To save the world, or to save the world?

My friend Joe sent me a link the other day, asking me what I thought about the whole idea of the ‘social gospel.’ The link is a WSJ article by Joseph Loconte of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, discussing the legacy of the ‘founder’ of the social gospel, Walter Rauschenbusch. I encourage you to read it, and thus I will not attempt to recap, other than to say that it is a remarkably precise analysis of the weaknesses of Rauschenbusch’s work. I have great affection for the brothers (Campolo, Wallis, Hauerwas) cited as lauding Rauschenbusch, but I suspect they are more familiar with his legacy than his actual theology.

As Loconte points out, Christianity does not have to be distorted in order to produce works of social justice; indeed, it cannot produce anything if it is eviscerated: “The Christian confession of faith, by itself, offers no guarantee that either individuals or societies will be transformed. But, for believers, not even the smallest steps forward can be taken without it.” This echoes my favorite Dallas Willard quote; in responding to Rodney King’s mid-L.A.-riot plea of “Can’t we just all get along?”, Willard replied, firmly but perhaps wistfully, “No, we can’t… not until we become the kind of people who can get along.” Social change will not occur without personal, spiritual change.

The typical response of the evangelical church today to that last statement, however, makes the lionizing of Rauschenbusch understandable. For while it might be uncomfortable to admit, for most evangelicals, social change is not only secondary, it is unimportant or even the wrong direction. Any time or resources spent on justice, reform, or economic efforts would be better spent on evangelism.

But of course it is not evangelism or social action, it is evangelism and social action; better still, it is evangelism as social action, and social action as evangelism. I am encouraged that this generation of college students seems less tied up with either/or statements, and are willing to embrace the both/and, because the Christian work in this world is clearly to be a both/and.

And of course these are not new concerns; they surfaced even in the time of John Wesley, and he had a stinging reply to questions raised by what Jesus says in Matthew 25:31ff. Wesley was asked by skeptical brethren, "what does it avail to feed or clothe men’s bodies, if they are just dropping into everlasting fire?" Wesley would then respond, "whether they will finally be lost or saved, you are expressly commanded to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. If you can, and do not... then whatever becomes of them, you shall go away into everlasting fire."

Mulligans, Mother's Day, and the Man in the Mirror...

You Must Think the Sun Shines Out of Your MSG
One of the NYT columnists, William Rhoden, suggested the other day (it’s a PPV story, so I won’t link it) that it would be in the best interests of the NBA for the Knicks to be allowed to ‘write off’ all the ludicrous contracts they’ve provided, so that they can ditch all their stiffs, get under the salary cap (which otherwise won’t happen until 2010), and essentially start over. The argument being, of course, that NY is essential to the NBA’s success, and thus special dispensation is warranted.

One thing about New Yorkers: they’re often so self-absorbed that it’s hard to know when they’re being sarcastic. But I have a solution that doesn’t just reward (and perpetuate) ineptitude; if the Knicks (and the Celtics, and the 76ers, etc.) are so critical to the success of the NBA, why doesn’t the NBA ‘reclaim’ their franchises (buying them back at market value) and put them in the hands of some at-least-semi-competent management? They are franchises, right? If I owned a McDonald’s franchise, and started selling horsemeat quarter pounders, I imagine that McDonald’s would find a way to pull my franchise, for the good of the brand. What these teams have been serving up over the past several years wouldn’t even qualify as horsemeat, although another term comes to mind…

There are drawbacks, of course; the entertainment value of the NBA would certainly drop without the astonishing antics of Isiah Thomas, James Dolan, Danny Ainge, Billy King, the Maloof brothers, Billy Knight, Kevin McHale, whoever is running the Seattle franchise (if anyone), and of course the inimitable Donald Sterling. But that’s too much ineptitude spread across too many teams; I would suggest to David Stern that he designate two franchises as the official league buffoons (my votes are the Knicks and the Celtics, but I’m biased), relocate all of the above-named suspects therein, and tell the rest of the league to start taking this seriously.

When I Look in the Mirror
Have you noticed that, as the chastened GWB moves closer to his father’s more moderate policies and stances, he’s also taken on some of his gestures?

I can’t wait to hear him say ‘prudent.’ But come to think of it, I don’t think that’s a concept he’s familiar with.

