Saturday, May 24, 2014

Luther (Idris Elba's character) and God's Justice

Good art is good art--whether it's secular or non-secular.  Good art accesses our emotions and opens our minds to understanding more about ourselves, God, our relationships with others, etc.

SPOILER ALERT.  In Luther, you wind up rooting for a woman that apparently killed both her parents--Alice.  You root for Alice, because she is a figure of justice.  When Luther is wrongly accused of murdering his ex-wife, Alice helps him set things right--they kill the perpetrator--someone who was supposedly Luther's most loyal friend on the force.  Season 2 ends with John having liberated a young woman from the clutches of a grand dame gangster, but is she free--is she truly free?  John approaches the gangster and tells her that he has called a friend and that, if she ever touches a hair on Jenny's head, John's friend will "come for her with the wrath of God and everything she has ever loved." It is a moment of catharsis--Jenny (and John) will now be free.  Jenny: "You didn't really do that did you--call up some totally psycho killer girl."  John:  "Her name is Alice. What do you think?"  Jenny: "I think you're totally epic."

Sometimes, I want God's justice to be like Alice's.  I want a "totally psycho killer girl friend" who I can use to threaten others--to dispense justice (my view of justice).  Of course, God is not a "totally psycho killler" like Alice--or is He?  He certainly sounds like one in many instances in the OT.  Perhaps God is perfect and, therefore, perfectly righteous in his murders.  Perhaps it's not even murder since it's God doing it.  We want the bad guys to get theirs--and we are told that they will get it in the end.  Sometimes, we're told, they will even get it (receive their just reward) before Judgment Day.

Is this the way of God's justice?  Is He simply a perfect Alice?  Or, based upon the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, might God's justice be different--wholly different from man's view of justice.

What if God's perfect justice is forgiveness?  I dare to say that it is--for at least a couple of reasons: 1)what the Devil (or we sinners) want least of all (or maybe most of all--down deep where we don't even recognize it) is to be forgiven:  and 2)justice is an endless game if it is based upon vengeance and retribution--there is no finality.

First, consider the vagaries of generational sin.  I've seen it played out in mine and countless others families.  One of the most poignant displays was the suicide of a good friend--both of whose parents had died by suicide.  How is the Devil defeated in this scenario?  It's not by punishing the Devil with 100 lashes or hanging (like the sadistic Muslims in Sudan), it's by having the next generation not commit suicide.  It's by having Ellis' children understand that using anger is not the way to manage people.  It's by having Debbie's children raising their children under a non-critical spirit.  In other words, true justice is giving the Devil the reverse of what he wants.

Second, giving the Devil the reverse of what he wants puts an end to the endless game of harm and retribution.  I also came to this realization watching Luther.  In Season 2, two brothers are playing a game by murdering folks.  There is no end to the game.  Luther outsmarts both of them, and he stops them.  Would Jesus outsmart them by playing the game better than them?  No, Jesus refused to play the game.  Jesus did not enter into a cycle of sin and retribution (which is exactly what these men wanted--which is exactly what the Devil wants).  Instead, Jesus put an end to the cycle by letting the Devil and we sinners kill Him.  We killed the perfect one, but He didn't stay dead.  In His death and resurrection, Jesus pronounced an end to the cycle of sin.  When someone harms me, and I seek retribution, the game just goes on.  When someone harms me, and I forgive, the cycle is broken.  You can't play if the other guy won't.

Of course, we all know instances where we have to set boundaries with others.  I'm not saying that wives shouldn't get restraining orders from husbands who are seeking to do them harm--she should.  I am saying that, while the wife should be truthful with the children, she shouldn't villainize the other spouse to the children.  The other's actions speak for themselves.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't put dangerous people behind bars.  What I am saying is that, when we do, the prisons shouldn't be overcrowded and run by gangs.  The prisoners should be treated humanely.  What might keep them from going back is feeling remorse.  What won't keep them from going back is thinking that prison is too Hellish.  Next time, when they go back, they will just go back tougher.

So, I'm suggesting that one way to reconcile Jesus' life and teachings with the idea of God's justice is to consider that God's justice is carried out through forgiveness.  Indeed, perhaps those were some of the last words that Jesus left us with:  "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."  You will have to answer the question for yourself--was Jesus just forgiving the actual persons who hung Him on the Cross or was He forgiving all of mankind for our actions (past, present, and future) in placing Him on the Cross?  If it's the latter, it seems to be the last word on God's perfect justice.

