy sex whenever with whomever you wish; but wear a condom."

No. The answer is no. Not no because it isn't cool or smart or because you might end up in jail or dying in an AIDS ward -- but no, because it's wrong. Because we have spent 5,000 years as a race of rational human being trying to drag ourselves out of the primeval slime by searching for truth and moral absolutes. In the place of Truth we have discovered facts; for moral absolutes we have substituted moral ambiguity. We now communicate with everyone and say absolutely nothing. We have reconstructed the Tower of Babel and it is a television antenna. A thousand voices producing a daily parody of democracy; in which everyone's opinion is afforded equal weight, regardless of substance or merit. Indeed, it can even be argued that opinions of real weight tend to sink with barely a trace of television's ocean banalities.

Our society finds Truth too strong a medicine to digest undiluted. In its purest form Truth is not a polite tap on the shoulder; it is a hallowing reproach.

What Moses brought down from Mt. Sinai were not the Ten Suggestions, they are Commandments. Are, not were.

The sheer brilliance of the Ten Commandments is that they codify, in a handful of words, acceptable human behavior. Not just for then or now but for all time. Language evolves, power shifts from nation to nation, messages are transmitted with the speed of light, man erases one frontier after another; and yet we and our behavior, and the Commandments which govern that behavior, remain the same. The tension between those Commandments and our baser instincts provide the grist for journalism's daily mill. What a huge, gaping void there would be in our informational flow and in our entertainment without routine violation of the Sixth Commandment. Thou shalt not murder.

There have always been imperfect role models; false gods of material success and shallow fame; but now their influence is magnified by television. I caution you, as one who performs daily on that flickering altar, to set your sights beyond what you can see. There is true majesty in the concept of an unseen power which can neither be measured nor weighed. There is harmony and inner peace to be found in following a moral compass that points in the same direction, regardless of fashion or trend.

It's a thought-provoking speech. I'd almost call it a sermon, and a good one. Read it all at Media Watch, at the bottom of the page.

Labels: Faith, Media, News, Politics

I came across this blog and found it fascinating. It's a running list of the last-meal requests of death row inmates.


It makes for compelling reading ... and it does put human faces on those waiting for execution. It makes you consider the complexities in surprising ways. It's not every day that you think about the fact that a murdering rapist is also a guy who likes cheeseburgers and Jell-O.

I found myself especially effected by those entries that provide no information other than the details of the meal itself. The reader is then left to fill in the particulars with her or his own imagination. Including the questions "What did this guy do?" and "Could he maybe have been innocent?"

Most of these guys aren't innocent, of course. Most of them are murdering scumbags. But murder is murder, even when the victim himself is a murdering scumbag, and if you're a Christian, I think you ought to realize that there's no asterisk after the words Thou shalt not kill. Nor is there support for the death penalty anywhere in the New Testament. You can find "Christian" ways to justify the death penalty all day long ... I used to do it myself and I know all the tricks. But, ultimately, that's all they are: tricks.

And, if you live in a state that sanctions the death penalty (as I do), then murder is being committed in your name every time someone is executed.

The death penalty is one the few political areas where Wendy and I disagree. I oppose it, she supports it. When I showed her this blog, her immediate reaction was "That's depressing. I don't want to think about it." I don't blame her.

It's a lot to digest, you might say.

Labels: Faith, Personal, Politics

His mind began to wonder as soon as he noticed that the choir director was playing a didgeridoo during the opening hymn. "Have we always had a didgeridoo in our choir?" he thought. "And is that, in fact, a didgeridoo? I've never seen one in person before, so I can't be sure. Playing that thing looks painful."

This was followed by a swift, internal reprimand. "You're here to focus on God, not on the choir," he reminded himself. "The music is supposed to support the mass, not detract from it. Just ignore the parts that distract you."

And he did pretty well … until the hand clapping started during the Gloria. Then the same old questions raised their ugly heads. Should we be clapping our hands during the Gloria? This is a Catholic church, after all, not a Pentecostal church (not that there's anything wrong with that.) We're old school, right? We're reverential and subdued. Doesn't this bopping and clapping seem, well, irreverent?

