7 Billion

It's been a week since we the world passed the 7 billion mark, but I thought this graphic was informative and well-done.

In Syria, A Modern Day Story of the Good Samaritan

Like many others, I've been keeping track of the Arab Spring as it has spread from Tunisia to Egypt and beyond.  Now that the rebels have seemingly taken control of Libya from Gaddafi, the situation in Syria becomes all the more pressing.  I came across this story on CNN of a famous Syrian cartoonist abducted by thugs, beaten to a pulp (with a focus on his hands to prevent him from ever drawing again) and then thrown in the ditch of a Syrian city.  Some fellow countrymen found him and brought him to the hospital.

While this horrific story has been repeated all too often in far too many countries, it made me realize what a poignant and interesting twist it is to the Good Samaritan story.  What if the robbers who leave the man for dead weren't just thugs looking for an easy steal... but were in fact agents of an oppressive state?  In occupied ancient (or modern, for that matter) Palestine, it's not too far-fetched.

Often people must come together to do what is right when the will of the people has been hijacked by a secretive state.  Sedition has many forms.  So does freedom.  Let freedom ring, not just in Syria but wherever the oppressed are beaten to a pulp for exercising their right to freedom of speech.

the least, the lost, and the left behind

I've always been a big fan of alliteration, probably even before I knew what the word meant.  So whenever I read a particularly good one, I like to share it.  I was on the website of The Fellowship of Presbyterians (trying to find out more of the gathering they've had these past few days) when I came across this description in their mission statement: "the least, the lost, and the left behind."  What a beautiful alliteration of "the poor, the widow and the orphan" we find in the Bible... even if it has some conservative theological allusions (ooo! another big 'a' word).  Perhaps if there's a Message Take 2 it can use this phrase...

Human Destiny & Dignity

My seminary library has old books they give away and every once and awhile I pick one up.  Much less often do I get around to reading them.  But today I was reading this old book (published 1947) called "Human Destiny," and had some thoughts to share...

Lecomte du Nouy wrote a book in 1947 called "Human Destiny."  I probably never would have heard of it except it appeared on a used book shelf marked "free" and I'm a sucker for books that (a) have a title with "destiny" and (b) have this quote on the front jacket: "a book of such fundamental grasp and insight as cannot be expected to appear more than once or twice in a century."  I wouldn't go so far, but here's my quick summary and thoughts.

Du Nouy's thesis: Humans have biologically evolved up until this point (so, through World War II), and now it is our moral imperative/challenge to evolve psychologically/mentally.  Just like evolutionary biology, this psycho-evolution should be done together and not just individually.  He claims (like many others at his time) that humans are the finish line for biology, the end of evolution.  But we're not the end of the story.  We were made for something greater, and now is our chance to participate in evolving into something greater.  It is, as the title indicates, our "human destiny."

He puts a great deal of emphasis on our free will and choice between good and evil.  We must be free to improve ourselves, "since [our] contribution to evolution will depend on the use [we] make of [our] liberty" (226).  The choice between religion and science is a false choice (239-40).  We must strive to integrate the two fields so that we do not make such terrible choices such as the Inquisition on the religious side and the Holocaust on the (arguably) scientific side.

He urges Christians specifically to live out the Christian ideal, and muses that scripture and sermons "have lost their power of conviction and that, consequently, other paths of access tot he heart, the intelligence, and the conscience of [humans] must be found " (241).  He says that whatever is noble and true must be of God and as truth cannot contradict God, who is Truth.  "Therefore, any [hu]man who is afraid of science does not possess a strong faith. (This is an answer to the religious extremists.)" (243).  The pursuit of truth should be expansive and unlimited, yet he also states our goal "should be the attainment of human dignity with all its implications" (244).
I would say Du Nouy is thus a humanist who is very hopeful about the future: "He [any person] must overcome his dislikes and fix his vision on the beauty that drains from within; for that beauty is perhaps an illusion today, but it is the truth of tomorrow" (244).  That's a pretty bold statement written on the heels of WWII.  Also: "Let him combat and persuade himself before trying to persuade or combat others.  Let him, by all the means of his disposal, concentrate his will on the construction of an unshakeable faith even though it be only a faith in the dignity and destiny of man" (245).  And finally: "there is not other way toward human solidarity but the search and respect for individual dignity" (245).