And a Belated Closing
Not that there’s no value at all to the NYT; check this out (registration required), in case you missed it on Mother’s Day. God’s pretty smart, you know. Genesis 5:2 says that “He created them male and female. He blessed them and called them humans when he created them.” I just think a male, left to his own devices, would’ve made a different choice… and would have been much the poorer for that choice. Happy (belated) Mother's Day, and be thankful for the choices your mother made.

I Wanna be Frank Miller...

I've been a comic book fan since I can remember... literally. And even though I've always been able to write a little, I couldn't draw to save my life, and I could never figure out how to write a good comic book story without being able to see it on the page. Add to that, it always seemed like the guys who could write and draw their own comics did the most amazing work; Miller, Howard Chaykin, Dave Sim, Todd McFarlane... So yes, I have serious art envy.

But my new Mac came with this really cool little program called "Comic Life," that can help you make your own comics. So, with no further ado (clicking on the thumbnails will take you to the full pic)...






Maybe just a little dark? hee hee hee...

The Temptation of John

I do my best thinking in the shower. Write my best sermons, prepare my best lessons, develop my most creative ideas… I’m sure there’s some reason behind this; lots of routine stimulation occupying the conscious mind, allowing the subconscious to seep through, or something like that. Where’s Dr. Phil when you need him?

Thankfully not in my shower. After mentally writing two or three major opuses (opi?) and solving most of the world’s conflicts, all before rinsing and repeating, I stepped out to dry off. I had forgotten to turn on the bathroom vent, and the room was as foggy as the I-5 Grapevine in January.

My eyelid had a twitch in it. I’d had twitches before, and this eyelid had been twitching on and off for a week, but now it was going every two hours, flapping like I had a sparrow trapped under it. Being raised as a radical hypocondriac, this increase in symptoms set me to worrying.

Nerves? Allergies? Not enough sleep? Cancer. Probably cancer.

Maybe I just wasn’t getting enough blood flow to it… I began to wink and blink madly, trying to exercise my eyelid. If the college drama department ever does a stage adaptation of “The Pink Panther,” I’m in as Inspector Dreyfus.

While I was maniacally twitching and winking and blinking, I heard the little voice in the back of my head.

“I know what’ll work.”

I knew that voice… well, not the timbre so much as the intonation. I didn’t answer.

“Go look at some porn. That’ll get the blood flowing to that eye.”

Now, I’m (unfortunately) not completely unfamiliar with the effects of porn on the human body…at least the male human body. However, increased blood flow to the eye seemed, at best, unlikely.

“What?” I said.

“Your eye,” the voice said again, a little hesitant this time. “It’ll be good for your eye.”

“It’ll… what!?! That doesn’t even make sense!” I paused for a moment, watching the steam recede from the bathroom mirror. My eyes narrowed, squinting into the steam. “You’re not the regular one, are you?”

Silence.

I was more insistent this time. “You’re not the regular one, are you? Who are you?”

Long pause. Small voice. “Stu.”

Now it was my turn to pause. “Stu?”

“Stu.”

“Not Beealzebub? Not Zaphor? Not Slugmort, Voracium, Incinerus, Abraxus, Moloch, Damien, Volac?” I rattled off a dozen more names, but each elicited only a barely-audible “nope” from the little voice.

“You’re… Stu.”

“Stu.”

“And the regular one, the other guy, he’s…?”

“Promoted, I believe. On to bigger and better… oh, umm, no offense, I mean, I’m sure you were a fine, umm… sorry…” His voice trailed off.

I sighed deeply into the warm wet air. The eyelid twitch had stopped, at least.

“You’re new, aren’t you, Stu?”

Long pause. “I’m a temp.”

The steam was nearly gone from the mirror now, and I could see my own face. An expression of sheer, abject, bone-chilling… disappointment.

“So.” I said, almost audibly. The implication was not lost on me. “So my Christian walk is now so ineffectual, so unproductive, so feeble… that I get a temp as a tempter.” The mirror was clear now, and I noticed more ear hair than before. This was not turning out to be a very good evening.

A blurry image of what appeared to be Paris Hilton flashed through my mind. “Stu… Paris Hilton? That’s just sad.”

The voice sounded oddly remorseful. “I know, I… I’m not very good at lust. For some of the guys it’s like falling out of bed, but I never seemed to get the hang of it. I’m much better at PR. I’m hoping something opens up in PR.”