Sunday, May 18, 2014

"Can You See the Real Me?" Being known at church (or elsewhere).

Just this week, a former children's minister within Sovereign Grace Ministries was sentenced to prison for years and years of child abuse--abuse which persons within the church ignored and covered up.  Why?

Friday, I met a man at the ATM whose girl friend just left him after they began attending a fundamentalist church--one of my former churches.  He was heartbroken.  Why?

Because you can't really be known at most churches!

At most churches, parishioners place their pastors on pedestals--which St Paul rebuked the Corinthians for doing.  They (we, me) want someone that we can latch onto that seems to have it together.  It's like we're confused Prostestants--we actually want a mediator with Jesus.  We want a mediator, because we are taught to hide our real selves from one another at church and, therefore, we learn to hide our real selves from God.  So, we want a pastor who can present himself holy and unblemished before Jesus on our behalf.  That's why churches cover up child abuse.  Of course, the congregants tell themselves that they don't want to bring dishonor upon Christ or the church.  But that's not it, they don't want to bring dishonor upon themselves!


In Quadrophenia, Pete Townsend begins with the song about being known--"Can you see the real me?"  As the album rocks along, Townsend writes about the conflict inherent within all of us:  "Schizophrenic, I'm bleeding quadrophenic."  But, when we go to church, we generally show one side of ourselves--the bright, shiny face of someone who has it together and whose family has it together.  If the pastor has to be unblemished, then so do the congregants.  We wear masks--we're not known--no one sees the "real us."


Remarkably, they don't do this at some churches.  Recently, I heard a sermon from Tullian Tchividjian in which he said that he was disgusted with himself.  He didn't want to go to his daughter's dance recital  (as guys, we've all been there).  He then became convicted that all he thinks about is himself.  He was disgusted that he wakes up thinking about himself and goes to sleep thinking about himself.  This is the type of self-revelation, of honest preaching, that can actually change people.  This is the type of church that won't cover up child abuse.  This is the type of church where congregants can be known.

When we are known, all kinds of crazy things happen--people forgive one another, wives stay with their husbands, husbands stay with their wives, children love their parents, parents love their children--long-dead relationships are made new!  We actually begin to enjoy our estranged siblings or parents.  Our children become friends with our friends.  And when this happens, as Pete concluded Quadrophenia:  "Love, reign[s] over me."

Saturday, May 17, 2014

Bad Bible Blunders, Spufford & DFW--Where do we find hope?

David Foster Wallace ("DFW") wrote that irony was killing American art.  Irony, which was designed to reveal the tyranny of conventionalism and sentimentalism, instead has become tyrannical.  If an artist portrays hope, redemption, or faith in his or her work, he or she is deemed a sentimentalist or, worse yet, a non-realist--someone who sticks their head in the sand.  This has led to a loss of faith, increased cynicism, and a marked increase in suicide in America.

Does the church have an answer?  Most don't.  Many, if not most, American churches propagate Bad Bible Blunders.  (I love this term--it comes from Aaron Zimmerman.  However, the ideas expressed in this post are not Aaron's.  So, don't blame him.  Instead, go to the St Albans Waco website and listen to his wonderful sermon by this name.)  In American churches, we usually see one of two theological paths--vapid sentimentalism or legalism/moralism.  Neither of these paths embraces the reality of Christianity.

Christianity is not sentimental--it is realistic.  Its leader met people directly in the midst of their sorrows and sins.  He didn't shy away from leprosy, blindness, or even death.  He ate and mingled with sinners.  In Jesus' day, if you ate with a sinner, you were accused of condoning their sin.  Jesus ate and/or mingled with criminals, tax collectors, adulteresses, the poor, the half-breeds, the no-breeds, and all manner of social outcasts.  Jesus confronted the "church" leaders of his day--revealing their hypocrisy--their abject failure to love the sinners, the outcasts, the poor.  This got Him killed.  Christianity is anything but sentimental.