I agree that our human dignity is tied up with our human destiny.  Amnesty International's Director, William Schultz, edited a book recently called "The Future of Human Rights."  I believe that we do not do enough to treat our fellow brothers and sisters in the human family with the respect and dignity that they deserve, not as the epitome of evolutionary success, but simply being created in the Image of God.  May the Spirit of God direct our hearts, minds and bodies to honoring the larger body of humanity.

Who Hears Our Prayers?

I've been thinking a lot about prayer lately.  Recently, my wife and I have been praying for a family friend who went into a coma due to carbon monoxide poisoning.  After two weeks in a coma and all the doctors having given up, he awoke (!).  He continues his long road to recovery (full recovery is still far from certain), so prayer continues as the doctors rejoin the effort.

It makes me think: Was our praying effectual?  How so?  Did God hear our prayer?  I came across this quote by Kierkegaard today:

 "the true relation in prayer is not when God hears what is prayed for, but when the person praying continues to pray until he is the one who hears, who hears what God wills."  (Journals, 154).

Donald Bloesch tells us that the "give me" prayer should always be subordinated to the "make me" prayer, as prayer isn't always "driven by need" but rather "kindled by grace" (The Struggle of Prayer, 75-76).  Anne Lamott says there are really only two kinds of prayers: "Please, please, please" and "thank you, thank you, thank you."

I agree with all of them and would summarize that prayer has to do with molding our hearts to the very will and heart of God.  For the ancients in the Mediterranean, the heart was the "seat of intention."  May we dwell at the seat of God's intention in prayer, whatever form it takes.

What are your thoughts on prayer?  What do you pray for?  What does prayer mean for you in your life?

May we all hear the prayers of our heart and the hearts of others, and in so doing hear the very heartbeat of God in this raucous world.

From an Army of One to an Audience of One

Something you may not know about me: I dabble in punk rock (A few of my favs, in case you're curious: Punchline, ).

Like any good SciFi (another genre I love but am no expert in - love the Ender's Game series), punk songs are at their best when they provide acute, poignant social commentary.  Such is the case with Rise Against's "Audience of One."  While the lyrics might seem a little obscure or vague, the music video is quite striking:


I'm not sure if this was the band's intention, but the song's title reminds me of the military's slogan, "Army of One," a while back.  The video shows how we've lost our way, or rather runaway, either to war or our 9-5 jobs, and we've lost all connections to those we love.  The closing bridge:

We're all ok, until the day we're not
The surface shines, while the inside rots
We raced the sunset and we almost won
We slammed the brakes, but the wheels went on

The end result?  We're left alone in an "audience of one."  May we remember how we got here - by running away from tough decisions and passing the buck to future generations... or so we thought, when really we were passing it off for 5, 10 years down the road.  May we find our way again, together, before it's too late.

streams in the air: a poem

streams in the air
undulating
falling sideways
in rhythmic pattern
rivers of thought
going where
wandering

lost
with purpose
alone
in togetherness
close overlapping
distant journeying
here yet
already there

a lone figure
walking in the night
a beautiful landscape
encroached by cars
ripples in the water
streams in the air
where have I come
where do I go
where am I now

How to Save a Life

I've always liked the Fray's How to Save a Life.  [Note: I try not to link to music videos and just the music/lyrics, as the images burn in my head and I no longer use my own imagination about what the song might be about.]  The song is apparently about trying to help someone who is addicted to drugs.

In this Christmas season, I'm wondering and praying over what does it mean for Jesus to be born.  Gabriel tells Mary she will give birth to a son and to call him Jesus according to Luke (1:31), and Matthew says his name will be Jesus for he will save the people from their sins (1:20).  Jesus is related to Joshua, or the one who saves.  Yes, I agree Jesus us saves us from sin, but I find that answer sometimes too trite, having lost its meaning over time in Christian jargon.

I had a breakthrough interpretation the other day, in part from watching Heroes: Season 4: When a life is saved, the course of history is changed.  Now, that's kind of obvious when you think of individual's history.  Then there's that age-old question of, If you could travel back in time and kill Adolf Hitler before he rose to power, would you do it?  That would certainly alter history.

But when we use other Christian phrase, 'born again,' it better captures the significance of what it means to save a life.  "I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live [...] but Christ lives within me."  (Gal 2:20).  Now I live in the light of Christ who saved me from myself... from the world... from death... from ____.

