Don't let the title of this amazing documentary film confuse you. This is not a movie about prostitution. It is a movie about real children. Amazing children.
Originally planning to reveal the plight of women in Calcutta, India, documentarian Zana Briski found herself unexpectedly charmed by the children of prostitutes who were literally Born into Brothels. And you will be charmed as well.
Briski felt moved to try to help some of these children any way she could. So she began to teach a number of them about photography. The film reveals its heart when she gives the children point-and-shoot cameras of their own. The images they capture are heartbreaking, both in beauty and in sorrow. And I defy you not to become enamored with the children themselves.
The movie made me feel a variety of emotions. Anger at myself for being a complainer when God has given me so much. Sadness that there is such poverty and despair in the world. Delight in the sweetness of these kids. I felt hope as I saw people rise out of selfishness to help others less blessed. And hope for the future of children who appear destined for misery. Finally it made me want to do something for others. I was changed a little bit by the experience of watching Born into Brothels and that is the definition of great art.
See this movie.
---
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Born Into Brothels
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Encouragement for Pastor's Wives
But What about Me?
Help and Hope for Women Whose Husbands are Considering the Pastoral Ministry
By Julie Stiegemeyer
“Now the LORD said to Abram, ‘Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you. …So Abram went, as the LORD had told him, and Lot went with him. Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife…” (Gen. 12:1-5).
These verses have always had special meaning for me because they were the basis of the first sermon that I heard in the seminary chapel at the opening service of my husband’s first year at the seminary. I’ve often wondered what Sarai was thinking and how she was coping with this sudden and life-changing journey. Was she crying as she left her mother? Did she see it as an adventure?
The thing I like about Sarah is how honest she was. She was far from perfect; she—along with Abraham—laughed in the face of God’s promise for a son in their old age (Gen. 17:17 and 18:12). But God, in His mercy, blessed her with His gifts, including a son they never dreamed they would have. Hebrews says: “By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised” (Hebrews 11:11). It was God who gave Sarah this faith, who helped her through all of the changes in her life. Over the years, I’ve heard and read a lot about being a pastor’s wife. The common perception is that a pastor’s wife lives in a “fishbowl”—meaning that everyone is always watching her. I’ve had strangers come up to me and feel sorry for me because my husband is a pastor. “Don’t you ever wish you were married to a plumber?” one person asked me.
However, in the first ten years of my husband’s ministry, I can honestly say that I have loved being a pastor’s wife. That doesn’t mean we don’t have problems or that we’re immune from sickness, frustration, and arguments. It simply means that I love my husband and am committed to him no matter what his vocation in life may be.
It is true that a pastor has many challenges and burdens to carry. He visits new babies in the hospital; he also visits teens who have attempted suicide. A pastor teaches the confirmands, and has to deal with their parents who almost never come to church. A pastor works for hours on a sermon, but then watches members of the congregation sleep through the message. These are burdens that your husband as a pastor will have to bear, and sometimes those burdens spill over to his personal life. But there are many more joys than frustrations. He has the joy of sincere gratitude from a member who needed to hear what he had to say. He also watches the children he baptized grow into young believers who share the love of God with their neighbors. He is honored at an anniversary lunch, showered with gifts, and bragged about by his congregation. A pastor’s duties are many and varied, and through each task, he ministers to sinners who come to hear about God’s forgiveness and love for them in Christ Jesus. And these blessings also spill over to the family.
As a pastor’s wife—just as in every other situation in life—we have a choice. We can choose to celebrate the joys in life, or we can focus only on the burdens. As a pastor’s wife I heard recently said: “Your husband is a servant of the King. What other joy in life could there be?” And then I think that Sarah—and I—have it pretty good.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Chapel Sermon
Kramer Chapel
Text: Mark
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. Then he said to the tree, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." And his disciples heard him say it. In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!" "Have faith in God," Jesus answered. "I tell you the truth, if anyone says to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it will be done for him. Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.
Why did Jesus kill that tree? Steven Wells, the author of The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, labels this story an absurdity and says, “Jesus kills a fig tree for not bearing figs, even though it was out of season. He did this to show the world just how much "God hates figs.” And then in the next few verses, he adds, Jesus goes on to have his famous "Temple tantrum."
Steve Wells is having a bit of fun but in truth, God does not hate figs. In fact, the evidence suggests that God is fond of them. It’s fruitless trees He cannot stand.
Throughout the Scriptures, trees or vines represent the people of God. A fruitful tree is a sign of blessing. A barren tree is a sign of curse. It is the nature of a fruit tree to bear fruit. And if it does not bear fruit, something is wrong, it needs to be chopped down and thrown into the fire.
In this morning’s lesson, Mark reports that the fig tree was full of leaves, but that it had no fruit. The point is that while there is the appearance of health, the reality is that there is nothing sweet on the branches. The same was true of Israel at the time of Christ. They had the appearance of holiness, but it was a mirage. Therefore, when Jesus cursed the fig tree, he was describing Israel’s spiritual condition. And killing the tree was His way of prefiguring the destruction to come when the Romans would destroy Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
Some people question why Jesus thought there might have been figs on the tree since, as Mark explicitly states, it was not the season for figs. There was a famous rationalist philosopher named Bertrand Russell who died in 1970. He wrote a book called Why I’m Not a Christian. He mentions this particular passage about the cursing of the fig tree and he says that a truly divine figure would have known there were no figs on the tree and would not have had to investigate the matter.