But he reminded himself that not everyone shares the same sensibilities. Not everyone felt that Church music should be understated and sober. Most of the choir at this church … most of the congregation, in fact … were people in their late 40's to early 60's. Baby boomers. People who wanted their church music to sound like the Mamas and the Papas, the Byrds, the Beatles. This was their version of "contemporary." They liked it. They liked to verge on dancing during the Liturgy of the Eucharist. They liked to clap and smile. They'd like to buy the world a Coke and keep it company. And that's OK.

So he went back to trying to focus on God and forced himself to look for references to God in the lyrics of the "hymns," which wasn't easy because references to God were vague and entirely subjective in this music. In all honesty, this was music for people who enjoyed novelty more than contemplation of the eternal. This was music that wasn't really about anything other than itself. A cappella sections, bongo solos, tambourines and all.

He got distracted again during the ukulele solo in Lamb Of God and started pandering to his own bad nature again. "Why don't we just give the whole church to the baby boomers? They've already got the music, why don't we just give them everything? Hang beaded curtains in the doorways, take the candles off the altar and put up lava lamps, replace the sign of the cross with the peace sign, and take down the crucifix and hang an oil portrait of David Crosby?"

This was followed by another sharp internal reprimand: "What's wrong with me? Why can't I just leave my bitterness out in the van on Sunday mornings? Who am I to decide what is or isn't appropriate church music? It could be worse. Just wait until today's young people are in charge and all the music in church sounds like Nickelback. Won't that be great? Singing Halleluiah Halleluiah to the tune of Hey, Hey, I Wanna Be A Rock Star.

And what is THAT sound? Is that … is that a kazoo?"

Labels: Faith, Humor

Remember, Easter is supposed to be a religious holiday. To reinforce that with our kids, we take them to visit this easter bunny at the mall. ;)

Labels: Faith

Sometimes I think I'd be better off not watching the History Channel at all. I enjoy most of their programs, but they sure do love biblical revisionism.

The show that's on now, called "There's Something About Mary Magdalene," presents another of those popular "new" theories that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Christ and/or the closest apostle of Christ and/or the co-founder of Christianity. These conclusions are presented as the conclusions of "recently discovered information," and they sure do seem to be amazing and confounding claims.

Except, not.

Look, if the History Channel wants to do PR for the various Gnostic non-Christian faiths, that's fine with me. I just wish they'd be a little less biased and provide all the information so that viewers who might be swayed by this stuff would be better informed.

Some of facts that the History Channel doesn't seem concerned enough to include in their program include:

• "Recently discovered information?" No, not really. The so-called "Gnostic gospels," including the "gospel of Mary Magdalene," were re-introduced to the world when bound volumes of them were discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt, in 1945.



• The "Gnostic gospels," contrary to modern claims, are not as old as the canonical gospels. Most scholars, religious and secular, agree that the "Gnostic gospels" are at least a few centuries newer than the canonical gospels.



• The Christian church has been well aware of these so-called "gospels" for hundreds of years and has rejected their authenticity and validity. In Christian terms, they are heresy.



• The "Gnostic gospels" do not complement or "flesh out" the canonical gospels. They contradict the canonical gospels. Each of the "Gnostic gospels" hinges on the idea that Christ taught certain things secretly to selected apostles. This is a contradiction to Christ's assertion while on trial for blasphemy that he'd taught nothing in secret. The claims of "secret lessons" from Christ is easy to explain… the writers of the "Gnostic gospels" wanted to present their new versions of "christiantiy" with an air of authority.



• Mary Magdalene" was an important and very privileged friend of Jesus. That's obvious to anyone who actually reads the canonical gospels, especially Luke. Of course, modern "Gnostics" aren't going to encourage you to do that. After all, the Canonical gospels, when read, have this odd effect of convincing many people that Jesus was Lord. (And, by the way, I'm personally convinced that Mary Magdalene is done as much a disservice by the "Gnostics" as she was by those who used to incorrectly consider her a prostitute.)



