Randy Greenwald

Over the next few days I’d like to share with you three quotes relative to the issue of abortion that I have picked up. The sources are diverse and the perspective may not be your own. However, they are reflective of how people really think, and so they are worth pondering.

The first came from the broadcast of a speech on ‘reproductive justice’ which I heard on WMNF, the local community radio station which blesses me with great music as well as with commentary that is generally of a persuasion the polar opposite of my own. Stimulating.

I cannot tell you who was speaking, but her words were so clear that I wrote the what she said easily word for word. Here was her comment:

“I am a Roe baby. I was literally born two days after Roe was announced. And I feel fortunate to have grown up in an era in which abortion was legal. This was a right denied my mother, grandmother, and great-grandmother.

I appreciate that these are the sincere and deeply felt sentiments of a passionate person. But can she not see what she is saying? Had that ‘right’ been granted her mother, grandmother, or great-grandmother, would she even be alive to have these sentiments? She should feel fortunate — fortunate to have had the right to grow up!

That is a right that has been denied to millions since.

Very sad.

[Note: I was not able to listen to the rest of her speech. Perhaps she qualified her statements in the body of the speech. If so, I am prepared to be corrected.]

The other day, I ran into a Windows networking tech helping a flustered Windows user at our nearby Panera Bread. I wowed him by showing my Windows programs running seamlessly on my Mac desktop. He was so impressed he told me that if he had not just bought a Windows laptop that the MacBook would be his computer.

Okay, so I’m a better computer evangelist than gospel evangelist. That much I’ve known for a long time. (The guy he was helping did visit church last Sunday. That was a plus.)

But this led me to solidify an observation I was forming in my mind. For me, the computer, and certain technologies associated with it, contain a definite ‘wow’ factor. I love the feeling of seeing something new work. I am moved with wonder by human ingenuity and creativity.

There is nothing wrong with that. To stand in front of the Mona Lisa or the Brooklyn Bridge and not breathlessly utter a ‘wow’ is to not be responding properly. But do I reserve the ‘wow’ response solely for technology and the like? Do I have the same deep sense of wonder for the things of God?

Should not my reflection on the Gospel constantly stir my heart and mind to utter a breathless ‘wow’? It should.

Am I more thrilled with the accomplishments of Steve Jobs than those of Jesus Christ? Sometimes I think I do have things mixed up, and I need to repent.

No doubt, we are to experience wonder. We are programmed to respond with a ‘wow’ to amazing things. We are created to respond with wonder. I just want to make sure my sense of wonder rests upon the right and proper and worthy things.

David Pogue writes a technology column for the NY Times, and obviously has more fun in his job than people should be allowed to have. His blog is always informative.

This week in addition to posting his review of the iPhone, he has produced a short video on the experience of reviewing the iPhone. It is a riot. I’m not going to run out and buy one, but the video is worth watching Click HERE to go to the page, and then play the video on the right side of that page.

Below are some notes on some recent movies we’ve watched, some new, some old. We’ve not been to the actual theater all summer, though opportunity might be coming to do that soon. Nothing profound here, no deep theological/redemptive reflections. Just reactions.

Bridge to Terabithia

This movie was quite good, really. A kids’ movie that stuck to a story line, was not too heavy handed with its bullying theme, and did not depend on jokes about bodily emissions to carry it along. Since it was based upon an honest and realistic book, it carried with it some heavy themes. Toward the end, even my six-year-old said that he had tears coming to his eyes. I looked down (he was sitting between my wife and me) and he was wiping his eyes with his shirt. Critics seemed to love it. The girl who starred in it did a good job. She has the cuteness factor going for her, but she seems to have a bit more in place as well.