Jesus is not an idiot. Like anyone else living in that place and time, He knew when particular fruit trees could be expected to bear fruit. But the details of horticulture aside, maybe Jesus had other reasons for expecting the fig tree to be full of fruit. Keep in mind that He approaches the tree just moments after his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, hailed by all the people as the son of David.
The Jewish encyclopedia says the fig tree represents the coming of the messiah. Given the fact that the King of kings has entered the Holy City to take up his throne, why wouldn’t the fig tree’s branches be teeming figs.
Now, you are probably going to think I’m a geek for doing what I’m about to do, but that is just a risk I’m going to have to take. I love fairy tales. And British author, J.R.R. Tolkien wrote his Lord of the Rings trilogy intending it to be a sort of fairy tale for adults. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the stories, I’m going to ask you to bear with me. There was once a great city in Middle Earth called Gondor. And this great civilization had once been ruled by a line of mighty and impressive kings. Unfortunately, there had not been a king in Gondor for many generations. Now there stood in the midst of the city, a beautiful white tree. And this tree, the white tree of Gondor, represented the glory of the kingdom. It was the symbol upon their flag. But this ancient tree has stood lifeless and dry and barren where it once bore its beautiful blossoms and fruit. It had been barren during the whole period of time when there was no king in Gondor.
The third of the three books is entitled The Return of the King. And in the story, there was a terrible battle where the forces of wrong were pitted against the forces of right. And then at the end, after the rebellious angels and their armies are defeated, the great warrior Aragorn is revealed to be the rightful son of Gondor and heir to the throne. There is a wedding, a banquet and a coronation. And here is one of those astonishing instances when the film version improves upon the book. For when the king is back in Gondor, the magic white tree is once more in full bloom.
Jesus cursed the fig tree and it withered, but isn’t it also true that the tree has cursed itself? So Jesus was really saying, in effect, “Fine. Have it your way. You won’t bear fruit, be fruitless forever.” Or as the Lord is quoted in the Book of Revelation to say: He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still (Rev. 22:11).”
You and I are found in that tree. We are the barren trees. Our lives are not fruitful. We do not bear the sweetness of God. We might have the appearance of godliness, yes, but we have nothing to offer Him but our sins and failures and lies. But I am here to tell you that: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree (Gal. 3:13)." You’ve been died for. I look forward to the day of the king’s return. For on that day there will be a wedding, a banquet, a coronation and you will bloom like a supernova. In Jesus’ name. Amen. Sphere: Related Content
Saturday, October 06, 2007
The Value of Shock Value
Can horror films serve a useful purpose? Jeffrey Overstreet thinks so. And I agree. Oh most horror films are probably, at best, merely entertainments for adrenaline junkies. Rather, most of them are harmful gore-fests that desensitize the viewer to human suffering and feed a broken sadistic appetite to see people cut apart, mangled and eaten.
But there are a few movies within the horror genre which exceed these limits and make a truly beneficial impact on the viewer. Of all genres, Horror is the most difficult to define. That's because it is really the only genre that refers to an emotion instead of a setting or scenario. So there can be horror dramas, horror comedies, horror westerns, horror space operas, horror romances, horror fantasies, etc. Any story that horrifies you is a horror story.
Is it always bad to be scared? Or is fear a useful and even good thing, from time to time? If experiencing artwork reminds you of the curse of death we all share, or if it makes you understand that the devil is real and hell exists, or if it stirs you up from moral relativism to acknowledge the fact that some things are evil and some are good, then that artwork has helped you in a spiritual sense.
And the only way to reach some people is to shock them. Flannery O'Connor said that for the hard of hearing you must occasionally shout. For the morally deaf and blind, a bit of excess in our expression is necessary. Wasn't Jesus going for shock value when he told people they had to chop off their hands and gouge out their eyeballs to avoid going to hell?? That's a pretty creepy image if you ask me.
Overstreet, in his book, Through a Screen Darkly
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Laughing at Ourselves: Through a Screen Darkly 2
As part of my preparation for a youth retreat I'm speaking at this weekend in Marshall, Michigan, I've been studying a new book by Jeffrey Overstreet called Through a Screen Darkly
Yesterday, I read his comments on a film I actually have not seen. It's called Saved! I don't want to remark on the particulars of this film since, as I said, I have not seen it. I have only read and heard about it. The reason I have not seen it is not because I necessarily object to it. I just haven't seen it yet.
If I may, the movie is basically a spoof of the Evangelical Christian subculture as exhibited at a Christian high school. I went to a small Lutheran High School myself and spent a great deal of my teen years going to Youth For Christ camps and events. So I think I probably have a grip on the premise. Being Lutheran, I wasn't ever fully steeped in all the subcultural moves the film probably highlights, but I've been around them plenty.