What have you been saved from?  Who or what has saved your life?  There's a story to share.  Share it with someone who cares just as deeply as it affects you.

The Theology of Tron

Some might call this post's title an oxymoron.  I mean, sure, there was some religious symbolism in Tron, like most sci-fi, but does it really amount to a full-blown theology?  Read further after the preview below to explore how deep this rabbit hole goes.

[Note: This trailer gives you a better feel for the slower pace of this film.  Trailer #3 is more exciting and more plot-revealing.]



First, a disclaimer: I've only seen half of the original Tron, but did get an in-depth summary of the movie on Wikipedia.  As bad as the original was, it didn't stop me from being there with a few pals (there was one gal, just FYI) to see the midnight showing Thursday night of Tron:Legacy.  I can't say I'm an avid fan, but I do like exploring theological themes in movies.  (My favorite films in this regard are the Matrix films and Last of the Mohicans; also, FYI).  As such, I focus entirely on Tron:Legacy in my commentary.

For those of you wondering if you should ever see the new Tron movie (I'll be honest, the original might be worth seeing once and only once), let me say this: the special effects are cool but certainly not mind-blowing, the action sweet but not stellar, the storyline is generally slow with sparks of action, and the music keeps pace (Daft Punk did an excellent, but not saving, job).  All in all I would give it a good but not great rating for a Sci-Fi film, and overall a barely above-average film (if you're patient and pay attention to the dialogue).  If I hadn't waited hours to see this at midnight, I probably wouldn't be so favorable.  Many a friend have called it "lame," and I can't really argue with them.  My one-word review: enjoyable. Whether you plan to see it or not, I will try to keep out all spoilers until after the "Spoiler Alert" notice.

The movie opens with a typical Father-Son archetype.  The Father (Flynn) is a Creator of an entire virtual world, and it's pretty clear that the Son (Sam) will follow his father there.  Surprisingly, the Son isn't herald as a messiah for a world that's clearly enslaved.  It appears he's there to rescue his father, which is an interesting theological twist.  As such, the world of Tron sees the Son as a way to the father in order to usurp the Father/Creator's power for their own.  Again, another interesting theological twist on the traditional Christian take.  In both theological schema, the son is used to gain access to the Father, yet for completely different reasons.

Now some will say that the Father/Creator isn't really God-like because he appears in human form within the (cyber)world he created.  Yet he did author the world by writing the code that produced it, before entering in as a character.  So there is a little Father/Incarnate Person motif within the character of Flynn himself, who, by the way, describes his creation as "more beautiful than I ever dreamed, more dangerous then I could ever imagine."

Of course, the main observation people will notice is visually with the stylized neon colors: orange/red equals bad guys, and white/blue equals good guys, with a whole lot of black.  That's a little simplistic when you consider that a lot of the city in Tron is white/blue even though it's ruled by bad guys.  With all the darkness, one wonders where is the light?  Where is the sun?  Apparently there's no program for that, as the first question a cyber-character asks about the 'outside' aka real world is, What's the sun like?  Do all of these people live in Plato's cave?  Are they all children clamoring in darkness?

There's also an interesting story of creation between the Father figure (Flynn) and a partner he created called Clue (a mirror-image of Flynn who doesn't appear to age).  As a partner in creation, is Clue an Adam-figure?  I would say No, because Clue is given powers almost if not completely equal to the Creator.  As such, I would say Clue is more like a Satan figure.  A plug for the movie, sums up the basic plot line: Creator creates a world with limitless possibility.  What happened?  "My creation turned against me."  Indeed, at one point Clue/Satan yells to the heavens, "Kevin Flynn  [aka Creator/God]!  Where are you now?"  Can you hear the echoes of Nietzche's "God is Dead" claim?

The Son, Sam, is different, too.  We're not the only ones to realize this: the Tron women who dress him for battle note that, "This one is different."  He asks, "What am I suppose to do?"  and the simple reply he gets is "Survive."  This advice is important insofar as it keeps him alive until he finds a truer purpose.  Indeed, Sam is a "user," not a program, and the innovation is both exciting and frightening for the plebian crowds.  (The Grid scenes of disc fighting and lightcycle racing are very reminiscent of gladiator sport.)