The Virgin Spring

I seem to have become fascinated with Ingmar Bergman, much to the chagrin of my wife. I just need to make sure I watch these on nights that I’ve NOT been up since 3:30 AM. This film is in Swedish, so I use the subtitles. Bergman is visually compelling. Images from the film remain with me. But I am more interested in theological struggle. One is made aware in this film that both the bad guys and the good guys are capable of evil. His main character cries out, for Bergman himself I imagine, “God, I don’t believe in you. I don’t understand you. I don’t understand why you let bad things happen. However, I still ask for your forgiveness.”

Sunset Boulevard

This film is ranked 31st on IMDB’s top 250 films (right between It’s a Wonderful Life and Fight Club. On the original AFI greatest movies of all time it is ranked 12th, right in front of The Bridge on the River Kwai. It has two lines quoted in the AFI greatest movie quotes list. So, it’s a biggie.

I just wish I could stay awake for a whole movie these days. This one was about a silent movie star who has lost her star appeal and is slowly going crazy. I admit the b & w camerawork was captivating, and the acting superb. But the movie did not really come out and grab me. However, when a work of art is this well received, I find the fault in my appreciation of it to be in me and not in the work. I need to see it again.

When Harry Met Sally

A romantic comedy that actually was funny, did not drag, was not overly offensive. In fact though sex is trivialized as is usual in Hollywood, in this movie it is seen as something that, apart from a deep commitment (which we would say only comes in marriage), cheapens a relationship. There is rich truth in that. So, I liked it. Interestingly, the screen writer, among her other credits, has two other romantic comedies: Sleepless in Seattle and You’ve Got Mail. This gal has her genre down. That, and she apparently likes writing lines for Meg Ryan.

Yes, I have eclectic tastes, and am drawn to old movies. In my queue are all three Die Hard movies. I don’t know why. What movie do you think I should see?

Back in March I made this simple commitment: “to add a post at least weekly between now and the end of May. At that point I will evaluate and make a decision about the future. Of course, some weeks there will be more.”

I’ve done that, mostly.

And I’ve had fun doing this, though at times, it has been a labor, as I knew it would be. There have been some distractions and added responsibilities which have made regularity and faithfulness a bit more difficult. But we have kept at it.

So, now what? Should I keep going? The end of May has come and gone. Is this worth the effort? Feel free to tell me what you think (but be kind).

This blog is for discipleship and conversation. How do I see that?

It is discipleship in that I believe my calling is to use whatever means I can to ‘put’ what I have learned ‘into’ others. Preaching is the primary aspect of that, of course, but if there are other channels that God can use, I am ready to take advantage of them.

And conversation? I enjoy seeing how others respond to ideas. I enjoy the interchange, and a blog allows for some of that. (And some of the interchange we have experienced here has been very helpful.)

So, should I keep going? I am encouraged to keep at this, at least until the end of 2007. But I would like to ask a favor of those who read this. If you think I am offering anything helpful at all, would you spread this around? This is not for my own glory, but for the glory of Christ and the strengthening of his church. If you believe this is worthwhile, let others know about this blog. Show them how to subscribe to the RSS feed. Encourage them to check in frequently.

In the meantime, I’ll try to be faithful, putting stuff up here two or three times/week as my schedule allows. I hope you find at least some of it helpful, or at least interesting.

Thanks!

I admit it. The pictures accompanying this blog are more often than not courtesy of a search on Google Images. I hope that is not offensive to anyone. However, contrary to what has been assumed by some, the bear in the post below is REAL. The cub was captured on real film on Matthew’s SLR. Good job, Matthew.

Here is an article that I have found interesting and stimulating. Perhaps those of you who like movies will find it so as well. It is called “Why Do Heathens Make the Best Christian Films“. Admittedly, the title overstates the case, but it is interesting nonetheless.

I post this on the day that Evan Almighty is released, but that is mere coincidence. That film puzzles me. I’m not sure I can find much redeeming in a film that turns a Biblical story of judgment out of which grace is displayed into a comedy.

I certainly don’t see much there that will pry $$ out of my wallet.