• The canonical gospels are different from the religious and mythical texts of their day. As C.S. Lewis pointed out, Mark, Matthew and Luke are clearly written as journalistic reports, not as attempts to proselyze or to make converts. They were written to preserve, as matter-of-factly as possible, the memories of those who actually lived and traveled with Christ. If they resonate emotionally with readers, that's because they connect on a level that's far deeper than the literary.

Shesh!

Look, if you want to worship everything, or nothing, or Mary Magdalene, or Tina Turner or roosters, be my guest. Just don't claim that there's historical support for your beliefs if there clearly isn't.

Labels: Faith, News

Hat tip to the Cubicle Reverend, who found this fun, funny and informative little ecumenical "conversation" about the nature of Lent.

Labels: Blogs, Faith

It's a big day in DC.

Those are a few pictures from previous marches ... and these videos are a few of the reasons why:

Labels: Faith, News, Politics, You Tube

I've written before that I oppose the death penalty for religious reasons. That doesn't always go over well with my fellow conservatives or many of my fellow Christians, and I'm sympathetic. My fellow conservatives who support the death penalty argue their case with logic and reason, and their positions are … well, logical and reasonable. Many Christians find support for capital punishment in the book of Romans and in the Old Testament. Their arguments are clear and rational, and yet I don't share them.

Then, something happens like the apparently justifiable and necessary execution of Saddam Hussein, and I feel compelled to examine my position.

(By the way, you can see a fairly upsetting cellphone video of the execution here. HT: LGF.)

My opposition to the death penalty has been a major factor in my personal religious journey. I used to support capital punishment adamantly. For me, the acid test was the horrific murder of Polly Klass by a vile career criminal named Richard Allen Davis. On October 1, 1993, Davis abducted 12 year old Polly Klass from her home in Petaluma, California. By morning Davis had molested and murdered Polly and left her body in the woods. When convicted of his crimes, Davis made obscene gestures at the jury. At his sentencing, Davis found one last way to inflict pain on Polly's family; he claimed that the young girl had indicated that she'd been molested by her father before he murdered her. If ever anyone deserved to be killed, It is Richard Allen Davis. For years, this piece of subhuman fecal matter was my lodestar for supporting capital punishment.

About five years ago (not long after 9/11), while I still supported the death penalty, I had a conversation with a good friend about the subject of state-sponsored execution. (I won't identify him, but he comments here and may chose to identify himself.) My friend opposed the death penalty on the grounds that people simply don't have the authority to execute it. He believed that only God could create life and that only God had the right to end it. I recognized that argument. I'd used it for years to explain my opposition to abortion on demand.

Although everything in me recoiled, I ended up having to admit that my friend's argument was logical. All my attempts to attack his point of view were really attacks on men of straw. He wasn't saying that the lives of unborn children were of equal merit to the lives of murderers, he was just saying that we don't have the authority to take any life. He wasn't arguing that people like Richard Allen Davis didn't deserve to die, he was just saying that it wasn't our job to kill him. He wasn't even arguing that my rage against Davis was unjustifiable. He was simply, tacitly saying that none of us have the authority to take any human life. No, not one.

I couldn't find anything in the Bible that backed up my point of view or refuted my friend's position. In the New Testament, as opposed to the Old, forgiveness and submission are the orders of the day, not revenge. Jesus spoke plainly against seeking revenge in the gospels, and in his letters Paul cried out for mercy, charity and compassion that exceeds what our enemies deserve. Even Saint Paul's instruction to follow the laws of the land (Romans 13) is not instruction to silently obey the law at the expense of the Christian model. We are called to be Stephens, not Samsons. Undue, unchristian laws must be identified and called to account. That's obvious to Christians when it comes to abortion on demand. For me, it became just as obvious (though not as easy, certainly) when it comes to the death penalty.

I realized that I could no longer support the death penalty and claim that I was following Christ in the way that I believed that the Holy Spirit was leading me. The religion I'd been practicing was Lewis's infamous "Christianity and water", and it wasn't going to be good enough. I'd been trying to change Jesus to fit me. I was supposed to do the opposite.