One interesting juxtaposition is the cyberspace world created within the computer system and the 'world out there' aka real world.  Listen to the voice over for this TV Spot - can't you see churches saying "in there is our future, in there is our destiny," speaking of within these church worlds or perhaps "in Jesus Christ"?



Later in the movie, from within cyberspace they talk about conquering/converting the world "out there," purifying it to perfection.  Doesn't it resemble some churches and their missional theology?  I think we're better off seeing the two worlds "in there" or "out there" as interconnected.

Also with regard to the two worlds: Creator/Flynn says "I kept dreaming of a world I thought I'd never see."  How often do Christians dream of the heaven or the Kingdom of God, a world we think we'll never see, except maybe after death or with the second coming?

***SPOILER ALERT***

The end of the movie has the Son (Sam) escape with the last "Iso," Quorra, a creature born out complete within the Grid/Inner Cyberspace without any User/Programmer behind her code.  She is now out in the real world, and it appears she will become a prophet for the age to come.  Sounds like a pseudo-Jesus figure, no?

Returning to the Creator/Satan, Flynn/Clue dichotomy, I found it really cool that in the end Flynn the Father saves Sam the Son from Clue the Anti-Christ by absorbing him into himself.  Many Christians will often talk about Jesus taking on the sin of the world.  What about God taking on the sin of the world?  That's really what we're saying, after all, if we are to also claim Jesus as the Son of God, or rather, God Incarnate.  Flynn the Father uses his power to produce/send out his creation, and then he uses his power to absorb it all back into himself, thus destroying it.  But not without planting a seed in the new world, a "shoot of Jesse" if you will, in Quorra, an original digital creation now living as a sentient being in the 'real world.'

So what do you think?  There's plenty of other themes I didn't touch upon yet, including identity disks, the light beam connecting the 'heavens and the earth' almost a la Sauron in LotR, the outpost away in the mountains from the city, Flynn's Zen practice [best line of movie: "Sam, you're really messing with my Zen thing."], and what about Tron himself?  What do all these things represent/symbolize?

Dead Already

The opening theme to the movie American Beauty is called "Dead Already" by Thomas Newman.  For the record, I really like his stuff.  I had a recent revelation that I'd like to share you (cyberspace).

Now, it's no secret that Kevin Spacey's character is dead when the movie starts, and we find out the how/why/when/who/etc. as the movie progresses.  Yet here is my perhaps-not-so-groundbreaking-theory: the very-much alive Stacey we see throughout the movie is, actually, already dead: dead to ambition, to his true life's purpose, to living life the the full.  Can we say the same about ourselves or someone we know?  What would it take to 'wake them up inside' that they might no longer move dream-like through their 'waking life'?

As with much of American Beauty, there is dual-imagery and multiple interpretations for its myriad of themes.  It deserved the AA Best Picture award, and it deserves more in-depth commentary here.  But that's all I have time for right now after writing my Tron piece.  I'm hoping that writing a post about a movie made 10 years ago is honor enough in itself.

Done!

I finished my last seminary class today.  Wahoo!  We had a very interesting discussion about how to resist the overarching corporate-consumer narrative of our culture.  As with much of my seminary career, there were few answers but a lot of good questions.

I don't officially graduate until May 2011, but with no more classes perhaps now I will write more regularly on this blog... here's to a new year and a new future.

Enlightenment v. Romanticism as seen in JRR Tolkien

I was readying a somewhat interesting but very lengthy review of the Lord of the Rings, particularly the Two Towers, when I came across this section (see below; view webpage here).  I think the author, David Brin, makes a good point: that in opposition to Feudalism/Monarchy rose Capitalism/Democracy with the Enlightenment leading the way.  Yet the sterile nature of industry, equal access, free markets, etc., led to a counter-rebellion, or the Romantic movement.  One may see these two sides continue to battle it out in our secular, postmodern culture, between those who see wonder in "harder" science and those who find wonder in "softer" myth. 

