|
 |
|
| The Pilgrim's Blog Fair, Balanced and Lightly Sauteed |
|
|
2/21/2003 Have you ever jacked up the spelling of a word so bad that MS Word highlights the word in red but gives no suggestions on how to spell it. The unspoken message is "We know you're wrong, but you've stumped even us Brainchild". I'm surprised the little paper clip thingie didn't pop up to either laugh at me or give the finger.
2/20/2003 Well it looks like my wife's Princess House pajama party is canceled for tonight. Which means that I'll be spared from viewing the ladies from my church clad in their PJ's
Obligatory "Why I blog" post.
"I've been reading your blog a lot lately. You've really improved in your writing since you began" posted by Rob | 4:27 PM | A great line from a great movie.
2/19/2003 RESOLVED:The only greenery that belongs on a taco is cilantro. Lettuce (especially iceberg) is simply wrong. posted by Rob | 5:46 PM | Well the early returns are not good. This however won't phase me from going. As an American history buff, I've been waiting for this movie for awhile. But good golly, four flippin' hours? I'd better take a sack lunch, a pillow and some emergency flares for this journey! posted by Rob | 5:43 PM |RESOLVED:The only acceptable way to eat tuna fish (if one must), is to make it with Miracle Whip (instead of mayonnaise) with a liberal smacking of pickle relish. posted by Rob | 5:05 PM | posted by Rob | 1:30 PM | 2/18/2003 Reading Barbara Nicolosi’s blog (thanks for the link Angel), I was struck by a remark she made in her review of Gangs of New York:
“I think the main source of lasting darkness from Gangs has to do with the film's terrible cynicism about human beings in general, and about America in particular. The great Ron Austin (my students call him the Yoda of Act One) noted to me years ago that Scorsese and Coppola were problematic as "Christian" filmmakers, because "they believe in sin, but they do not believe in redemption." Gangs of New York is a movie in which sin is dominant and pervasive, completely having its way with the rare instances of qualified virtue in a largely graceless cosmos.” This is an excellent observation and it leaves me with a few thoughts. Now I believe that all good fiction or all good stories are recreations of the Great Story, and therefore will have conscious or subconscious elements and characteristics of the great meta-narrative of the Word of God: Creation, Fall and Re-creation (or Redemption). Any attempt to move away from this paradigm will always result in absurdity and meaninglessness. Now that’s not to say that people will not take pleasure in them, sadly there will always be a market for dung-stained religious items and Roman Polanski/James Toback movies among the post-modern criterati. With this said however, I believe that the reason postmodern filmmakers are successful in leaving out the Redemption in their movies is because “Christian” filmmakers are unwilling to paint a realistic portrait of the Fall. Now this is not to be blamed on the filmmakers but on Christian culture (or the lack of it). American Christianity is all too willing to look at the Fall as some kind of a lack or default of moral character rather than an horrible offense against a holy God. No, the Fall is ugly, the Fall is wretched and disgusting. The Fall cannot be sanitized for easy consumption. Yet the Fall is necessary. Without the Fall you have no Redemption and when you try to have Redemption without the Fall, quite often the result can be characterized as “fluff” or “schmaltz”. There is no internal conflict, no struggle for righteousness. Evil is often beaten without much of a fight. Rightly do the pagans resist that, how much more should we Christians? Because the thing is, everyone doesn’t live happily ever after in this lifetime. Adam loses the Garden, Moses, though a close friend of God, doesn’t get to see the Promised Land. David, though used greatly by the Lord, continuously deals with the long-term consequences of his sin. The prophets get slaughtered and apostles get martyred. I’m not saying that their lives ended without hope, joy or even victory, but certainly these weren’t “happy endings” in the conventional sense. All this leaves me with a question: How can conscientious Christian filmmakers and screenplay writers make a movie that incorporates the themes of Creation, Fall and Redemption without either being (a) schmaltzy; (b) obviously manipulative (“Yay, Carmen knocked out the bad guy” or “Yay, Christ is throwing Michael York into the Lake of Fire.”); or (c) willing to tie up loose ends by using a convenient but unlikely deux ex machina where everyone lives happily ever after? What are some examples of moviemaking that successfully and biblically incorporate these themes without falling into these traps? Should I even regard them as traps? Do I need to have a “perspective shift” and rethink my reticence for “feel good-ism”? Hmmmmmm…. posted by Rob | 5:13 PM | No matter what others may tell you, the life of a pro athelete is a dangerous one. posted by Rob | 11:24 AM |As I sit here, three or four lines into my donor letter for NCA, I have come to an unsettling conclusion.
I can't help but have the nagging suspicion that this will not be effective. posted by Rob | 11:06 AM | 2/17/2003 Oh, well this surprises no one I'm sure...
Take the test, by Emily. posted by Rob | 4:26 PM | Well, Mr. Brown...so nice of you to join us.....
Just got this juicy lil' tidbit of info from CCL:
"CCL will co-sponsor with the Southern California Center for Christian Studies an August 8-9 conference in Los Angeles on “Justification, Faith, and Works: A Covenantal Dialogue.” Speakers include Randy Booth, P. Andrew Sandlin, Norman Shepherd, Jeff Ventrella, and Roger Wagner. Contact David Bahnsen: davidbahnsen@msn.com." And here is Dave Bahnsen's article in which he speculates what his father's take on what the whole AAPC/RPCUS controversy might be. The fact that the men involved in the fracas have had a past history of camaraderie and friendship makes the tone of the article not a little sad. Nevertheless, I wonder how long it will take for some TR to drop the "apostasy" card on CMF and SCCCS for having Shepherd speak at this conference? posted by Rob | 11:35 AM | Related to the last post, It has been my experience that most women do not appreciate the humor of Python. My wife likes it though and my sister saw Grail and loved it, however they are the only women I know that appreciate it...I wonder why that is? posted by Rob | 10:59 AM |2/16/2003 OK..that makes it two times today I have seen Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The fact that I could go for two more should tell you how much I love that movie. posted by Rob | 2:33 AM |Wow, it looks like Tim's Paedocommunion website has had a facelift.
|
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