I began listening more closely to the still small voice, and eventually I concluded that it was leading me to Rome. It might lead others to other churches. It's almost inconsequential. No Earthly local is the ultimate destination, and I can't imagine that we'll find denominational segregation when we get there. I hope to make it there myself and find myself in communion with a myriad of the faithful, including those who have been "a law for themselves" (Romans 2:13-16).

So, what of Saddam Hussein?

When Saddam was executed this weekend, I remembered the slow and lonely death of Pol Pot, a dictator responsible for tremendous genocide. For his crimes, Pol Pot was apparently given something he'd denied to well over a million Cambodians: a prolonged and painful death due to old age. After years of despotism, Pol Pot died in a mud hut under house arrest in 1997. His death wasn't as galvanizing as a public execution would have been, but it was just as final.

There was, of course, an element of temporal satisfaction in the hanging of Saddam Hussein. I won't argue that he didn't deserve execution. By any Earthly standard, he did. Still, I believe that we Christians will be judged by another standard, and we must try, even in our frailty, to live up to that standard. Arguing to spare the life of a genocidal murderer is distasteful, but I can't find anything that indicates that Christianity is supposed to be tasteful. Quite the opposite. From what I can tell, the Christian life is often divisive (Matthew 10:34-36) and involves tremendous self denial (Mark 8:34), and sometimes requires us to advance unpopular truths at terrible personal risk (Acts 7:51-60). Clearly it involves the sacrifice of our individual will for the will of Another.

The fact that Saddam Hussein was executed by Muslims and not Christians isn't relevant from my point of view. Even removing religious considerations, I still believe that other options might have been better. Had Saddam's life been spared, had he been allowed to grow old in prison, the new Iraqi government might have set a brave and merciful new precedent. I'm naïve enough to believe that it might have been a good thing in a region desperate for bravery and mercy.

Labels: Faith, News, Politics

In recent months, books by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and others, have attacked religion as a destructive force in human history. Writing for the Christian Science Monitor, Dinesh D'Souza argues to the contrary ... and wins the argument:

The problem with this critique is that it exaggerates the crimes attributed to religion, while ignoring the greater crimes of secular fanaticism. The best example of religious persecution in America is the Salem witch trials. How many people were killed in those trials? Thousands? Hundreds? Actually, fewer than 25. Yet the event still haunts the liberal imagination.

It is strange to witness the passion with which some secular figures rail against the misdeeds of the Crusaders and Inquisitors more than 500 years ago. The number sentenced to death by the Spanish Inquisition appears to be about 10,000. Some historians contend that an additional 100,000 died in jail due to malnutrition or illness.

These figures are tragic, and of course population levels were much lower at the time. But even so, they are minuscule compared with the death tolls produced by the atheist despotisms of the 20th century. In the name of creating their version of a religion-free utopia, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Mao Zedong produced the kind of mass slaughter that no Inquisitor could possibly match. Collectively these atheist tyrants murdered more than 100 million people.

Read the whole thing. It's very good.

Labels: Faith, News, Politics

More of the usual… religion, rock and roll, and at least one post that's about both:

• The Superman / Jesus Connection
  
  I'm not saying that I agree with this stuff, I’m not saying that I disagree with this stuff, I'm just saying that I read this stuff and I thought it was interesting.
  
  Get Religion has collected various points of view regarding the possible Christian allegory of the Superman story. One clip from the New York Times asserts that…
  
  

  There’s always been a hint of Jesus (and Moses) to the character, from the omnipotence of his father to a costume that, with its swaths of red and blue, evokes the colors worn by the Virgin Mary in numerous Renaissance paintings. It’s a hint that proves impossible not to take…
  
  Every era gets the superhero it deserves, or at least the one filmmakers think we want. For (director Bryan) Singer that means a Superman who fights his foes in a scene that visually echoes the garden betrayal in “The Passion of the Christ” and even hangs in the air much as Jesus did on the cross. It’s hard to see what the point is beyond the usual grandiosity that comes whenever B-movie material is pumped up with ambition and money. As he proved with his first two installments of “The X-Men” franchise, Mr. Singer likes to make important pop entertainments that trumpet their seriousness as loudly as they deploy their bangs. It’s hard not to think that Superman isn’t the only one here with a savior complex.