[...]almost from its birth, the Enlightenment Movement was confronted by an ironic counterrevolution, rejecting the very notion of progress. The Romantic Movement erupted as a rebellion against the rebellion.
In fairness, it didn't start out that way. The first Romantics stood with their Enlightenment predecessors against feudalism and clericalism and welcomed the French Revolution as a step toward a kind of utopian universal brotherhood. Even today, men like Thomas Jefferson stand as icons of both Enlightenment and Romanticism.
But this changed when the industrial revolution hit full stride. Suddenly, where once gentry and clergy ruled, there were arrogant new powers striding about. An entrepreneurial bourgeoisie. A new intellectual elite of science. And a clanking, noisome ruction of impudent machinery.
Even democracy began to seem less classically pure when it was taken off a pedestal to be practiced for real by farmers, shopkeepers and a rising middle class, all of them arguing, wheedling and conniving amid an incredible din.
Temblors began splitting a chasm between Romantics and Enlightenment pragmatists. The alliance that had been so formidable against feudalism began turning against itself. Trenches soon aligned along the most obvious fault line, down the middle -- between future and past.
In this conflict, J.R.R. Tolkien stood firmly for the past.
Calling the scientific worldview "soul-less," he joined Keats and Shelley, Sir Walter Scott, Henry James and many European-trained philosophers in spurning the modern emphasis on pragmatic experimentation, production, universal literacy, progress, cooperative enterprise, democracy, city life and flattened social orders.
In contrast to these "sterile" pursuits, Romantics extolled the traditional, the personal, the particular, the subjective, the rural, the hierarchical and the metaphorical.

 The article/review is entitled J.R.R. Tolkien - Enemy of Progress, and goes at length to detail the ways in which Tolkien was a Romantic and used many literary cliches to entrench traditional story-telling, both in his day and now today with Peter Jackson's trilogy.  I still very much enjoy the movies, but am also seeing them in a more understanding and critical light.  

Fear and Trembling and Stupefying

I just 'pinched-hit' today for someone by teaching on Philippians 2:12-18. In 2:12 Paul mentions the phrase "fear and trembling" when talking about working out salvation. This phrase was made famous by Soren Kierkegaard, and after teaching through it this morning, I'm still 'working it out' myself.

The fullness of what it means that God is working out our salvation within us, both the willing and the doing, is only now hitting home.  The jury's still out in my court over predestination, but I have to say that mainly there is a lack of evidence we're just not seeing.  Today I have been blessed to see how God has been at work in my life over the past few months.  In the spirit of the movie "Memento" and Kierkegaard's own "Life must be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards," here I go.

I taught today because Mark was preaching.
Mark was preaching because Debbie was sick.
Mark agreed to preach because he already studied the text earlier that week.
Mark studied the test earlier that week because he was filling in for me leading that bible study.
I was able to brief him for the study on the lesson's text because I led a study earlier on the same text.
The only reason I was leading a study on THAT text was because I "happened" to be on fall break from my seminary class that usually prevents me from even attending the study.
I was only taking that seminary class because all other options didn't work out.

From the very beginning, even before what I've written above, God was 'working it out' that Mark would be able to preach within 24 hours of being called upon.  That's stupefying. 

Is it possible that God has orchestrated your life so that you are where you are right here, right now?  Is there some greater purpose God is preparing for you, right here, right now?

Using another Kierkegaard phrase, "the strength of the absurd" rests in believing that God is at work beyond our seeing, beyond understanding, beyond even our comprehension.  Reason and knowledge alone won't get us there.  It takes faith in some form - sometimes a leap, sometimes an itsy-bitsy step - but always willing to believe beyond what we see.

Goma

This summer I'll be heading to the DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo) to the town of Goma on the North side of Lake Kivu, next to the border with Rwanda. I just set up our Goma blog where we're fundraising and will be posting photos of our trip and information about the region:

www.gomateam2010.blogspot.com

The Origins of Bevo

Some people who know me (and many more only know me) know about my screenname Bevo82 or BevoBevans. Now I will reveal to you why I have these names. (Gasp!) I know, I know - I should really be trademarking these names or selling the rights, but I'm a nice guy and believe in an open, free society. :)

The "82" is simple: I was born in 1982.

The "Bevans" comes from when my mother called me "Evans-Bevans" as a kid. Ok, ok - she still does sometimes.

And now for the Bevo - the short answer is it's the name of the Texas Longhorns Mascot (I was born and raised in Austin, TX, and my Dad went and taught law there at UT... it was years later when my sister Lea went to Tampa that I woefully admitted the original "UT" was the University of Tampa, not Texas or Tennessee - which has the uglier orange, and many of my friends who are TN Vol fans would agree - and if you go to ut.edu you will notice it's Tampa, not Austin, which is utexas.edu. OK - random asides are OVER!)