The other path reflecting Bad Bible Blunders is moralism/legalism.  In Unapologetic, Frances Spufford clearly distinguishes Christianity from its two related religions--Judaism and Islam.  In Spufford's words, Judaism and Islam are like "wearable coats"--if you devote time and energy to keeping their tenets, you can be a reasonably good person.  This is the hallmark of moralism--you can be a "good" person.  In contrast, Christianity "makes frankly impossible demands.  Instead of asking for specific actions, it offers general but lunatic principles.  It thinks you should give your possessions away, refuse to defend yourself, love strangers as much as your family, behave as if there is no tomorrow."  But there's a further distinction--"You could pauperise yourself, get slapped silly without fighting back, care for lepers all day, laugh in the face of futures markets, and it still wouldn't count, if  you did it for the wrong reasons."  Wow, how often do preachers and we believers "water down" the Christian message so that it is a "wearable coat" instead of "lunatic principles."

If the church is to respond to the cynicism and loss of faith in America, if the church is to be a source of hope, it must confront the reality of living in a fallen world and respond with the hope found in an impossible, lunatic love ethic--that of Jesus Christ.  No more sentimentalism.  No more moralism.  Just the pure love of Jesus for all of us who hurt, worry, are sick, dying, lost, and down-heartened.  DFW committed suicide.  Let's pray that the American church corrects its Bad Bible Blunders.  Only that correction will provide the answer to DFW's prophetic writing.

Sunday, May 4, 2014

A Fresh Look at the Gospel--Grand Budapest Hotel

SPOILER ALERT--THE REASON FOR MUSTAFA'S OWNERSHIP OF THE HOTEL IS REVEALED.

About two years ago, I was reading the parables of the Kingdom in my Scofield Bible, and I had a breakthrough.  My current pastor has preached that, if we think we have Jesus figured out, then we are worshipping the wrong Jesus/God.  Thankfully, he's right.  The depths of the Gospel can never be completely plumbed.  I will get to the Scriptures in a moment, but first Wes Anderson's take on one of these parables.

At the beginning of the movie, the pre-war luxury and extravagance of the Hotel is revealed to have been dissipated.  Now, the Hotel is but a shell of its former self.  The once fine furnishings are now shabby.  The once fanatical level of service has been replaced by lackluster service.  The once full Hotel is now relegated to having just a few guests.  One of these guests is the current owner of the Hotel--an elderly gentleman named Mustafa.  Interestingly, Mustafa stays in one tiny room--no larger than a servant's quarters--we later learn it was the servant's quarters that he occupied when he was Lobby Boy.

At the end of the movie, Mustafa is questioned why he still owns the Hotel.  Mustafa had inherited a vast empire--two magnificent estates (castles, really) and endless factories.  Now, he owns only this run-down hotel.  Mustafa (paraphrasing): "Once the new government took over, I struck a deal to relinquish my castles and factories in exchange for keeping the Hotel."  Query to Mustafa:  "Did you do that because of your fondness for Monsieur Gustav."  Mustafa:  "No, I did it because of Agatha."  At this point, I got choked up and began digging my nails into my palms so I wouldn't sob in the middle of the theater.

Later, Debbie asked why that part of the movie made me so emotional.  Here's why.

Agatha and Mustafa married at a very young age.  She was the one love of his life.  He sold everything (his vast empire) to hold onto his least valuable asset--but it was a treasure to Mustafa because of its connection to Agatha.  Agatha was Mustafa's "treasure in the field."

Which brings us to Scofield's explanation of the "treasure in the field" parable.  The parable is used to explain the characteristics of the kingdom.  How better to understand the kingdom than to understand the character of the king.

I've always been taught that the "treasure in the field" is the Kingdom--that once we find Jesus, we view Jesus/Kingdom as a treasure and sell everything to buy the field so that we can have the treasure located there.  Is this good news--that we have to sell everything?

Scofield says that we are the treasure.  That's right--the treasure is us.  God views us as a treasure.  God sells everything (His Son) to buy the field in which we are buried.  Jesus gives His life for us,   because we are like a treasure to Him.  If you look at the other "seeking the lost" parables, God is the actor and we are the "lost" item.  So, it seems clear that we are the treasure--that the creator of the Universe--of trillions of galaxies containing trillions of solar systems--views each of us individually as treasures.

In viewing each of us as treasures, God does so with full knowledge of our brokenness, our selfishness, our pride, and our pious religiosity or irreligiosity.  God sees into the darkest corners of our hearts.  Jesus attached the idea of sin to thoughts (going radically beyond the concept of sin held by the Pharisees), so our thoughts should condemn us time and again before God.  But rather than judging us, God forgives our sins and views us as treasures.  This view of the Gospel seems too radical to be true.  Yet, if Mustafa could love Agatha that much, then maybe, just maybe, God can love us that much.  This is truly good news.