  
  
  Not everybody buys it. From the Dallas Morning News…
  
  

  …there’s a vital difference from the message of Christianity: The caped, comic book “savior” is not sent to save people from their own evil. “He comes to help us find our potential,” (pastoral professor) Dr. (Reg) Grant said.
  
  In fact, the new movie, despite its Christ imagery, could hardly be less theological. There’s nothing of prayer or heaven. Superman offers salvation only from the perils of this world.
  
  To hammer that point, Luthor steals a quote from science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Or, though he doesn’t say so, from divinity.

  
  
  Other commentators find parallels between the new Superman movie and The Da Vinci Code. Honestly, I don't much buy any of this… but it's interesting reading.



• A Return To Musical Reverence At Mass
  
  If you attend a church where the music is reverent and traditional, I really hope you don't take it for granted. It seems like a lot of churches these days… even Catholic churches… are changing over to more "contemporary" sounding music during the worship service. According to at least one source, Pope Benedict would like to see a change. Of course, different sources report the story differently. The UPI version of the story is blunt:
  
  

  Pope Benedict XVI is calling for an end to guitars and a return to traditional choirs in the Catholic Church.
  
  The recital of mass set to guitars has grown in popularity in Italy and in Spain it has been set to flamenco music, the London Telegraph reported.
  
  "It is possible to modernize holy music," the Pope said, at a concert conducted by Domenico Bartolucci, the director of music at the Sistine Chapel. "But it should not happen outside the traditional path of Gregorian chants or sacred polyphonic choral music."

  
  
  It's no surprise that a Catholic news source reports the Pontiff's feelings with more nuance:
  
  

  Pope Benedict said, "An authentic updating of sacred music cannot take place except in the wake of the great tradition of the past, of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony."
  
  The pope said that in music, as in art and architecture, the church promotes and supports "new expressive means without denying the past -- the history of the human spirit -- which is also the story of its dialogue with God."

  
  
  Speaking for my wife and myself, we prefer the more traditional kinds of church music… pipe organ, choir, etc. Nonetheless, each church has to do the best it can with the resources available to it. The music at the church that our family attends isn't exactly what Wendy and I would like to hear… but part of making a church work is compromise and unity. So we sing along and we don't complain about the guitars, bongos and clarinets. Nonetheless, like I said before, if the church you attend features reverent, traditional music during service, please don't take it for granted.



• Mandatory Metallica
  
  Seems like I have to always feature a Metallica update these days, right? Well, if you're like me… a Metallica fan and a fan of The Simpsons, then you'll probably be amused to know that Metallica will be lending their voices to the program in an episode to air this September. Of course, this won't be the first time Metallica has been animated, and the picture here is yet another link to my favorite Metallica-related cartoon.
  
  By the way, Lars says we should look for the next album about the middle of next year… and James reports that the album is being shaped by jam sessions and full-band collaboration… just like the last one was.



• New Alice In Chains Collection
  
  Sony reports that a 2 CD collection called The Essential Alice In Chains will be released in July. I, for one, am thrilled to hear the news. It's about time somebody put together a good collection of tracks from Alice In Chains albums. Once this comes out, fans won't have to settle for listening to the songs collected in The Greatest Hits collection and The box set and the abbreviated version of the box set and the live album. Now if only Sony would take the incentive to do a "Best Of Alice In Chains" single CD collection, I'd finally feel like I have these same thirty songs collected together in enough different versions.

Labels: Faith, Metallica, Music, News

Here's today's ramblings and absurd observations...

• Our Lady Of The Pruned Tree Branch?
  
  Another one of those "Mary Sightings." Some folks in Cleveland have found an image of the Blessed Virgin in a piece of wood in their backyard:
  

  Donna Vicarrone says it's truly a miracle that she found an image of the Virgin Mary in her backyard. Vicarrone and her husband were clearing out tree branches for a new sitting area. The beauty of one of the branches caught her eye so she kept it. But it was her husband who first saw Mary's likeness.
  