I was taken aback. “His Infernalness has a public relations office?”

“Oh, no, no,” Stu said, his mood brightening. “We tempt PR people. It’s easy work.” His tone was almost cocky now. “White lies, baldfaced lies, half-truths, deception, denials. Like falling out of bed.”

It was quiet for a moment. “Stu, I’m leaving now. I’m going to bed.”

“Bed?” He sounded momentarily confused. “Umm… Britney Spears?”

“Stu?”

“Hmm?”

“No, Stu. No.”

“Oh. Well, tomorrow, then?”

Another sigh escaped me. “No doubt, Stu… no doubt.”

Dissent is not disloyalty

WARNING: ROUGH ROAD AND SHARP CURVES AHEAD. USE LOW GEAR. TURN ON HEADLIGHTS.

Somewhere during George Bush's education, I'm sure he came across the phrase ad hominem. An ad-hominem response criticizes the person, not their argument. Despite his admittedly spotty educational record, I know he knows this, because his response to the Democrats' attempt to set a draw-down date is not to criticize their argument, but to question their motives.

Is the Democratic response a political ploy? What isn't in Washington these days? And it clearly does no good for Harry Reid to say that the war has been lost. But to grant that the Dems are seeking political advantage doesn't speak to the validity of their position.

Bush had a relatively long time to get it right. By almost every measure, he had over four years of nearly unanimous support; public opinion, news coverage, congressional collegiality, a seemingly-bottomless war-chest. How long did he genuinely expect that to continue, especially in the face of mounting casualties, the no-WMDs disclosures, the torture scandals, the lack of international support, the tone-deaf hawkishness of Cheney and Rumsfeld, and (most critically) no discernible progress? And this doesn't even consider the now-nearly-discredited notions that (a) nation-building still works, and (b) democracy can be successfully transplanted anywhere at any time to any people, like a McDonald's (see note below).

To say, "this far, and no farther," is neither unpatriotic nor unChristian; when Christ called people to Himself, he first warned them to count the cost: "For which one of you, when he wants to build a tower, does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if he has enough to complete it? Otherwise, when he has laid a foundation and is not able to finish, all who observe it begin to ridicule him, saying, `This man began to build and was not able to finish.' ” (Luke 14:27-30)

The Dems have said, "we think we've spent all the lives and money that we're going to on this." The Bush administration has given no indication of its spending limit, or if it has (or ever had) a 'cost' in mind. It's hard to argue that the lives of 3,303 American soldiers (as of 4/19) is not enough.

NOTE ON DEMOCRACY: I'm sure this is idealistic, but it's always seemed to me that a cornerstone of democracy was the idea of 'self-rule.' I'm not talking about self-rule as opposed to rule by tyranny; I mean that most citizens (for there have always been psychopaths and sociopaths) must have the ability to govern their individual selves, their behaviors, and their passions, such that some sense of common fairness can survive. I would not suggest that there are people-groups inherently incapable of this, but I don't believe it is chauvinistic to suggest that not all cultures have emphasized or encouraged the development of this virtue, and therefore not all cultures are at any given point in time equally capable of living in democracy.

That point no doubt needs more space than I have here, but my concern is really consequent to it; I am concerned that America, too, is losing its 'capacity' for democracy. We may call it conscience, or shared values, or the rule of law, or 'overarching metanarrative,' or even categorical imperative...some Christians would call it 'common grace' or the vestiges of the 'imago deo.' But when we lose the common sense of the good, and the sense of our own obligation to govern our individual selves (rather than pursuing our own ends at any cost), then we can no longer be governed by a democracy. We call down tyranny on ourselves (witness Russia under Putin), and we thank Them for saving us from us. I am no great fan of George Bernard Shaw, but he nailed it over a hundred years ago: "Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."

AND IN CLOSING: Since we are speaking of Vietnam Iraq the war, goodbye to a dear friend I never met, David Halberstam. If I may suck all the irony out of one of his titles, he was truly the best and the brightest, and will be greatly missed.

Imus be movin' on...

As my friend Dale will tell you, the day after the Imus scandal broke, I pretty much knew he was done… that’s nothing portentous; it was a 50/50 shot, in or out. But this time his stink had gotten fanned into the national a/c system, there was no other big story out there to cover the scent, and between bloggers and YouTube, there are too many noses in the air now to miss the smell. My friend Joe thinks it’s because it was simulcasted on MSNBC; if it had just been radio, it might have gone right by… maybe.