But for the long answer for how on earth Bevo was named, I refer to the ever-prescient Wikipedia Article on Bevo, and this passage in particular:

[begin quote]

Origin of the name Bevo

"Bo" made his first public appearance at the halftime of the 1916 Thanksgiving Day football game between Texas and archrival the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas (later Texas A&M University), a game in which Texas defeated the Aggies 22 - 7.[8] Following the game, Ben Dyer, editor of the UT campus magazine The Alcalde, referred to the mascot as BEVO.[9] It is not known why he chose this name, though various theories have been put forth, including that Texas A&M had a hand in naming the mascot.[9]

The best-known tale has been called into question.[9][10] The legend claims that the name came about due to an incident of vandalism led by students of the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas.[11][12][9] It is true that in 1917, four Texas A&M Aggies kidnapped the longhorn and branded him with "13 - 0", the score of A&M's 1915 win over Texas.[9][12][10] Texas students are rumored to have retaliated by changing the steer's brand to Bevo, as is sometimes claimed.[9][10] However, there is actually evidence that Bevo was fattened up and served at a football banquet in 1920, due to the fact the university did not have the money to take care of him and he was not tamed to roam the campus.[9][10] The Aggies were fed the side they had branded and presented with the hide, which still read 13–0.[9][10] Since Ben Dyer had used the term one year previously, this would mean that the A&M prank could not have led to the name.[9] Another story states that it is possible the editor had Bevo in mind, which was a near beer.[9]

Another potential source of the BEVO name was the one reported in The Daily Texan, the student newspaper of UT: "Through the 1900s and 1910s, newspapers ran a series of comic strips drawn by Gus Mager. The strips usually featured monkeys as the main characters, all named for their personality traits. Braggo the Monk constantly made empty boasts, Sherlocko the Monk was a bumbling detective, and so on. The comic strips were popular enough to create a nationwide fad for persons to nickname their friends the same way, with an 'o' added to the end. The Marx Brothers were so named by their colleagues in Vaudeville: Groucho was moody, Harpo played the harp, and Chico raised chicks when he was a boy. Mager's strips ran every Sunday in newspapers throughout Texas, including Austin. In addition, the term 'beeve' is the plural of beef, but is more commonly used as a slang term for a cow (or steer) that's destined to become food. The term is still used, though it was more common among the general public in the 1910s when Texas was more rural. The jump from 'beeve' to 'Bevo' isn't far, and makes more sense given the slang and national fads of the time."[9]

[end quote]

Both stories are quite good, and I'm most impressed by the inventiveness of the first and the sociohistorical research of the second.

I hope you enjoyed this as much as I did :)

When Pesky Turns Productive

In another "Genius!" moment (see post below on cardboard oven for the other one), I came across this article about CAPTCHAs. You know, those images where you type in the corresponding letters to show that you're a real human being and not some spybot infiltrating a site.

CAPTCHA is short for “Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart.” It was developed by a Guatemalan professor who thought he'd put it to greater use than just identity-verification. He has started a project that now spans from Facebook to Craigslist and other sites where the image is a snippet from a scanned-in book where the computer can't decipher the text... but the human eye can.

Find out much more by clicking here.

So whenever you think you're being pestered into deciphering some random letters, when they form words there's a good chance you're giving 10 seconds of your brain power to the global effort to turn out-of-copywrited texts into digitally-searchable material for the Internet. Alas, it doesn't seem blogger (my host for this blog) employs reCAPTCHA, but I'm urging them to do so if they aren't already! Anyone, let me know if they already are!

So how does it feel to be a part of an Eternal Digital Project? ;)

UPDATE: In a NY Times article, reCAPTCHA is reportedly being used by Twitter, Facebook, Craigslist, the NY Times and Ticketmaster, and is deciphering about 25 million words each day!!!

Cardboard Oven: A Beautiful, 'Impossible' Reality

[This week I preached a sermon on Matt 11:28-30, where Jesus beckons all who are weary to come and find rest in him, and to bear his yoke, for it is easy and light (find my sermon notes here). I have some more thoughts about yoking and bearing burdens...]