  Since then, the Vicarrone's have shown the tree branch to a local priest and to a local prayer group and they all agree it looks like the Blessed Mother. The Cleveland couple have not yet decided what they will do with the image, but they are hoping to display it somewhere people can view it.

  
  
  I've written about these kind of Mary sightings before, and my take on it then was that these kinds of things were probably harmless and that they had the potential to be good things if they inspired more reverence. Since I wrote that, my attitude has changed a little bit. I've gotten to the point where things like this make me a little uncomfortable.
  
  These days, my personal religious practice involves a great deal of devotion to Mary. I had something of a personal epiphany about Mary a while back, and I've come to love and admire her very much. She means a lot to me and I try to keep her example in the forefront of my mind. I'm at the point now where I almost see these kinds of "Mary sightings" as a bit of a distraction. Mary's life is a wonderful example of Christian devotion and obedience to God. It bugs me a little bit when things like this happen because I don't like the idea of her becoming simply a pop-culture icon. Please keep in mind that all of this is just my opinion and I don't mean to present myself as an authority… I'm just one more sinner trying to follow Christ.



• The Passion Of The Billboard
  
  The Unseen Blogger posted this picture the other day:
  
  

  

  
  
  It's a billboard encouraging people to vote no in a municipal election regarding alcohol sales.
  
  Unseen found the billboard distasteful:
  
  

  Does anyone else, as Christians, find this campaign completely inappropriate and offensive?
  
  What's next? Invoking the name of Christ for jaywalking? Littering? "You crucified Christ again by not recycling that aluminum can!!!" …
  
  Christ's sacrifice was the ultimate sacrifice anyone could make. It should not be trivialized for the sake of self-righteousness.

  
  
  I'm in totally agreement with my bandaged buddy about this. I think it's terribly insulting and that it really trivializes the passion of Jesus Christ. I'm particularly upset that Jesus is presented on the billboard with such an accusatory expression on his face. I don't think that the people who came up with this campaign understand the real point of the passion of our Lord at all. I'm not fit to judge them, of course, I know that… but my impression is that they see the image of the crucified Christ as a valuable tool for use in political propaganda. It's my belief that using Christ to achieve any kind of personal or political objective is blatantly taking the Lord's name in vain.
  
  I'm going to make a further comment that is based on a speculation on my part, so please forgive me for that. My speculation is that this billboard was most likely put up by Christian Fundamentalists… and most of the Christian Fundamentalists I've known have told me that they consider crucifixes to be improper because a crucifix is a "graven image." Look, I can't define irony… but I know it when I see it.



• Spider-Man 3 Stuff
  
  WARNING! Spidey-related links and videos below may contain spoilers!
  
  What appears to be a legit teaser trailer for the next Spider-Man movie has leaked. Well, the trailer itself might not be legit, but it looks like it has some legit footage from the as-yet unfinished film. Watch it below, and then read my comments under the video.
  

  OK, gut reaction: I'm underwhelmed by the trailer.
  
  Looks like they've gone Hobgoblin for Harry Osborn instead of Green Goblin 2. I'm fine with that. In fact I predicted it.
  
  I'm very disappointed by the images of Venom in the trailer. He just doesn't look right. In the comics, Venom is a huge, hulking thing. In this he looks more like a skinny vampire or something.
  
  No peek at Sandman in the trailer? What's up with that?
  
  A lot of info about the movie is supposedly leaking all over the net. Who knows how much of it is real or not. As of right now, my hopes are pretty low. My gut tells me they're trying to cram too much into one movie. They'll never top Spider-Man 2, and I'm actually starting to dread this film.




• United 93
  
  I've posted a review of United 93 at film geeks if you want to read it. Rhodester has also posted a brief story about a friend of his with a personal connection to that flight. Interesting stuff.
  
  
• This Week In Catholicism
  
  In a recent column, Pat Buchanan argues that the abhorrent trend of political correctness is threatening to make Catholicism an unacceptable faith in the political arena. I thought his point of view and the story that inspired it were interesting. By the way, even if Catholicism is under attack here at home, it seems to be growing in South Korea.
  