This could turn into a rant, and there are others who’ll do that better than I. Let me just respond to a few comments I’ve heard from Imus defenders:

• That this is an overreaction to a single incident. Even Imus’ apologists are using the words “disgusting” and “reprehensible,” but what they leave out is “and totally in character.” This is not an out-of-the-blue remark for Imus; it’s not unexpected at all. That he got called on it probably shocked the hell out of Mr. Shock-Jock himself.
• That Imus is only giving people what they want. Fine, I’ll accept that most humans need their taste and preference meters adjusted; I’m a Christian who believes in total depravity. But I also believe that the goal is upward, not downward, and that playing to our baser instincts is a bad thing to do. See also “Francis, Joe.”
• That Imus is not a bad guy. That’s fine; I’ll buy that too. I’m not suggesting he be jailed or exiled or beaten. I’m just saying it’s appropriate that he lost his job. He’ll get another. In fact, he’s probably got a standing offer from Sirius in his desk drawer at home.
• That this is a free speech issue. I call BS on that one. Imus has the right to say whatever he wants. He doesn’t have the constitutional right to be paid $10 million a year to say it over 60+ radio stations. Give him a soapbox and a streetcorner and let’s see how many folks think he’s clever.

Maybe I’m overly sensitive because I work around college students all day long. If you’re a politician or an actor, this is part of the deal; taking public abuse and criticism is the flip side of the power and wealth and fame if you’re Hilary or Barak or Tom or Oprah, or even wannabees like Kato Kaelin or Larry Birkhead. But a bunch of teen-age girls playing basketball? This is a viable target? As I recall, the only email I ever sent to Jim Rome was when he was running smack on a 12-year-old girl who had won a spelling bee. I don’t remember exactly what I wrote, but it was something about if this was the best he could do anymore, maybe he could get his old job back introducing the strippers at the Doo-Drop-Inn Gentlemen’s Club (come to think of it, I don’t think he ever wrote back…).

Tim Rutten has a good take in the LA Times today, wondering if maybe we have finally satiated our appetites for vile and meanspirited public ‘conversations.’ I wish it were so… but as long as we are a people driven by fear and selfishness, we will also be attracted to hatred and prejudice. During the LA riots, when Rodney King asked, “can’t we just all get along?,” Christian philosopher Dallas Willard wistfully responded, “No, we can’t… not until we become the kind of people who can get along.”

Not there yet. But maybe there'll be a little less odor in the morning air tomorrow... maybe.

Roy Rogers is riding tonight...

I try not to bore you with too many of my quirky hobbies… but my friend Dale sent me a link to a list by radio historian Elizabeth McLeod of the 100 most significant “moments” in radio. Now, I really really like old time radio (OTR); I’ve probably got 4500 episodes of various broadcasts, most thanks to the great OTR community at The Cobalt Club. Almost all of it is in public domain now (with notable exceptions like The Lone Ranger, The Shadow, any BBC stuff, and anything post-1962), so it's there for the downloading, without having to sweat that certified letter from the RIAA.

Many of the broadcasts she mentions are unfortunately lost, or otherwise not available to the OTR web community. But I wanted to talk about some of her entries that I am conversant with:

#98 SHERLOCK HOLMES is indeed made for radio... it’s all exposition and verbal banter and deduction. I’ve never heard anything prior to Rathbone and Bruce's, which are pretty corny but still entertaining; their American successors don’t fare as well. The really good productions are British; John Gielgud and Ralph Richardson as Holmes & Watson, for goodness’ sake! But the late-90s productions for BBC-4 with Clive Merrison and Michael Williams (later Andrew Sachs) are the defining work; they are beautifully written, elaborately produced, wonderfully performed, and bring these characters so richly to life that it’s sometimes hard to go back and listen to the older stuff.

#75 GUNSMOKE is my favorite radio drama... If all you saw was his “Cannon” days, you wouldn’t appreciate what a really really good actor William Conrad was. His Matt Dillon is a marvel of understated complexity, and he did it all with just his voice. Like McLeod’s listing says, this is not a western where the good guys always win and there’s trumpet fanfare at the end. If I was one o’ them cinema historian guys, I’d say that the ‘anti-hero’ and ambiguity of so many late-60’s-early-70’s films goes directly back to the radio version of Gunsmoke. Lots of times Dillon has to choose between bad and worse. Not Ronald Reagan’s America; not Ronald Reagan's kind of western.