It seems to me that all it takes to be a radio news guy is an ability to read and a great sounding voice. Apparently most think that NPR’s news caster Carl Kasell has both those qualities. I do appreciate the fact that he is self deprecating and seems to be an all around great guy. But for the past couple of mornings, I could not listen to him read the news. It sounds as if he is drinking maple syrup while he speaks. Is this just me being a crotchety old man?

The “Mystery Book” of yesterday generated several responses to which I would like to reply.

First, yes, the author is Jonathan Edwards, but no, the book in question is not Charity and Its Fruits (though I would like to get the Yale edition of that work — Volume 8 — but I am not willing to come up with the $100 to do so, yet). The book is rather his treatise on Religious Affections. I was first made aware of this book and its importance nearly 20 years ago. I probably bought it ten years ago with all good intentions. It may take me another five years to read it, but I will.

One respondent said that after trying to read the book, he stopped, finding it “too long” and “a bit redundant after a few sections”. Yes, that can be the downside of reading Puritan or Puritan-like authors. I’m not deep enough in to pick up on either the length or redundancy. I will no doubt agree once I’m another 100 pages in. As you can imagine, Edwards is treading into a subject that is laced with minefields and ripe with possibilities for misunderstanding. He must hedge his argument with all kinds of qualifications in order to avoid being wrongly understood. That probably feeds his redundancy.

Should reading it cause us to feel awful about ourselves, as this respondent went on to confess? Like him, I don’t need any help doing THAT! I am predisposed to severe self-criticism. I come by it naturally. I understand. But I’m also aware that my heart is cold, my passion lukewarm. I fear abandoning my first love and losing the sense of the simple joy of God’s salvation. Edwards may not be the place to go to have the fires renewed. But I know that Edwards has fueled the fire of men whom I respect, and I’m anxious to mine for myself something of what they mined.

One response says that she (or he? the screen name is both unpronounceable and unknown to me) found the quote in an article by a man arguing in favor of contemporary worship music. Thanks for the reference, though I’m not sure what your take on the article is. I found it quite good. He is responding to an article by Chuck Colson, and he does so respectfully. (My response to Colson, mentally at least, when I read his article, was more like this: “crotchety old man”. Maybe I do need to read Charity and Its Fruits!) His reference to Edwards shows the relevance of Old Books. There really is nothing new under the sun, so it is good to bring the wisdom of some of the church’s greatest thinkers into contemporary controversy.

And finally, to the friend who quoted a scholar saying “Books are to be referenced, not read” I reply, “He is a scholar. I’m not.” That’s not completely true. Just yesterday I pulled several books off my shelves that I had not looked at for years to reference a particular subject. Many books in my library are there simply for that purpose: reference. Others, however, sit there as ripe fruit ready to be picked and enjoyed. The same is true for you as well.

This post is way too long already, but I must say one more thing. As we read, we must resist the temptation to allow contemporary debate to define our reading. I find some who read and study only what is “hot” and do not reserve time to read what might really nourish their soul. The latter should be primary.

Old books scare us. We assume that they must, because of their age, be hard to read and irrelevant to our modern situation. That may be true in some cases, but in others the fact that the old book is still around is because of its quality and its relevance.

I dove into an old book today, one I’ve been wanting to read for a long time (I bought it many years ago), and one which i know has been greatly influential upon people who have influenced me. It was written originally in the middle part of the 18th century by a man considered by many to be one of the most influential and gifted theologians ever. (That line alone will scare most of us away.) And yet I find his writing to be very accessible and engaging and highly relevant.

I’ve given enough info for some of you to guess the author. The following quote will give you further clues to his identify, the name of the book, and a hint to its contemporary relevance. I’ll be posting often, methinks, in response to this book.

“If it be so, that true religion lies much in the affections, hence we may infer, that such means are to be desired, as have much of a tendency to move the affections. Such books, and such a way of preaching the Word, and administration of ordinances, and such as way of worshiping God in prayer, and singing praises, is much to be desired, as has a tendency deeply to affect the hearts of those who attend these means.”

And the author and book would be?