  
• Live Metallica
  
  A while back I mentioned that Metallica has been doing a new old-school sounding song at recent concerts, and that they've been focusing on their older material live, even playing every track on my favorite Metallica album at recent concerts. Well, if you're willing to shell out a few bucks, you can go download authorized recordings of those recent shows. Personally, I'm unwilling to spend the money, so if you purchase and download those shows, send me a note telling me how they sound. Of course, I'm not suggesting that you send me copies of the shows themselves. Why, that would be wrong! And we all know that Lars wouldn’t approve.



• Bloggery
  
  Chad Is Not Enough is a blog by a fellow new convert to Catholicism. A Catholic Life clued me in to Chad's blog. Sometimes I come across a new blog and just like it right off the bat. This is an instance of that, and I can see me reading Chad regularly.
  
  For more than a year now I've been reading another blog, A Southern Catholic Convert… but the other day I noticed that her blog was gone. I thought it might be a blogger issue, but I noticed today that her blogspot URL has been grabbed up by a new person. I guess I'll take the link down until I find out what this new person is all about.
  
  I mentioned that my old blogspot URL was grabbed up recently. I wish the guy (or gal) who grabbed it would post more so I can get an idea of what he or she is all about, too.
  
  A spambot comment at Where Have You Gone Ronald Reagan ended up leading to a fairly funny comment thread.
  
  Oh, I also found another Catholic blog, Per Christum, with some good stuff by some good contributors. Go check it out.



• Funny… I don't Look Like Famke Janssen
  
  Thanks to a link provided by Wolverine…I mean Rey, I was able to find out which X-man I am:
  

  
  Most Comprehensive X-Men Personality Quiz 2.0
  created with QuizFarm.com

  
  This particular quiz was far more exhaustive than the one I took a year and a half ago. That one said I was Hank McCoy. I didn't agree with that one and I don't agree with this one, either. The X-man that I'd want to be is Kurt Wagner, the devout Catholic mutant known as Nightcrawler. This stupid quiz said I was Phoenix instead and said that my wife was Nightcrawler… which is dumb because my wife is clearly Kitty Pride. Stupid quiz.

That's all I got for today… and, frankly, that's plenty.

Labels: Blogs, Faith, Metallica, Movies, Music, News, You Tube

Some people think I'm crazy because... well, people think I'm crazy for a number of reasons, all of them perfectly valid. Specifically, though, some people think I'm crazy because of my Christian interpretations of a number of rock songs. The thing is, most Christian rock is just boring. What's wrong with Christian rock? I'll tell you what's wrong with it: It sucks. It's awful. There are a hand-full those bands that are decent... I can think of a few Jars of Clay and 12 Stones songs that are OK, and I really enjoy POD and early stuff by King's X... but most of it is just so amateurish. The musicians are mediocre, and for the most part, the lyrics are just tepid. It seems like the really talented musicians and songwriters don't come out of religious colleges, where most of the Christian rock bands are formed. Now and then, though, some of the best secular rock bands write lyrics that seem to fit my spiritual life and my ideas about Christianity... so I end up finding Christian messages in songs that probably weren't written with anything spiritual in mind. Like this song, for example. And this one. Other times, a secular song will have sort of a spiritual element, and I'll find a Christ-centered interpretation of my own, like with this song and with this one.

Of course, I haven't always done this. When I was a teenager, I was pretty heavily into rock and roll for rock and roll's own sake. My parents, of course, frowned on this. I remember being in my late teens and going to see the Monsters of Rock show, with Van Halen, The Scorpions, Dokken, Metallica, and Kingdom Come (remember Kingdom Come? Me neither.) at RFK stadium, and knowing that my parents would have frowned on the debauchery taking place there. I saw the show with my friend's John and Saul, and after the show, when we got back home and dropped Saul off at his house, his dad came out to greet us. He asked us how the show was, and we told him it was OK. John and I were afraid to say too much, because Saul's dad was, after all, a parent. At this point, Saul's dad regaled us with tales of Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath show's he'd seen in the '70's. He told us about one show where the cops had come in and, to use his phrase, "teargassed the whole f---ing place, man." John and I listened to these stories in amazement. I remember telling Saul afterwards that his dad was the coolest human being who had ever lived.