If you guessed that Saved! elicited a firestorm of protest from Christians, you are dead on. So, once again, I remind you that since I have not seen this particular movie, I won't add to the specific controversy. I have a feeling that I would NOT share the same righteous anger of many of my brothers and sisters about this movie, but I don't know that for sure.
Really, I want to respond to some of the insightful observations that Overstreet makes in this part of his book. He highlights the fact that many Christians consider every poke of fun at the church as a direct attack on God. If I read him correctly, he cautions Christians from being hyper-sensitive to legitimate criticisms offered in the form of satire. It is a healthy thing to know how to laugh at one's own foibles and failings. It shows humility. The wise man, after all, delights when someone corrects him.
Overstreet observes that comedy serves a useful role in society. Even silly screwball farces like
Zoolander or Anchorman serve a purpose beyond mere entertainment by putting light on man's various pretensions in an entertaining way. I am reminded of the classic Saturday Night Live sketch during the presidential debates between Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000. Both candidates were skewered by the show and it was hilarious, not because they were trying to be disrespectful, but because their exaggerated performance was rooted in truth. And it's a testimony to their talent that so many who watched the program recognized its truthfulness, including the advisors to both Gore and Bush.
Let's face it. Christians really are pretty ridiculous at times. I will applaud artists and performers who skillfully pop our balloons from time to time.
I would, however, like to add a couple of cautions. Overstreet recognizes the difference between making fun of Christians and making fun of Christ. While one is acceptable and even welcome, the other is not. Certainly not every protest from the Christians is a result of their being thin-skinned. They may not register their objections in a seemly fashion, but mocking God is a real offense. The Creator does not appreciate having His name abused.
Further, mock the hypocrisies of the Christians. But don't mock the doctrines or beliefs of the Christians. This is a fine line to distinguish at times because so much of what it mock-able in us are the eccentric extremes or deviations we make to the historic creeds of God's people. A bit of fun poking at the ways we express ourselves is at times fitting, but the underlying truths are sacred realities that impart life. Such things deserve a foundation of fear and trembling.
Satire can serve a beneficial function, but it can also be taken too far. I realize that this is subjective. What is "too far" to you, may be appropriately strong to me, but mean-spiritedness does little to advance understanding. It is in this respect, that I find fault with much of what Hollywood produces. While there are notable exceptions, it is generally true that Christians are negatively portrayed in the entertainment media. Are all Christians hypocritical all the time? Are all clergy pedophiles, greedy, insane or dimwitted? And why be one-sided? I don't see many shows or films that ridicule secularism.
I can accept fair critiques that demonstrate the goofs of the Church. But without balance, such comedy strengthens stereotypes. And stereotyping undermines understanding. It effectively kills the thought process.
Wednesday, October 03, 2007
Reviving Private Confession
There's a neat article in the Wall Street Journal about the renewed emphasis on Confession in both Roman Catholic and non-Roman circles. Here it is.
Sometimes when you talk about going to private confession, otherwise conservative Lutherans look at you like you've grown a second nose on your face. It's like they've never heard of such a thing in the Lutheran church, except perhaps in the context of criticizing the Church of Rome.
To a large extent, this confusion arises because of a mistaken view of what private confession is for. It's not a time for God, your pastor, or the church to condemn you. Quite the opposite. It's a time and a means to be set free from condemnation.
The fact is that this is something Martin Luther addresses in the Small Catechism. He says:
"...we receive absolution, that is, forgiveness, from the pastor as from God Himself...."
One of our seminary professors, Rev. John Pless, has this reminder in an excellent article on the topic. Note the very clear instruction from Martin Luther:
Our practice of confession/absolution must grow out of Evangelical-Lutheran theology. "It is taught among us that private absolution should be retained and not allowed to fall into disuse" says Article XI of the Augsburg Confession. Martin Luther was no less adamant in the Large Catechism: "If you are a Christian, you should be glad to run more than a hundred miles for confession, not under compulsion but rather coming and compelling us to offer it...Therefore, when I urge you to go to confession, I am simply urging you to be a Christian" (LC: "A Brief Exhortation to Confession, 30,32, Tappert).
Prof. Pless's excellent article entitled Your Pastor is Not Your Therapist is located here.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Through a Screen Darkly 1
Even though I started to read Jeffrey Overstreet's Through a Screen Darkly
For various reasons, "conservative" Protestants tend to view all the arts with suspicion. Film is certainly no exception. But what role do the arts play in human life? How is the creative nature of God reflected in man's efforts to create (or "sub-create" as Tolkien would differentiate)? Can we learn anything from art? Does it help us or improve us in any way? Or maybe we should step backwards and ask whether movies qualify as art. What is the difference between entertainment and artwork?
Furthermore, I've also appreciated Overstreet's response to those Christians who criticize - or even condemn - him for recommending or commenting positively on particular films, even for viewing them. I am often asked to speak about movies and Christianity with church youth and I always cover the big three objections to movies from parents: nudity, violence, and profanity. I'll post about that at another time.