There is a picture given to us by one of Emily's friend in Central America, of a woman throwing her head back in pure laughing joy. In the background is a mound of trashing filling the frame. It's a beautiful picture, seeing the joy amidst so much trash. And yet, it's hard to catch her contagious laughter without filling a twinge of irony and guilt.

Too often in this economically developed, individually-minded American culture, we focus too much on the "yoke" and "burden" part rather than the "easy" and "light" part. When I was in East Africa, Ecuador and Central America, I saw many women carrying huge loads of firewood on their backs. (Yes, it was always women - if it were men, they'd have a donkey to carry it for them.) It's a "woman's job" since gathering firewood was for domestic (and usually not commercial/business) use, and the household is the woman's domain (traditionally in many societies).

So for many poor, especially women, society weighs on them both figuratively and literally, whereas we rich tend to be more afraid of losing our individual freedom. Which is why I found this invention of a cardboard oven to be utterly amazing.

Flabbergasted, I read the article where a man in Kenya created this $5 invention with his daughters. Mass production is now planned out of factories in Nairobi. The article ended with these wonderful words: "I don't want to see another 80-year-old woman carrying 20 kilos of firewood on her back. Maybe we don't have to."

Simple is Beautiful.

I now look at this picture on the wall, and I'm able to laugh heartily with this woman, filled with a real hope in relieving at least one of her burdens.

The First are First, until the Last become First

Confession: I'm a current events junkie. Between Democracy Now, the NYTimes, Washington Post and WSJ, I spend at least an hour a day digesting the news. Perhaps it's the Political Scientist undergrad in me. I would love to ween myself off of this habit, but then I do get theological insights such as this...

In the NYTimes today, there is an article about Brain Power and drug doses that help a person forget certain memories.

On the same day, there is an article in the Washington Post that speaks of how the stress of poverty affects memory retention.

The Irony? The FIRST persons, the poor, who may benefit from drug treatment to either forget or better remember things, will be the LAST to ever receive these drugs. In our system, the first are those with money and access, and the last are those who are poor and unable to access the markets, the benefits of what "money can buy."

Thankfully, we believe in a God who subverts this system, flipping it on its head and saying that NO, the First will be Last and the Last will be First, in the Kingdom of our God (Matt 19:30, 20:16; Mark 10:31; Luke 13:30). Those who are most needy shall be clothed, nourished and sheltered FIRST.

. Let us work hand-and-hand to make this vision a reality.

Moral Autonomy v. Manipulative Character

"Corporatism is about crushing the capacity for moral choice."

[irony: even as it "increases" individual choice]

I read this line in an article called "America is in Need of a Moral Bailout." While the author's language is quite vituperative, I think his main point is a good one: Corporations have a manipulative character that has subverted our morals.

And to make matters worse, we have been complicit in their endeavor to the point that we now feel enraged yet helpless. "Who am I in the face of such greed, gluttony and malice?"

In this time of grave economic instability, we each need to take responsibility for ourselves and our own moral compass, or what Kant referred to as "moral autonomy."

Now, it is true that we learn how to behave within our social interactions with others (see Rene Girard's Theory of Mimetic Desire). But each of us is a member of society, and therefore we each can have an effect, however small, on the whole.

Therefore, let us be renewed for peace, love and equality,
repenting from our jealous, self-justifying and selfish ways.

And let us believe in a world where there is more love, peace and hope, and less hatred, war and despair.

It's Official: Red Meat Kills

Em and I are experimenting with going vegetarian... and in the process are doing a detox diet consisting of lemon juice, maple syrup, water and a dash of cayenne - for 10 days(!).

Now, I'm all up for a challenge, but I'm also the guy who likes his meat rare, soft and juicy. Tofu just doesn't come close. So boy am I missing a hamburger right now!

Yet after reading this article, where daily consumption of red meat increases my chances of dying in the next 10 years by 30%, I have some questions to share:

- Will mortality keep me from these red, delicious juices?
- What's life without the pleasure of enjoying it?
- Can I enjoy life without meat?
- Can my habits and tastes and desires change?

A part of me hopes I can ditch red meat, live longer and enjoy other foods... and another part of me mourns the red-juicy-ness I'd be losing.

I suppose only time will tell if my desires for red meat will be satisfied or denied... and another desire takes its place.

Mmmm... now back to my lemony-juicy-syrup.