Saul's dad was not just interested in the music that we were listening to, he actually shared our taste in music. Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin were like gods to us, and meeting a parent who was a fan just blew our minds. After meeting Saul's dad, I decided that he was the kind of father I wanted to be... I wanted to share music with my son, to be as relevant and hip, musically speaking, as Saul's dad was, and to be just as cool.

I remember when my first wife was pregnant with our son, it was very, very important to me that I pick just the right album for him to hear as his very first album. I agonized over the decision. It had to be an album that represented rock and roll at it's very best. The music had to be perfect, the lyrics had to be perfect, and the arrangement and sequence of songs had to be just as unassailable. It had to be an album that "spoke to me," an album that summed up not just rock and roll but the world and life in general. It had to be something he could brag about to his friends when he was older. I wanted him to be able to say "The very first rock album I ever heard was..." But, what? What would it be? Finally, I decide on what I thought was the perfect album. My son was born at a hospital an hour away from home, and on the car-ride home I played for him, in it's entirety, his first rock album. This rock album. Looking back, I'm still sure I made as good a choice as I could have.

Of course, all his life, I've subjected my son to my music. The (clickable) picture to the right is him when he was just a year or so old, munching on a Ritz cracker, wearing a custom-made onesie that advertised one of my favorite bands. Over the years I've played a ton of music for him, and he's developing a fairly distinct musical taste of his own. When he was only a two or three years old, he could identify just about any song that came on the radio, or at least tell you the artist. "This is Lenny Kravitz," he might say... or "This is Metallica." I remember being in the car with him once, listening to a Top 40 radio station. A Janet Jackson song came on and my son said "This is Garbage." I was surprised at him having made a mistake, since Shirley Manson and Janet Jackson don't sound anything alike. I said "No, actually this is Janet Jackson." To this, he replied "I know. And, it's garbage."

Some of what I've played for him hasn't set well with him. Two bands he flat out hates are Thrice and Faith No More. Faith No More, to put it in his terms, just sucks. His only comment about Thrice was "I have no idea what this guy is trying to say."

He's a big Lyle Lovett fan, though, which I think is just great, because Lyle Lovett is coolness personified. He also likes Toad the Wet Sprocket and Jimmy Eat World and he thinks Fishbone is alright. I'm just glad he's heard Fishbone. How many eight year olds do you know who have distinct ideas about Fishbone? My son is so cool.

I have visitation with him on the weekends, and every Sunday I take him back to his mother, which is an hours drive. When I take him back by myself, we usually have a chance to check out new music. I'll put CDs in for him and ask him what he thinks. Today I decided to try Tom Waits on him. If you've heard Tom Waits, you know that his vocal style is... well, unconventional. I put in the Bone Machine album and went to the track I Don't Want To Grow Up. My son got a big kick out of that song, but asked me if he "always sings that way." I said that he pretty much did, and said that he even sang that way on the slow songs. He asked to hear some more, so I skipped to That Feel and Who Are You This Time, both of which he said were just "weird." I asked him if he'd like to hear some more or hear something else, and he said he'd try some more Tom Waits... so I took out that CD and reached for my copy of Rain Dogs. While I was changing CDs, the radio was on the AM band and was just playing static. After about thirty seconds of static, my son said "He sounds even worse on this song." I laughed and told him that it was just radio static, and he laughed like crazy about that.

I don't know if I'll be considered one of those "cool dads," and I imagine that most dads can't do much to make their teenage kids think they are cool. Oh, well. For now, my son and I have a shared love for music, and for now it's a fun common interest. I know that lot of kids end up rebelling against their parents by getting into music that is offensive and awful. The day might come when that happens. The day might come when he only wants to listen to music that offends and disgusts me. Can you imagine? My own son bringing Shania Twain CDs into my house?

For now, though, it's all good.

Labels: Faith, Metallica, Music, Personal