#69 DRAGNET is of course a blast... It’s really no different than the TV show, except there’s no crazed drug smokin’ hippies turning on by tuning out, man (“is that right, fella?... well, listen up, you forgot one thing...”). Of course, Joe Friday is single and lives with his mom, who calls him “Joseph.” And he stays out on stakeouts with his partner Frank Smith until all hours. And he scoffs every time good old married guy Frank tries to fix him up with a date. But he’s NOT GAY... Clear?!? NOT GAY!!! He’s just beyond all that... he’s... metasexual!

#66 SUPERMAN is about what you’d expect... except (as noted in McLeod) there is this less-than-subtle message (in the scripts and in the PSAs) about bigotry, intolerance, and hate. It’s truly astonishing. For all the complaints that the right sends up today about the ‘messages’ kids get from Sesame Street, etc., there is no way that this kind of blunt proselytizing would EVER be allowed on a kids program today. I don’t know enough about the history of the show to know what the genesis of this was, but it sounds radically out of place in 1946, and (at the risk of overstatement) it makes the movements of the 60’s more understandable with this as a preface...

#53 THE LONE RANGER is, also, about what you’d expect... but with no surprises. Not my favorite, if that’s not heretical to say. It didn’t have the weirdness and camp that makes Superman palatable for an adult. It is however surprising how often the bad guy outsmarts LR and he has to go to plan B…

#51 THE SHADOW with Orson Welles. Welles is always fun to listen to... In several of the episodes I have, young Mr. Welles seems to believe that great acting requires stepping on the last word of your co-star’s lines, usually Margo Lane’s. By the end of the episode, she’s started stepping on his lines (you can hear her frustration) and he’s still on hers and neither of them ever gets to finish a sentence. But great hammy stuff for Welles.

#47 LIGHTS OUT, Columbia Workshop, etc.... Some really odd stuff starting to happen here, much more troubling and personal than 99% of TV today. This is the seedbed for Playhouse 90 and Rod Serling and his amazing blend of fantasy and social commentary.

#26 JACK BENNY, FRED ALLEN- Jack is one of my all-time favorites; my parents told me that when I was little I would never miss an episode of his TV show. He generally plays the straight man, letting the chaos flail around him; his only power is that he controls the money, a fact he never lets his cast forget (and vice versa). It’s really situation comedy. Allen, on the other hand, ran much more of a sketch comedy show, very acerbic and very funny, and very topical, which is why it doesn’t hold up as well, and probably why Allen faded as TV ascended and took Benny along with it.

#21 LONDON AFTER DARK. I’ve only heard a couple of these, but if you can get your 21st century ears around the idea that this is real, not a drama, they’re amazing. Play by play descriptions of bombing raids, shelters, life in the blackouts. If the closest thing you’ve come to WW2 is watching war movies, this is the real thing. And if you wondered how England held out so long while waiting for the Americans to come to their senses, you’ll come to understand how damn tough those Brits were.

#8 HINDENBURG DISASTER and #10 WAR OF THE WORLDS: Only 18 months apart, the shocking anguish of the one leading to the incredible-yet-realistic drama of the second. I hope my generation isn’t the last to hear and appreciate these icons to the power and intimate immediacy of radio.

#4 PEARL HARBOR: The halting delivery of a stunned newscaster, breaking in to regular programming; the updates throughout the day describing the extent of the carnage; Roosevelt’s “forever in infamy” speech... This was their 9/11, when nice normal predictable American lives were suddenly dragged into the pain other humans had known for years. And to listen to the newscasts in the weeks and months preceding December 7th, it is stunning to realize that it was no sure thing that we were going to battle Hitler and Tojo; there was a real good chance we were going to try and sit it out. Amazing.

McLeod's top 100 list rightfully concludes with #1, D-DAY: I’ve only heard the CBS broadcasts, with Collingwood onboard a landing craft at Normandy. To say there’s a difference between the journalists of that day, and the Anderson Cooper’s of today, goes without saying; the difference centers around the inability to get out of the way of the story.