Today the world was caught off guard with an announcement by Pope Benedict that he would be resigning his office for medical reasons. In the minutes and hours following this portentous message commentators all around the world have taken up the task of contextualizing this decision. Some of them have chosen to portray this act in a negative light. In their eyes, there must have been something some dark reason that this man would choose to live the rest of his life in obscurity.
Over a billion people look to Rome and her Pope for spiritual guidance. Like most major religions the number of active adherents is much lower, but on any scale Catholicism is an enormous community of faith. The broad influence of the papal office is undeniable, and perhaps unrivaled. For any man to willingly relinquish that power is very special. Among faithful and practicing Catholics there are very few if any voices that would have called on him to step down. Of those few, none would have had the capacity to compel him.
As I sat and took just a moment to ponder it all, my mind was drawn to the Sermon on the Mount. Where the Lord taught some of his most important doctrines. Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit the Earth. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
Pope Benedict is known as a staunch defender of the faith. Many of his greatest critics are those who take offense to his unwillingness to apologize Catholic doctrine. He believes that there are universal truths. He has been a voice for doctrinal conservatism within the Catholic community for many years. Although, to be fair, he also spoke out against a very orthodox group when they did not want to take up the lead set by Rome.
To some this makes the man insensitive, backwards, and blind. But it does not mean that to me. Granted, Pope Benedict would seriously disagree with my personal view of the Scriptures, of the nature of God, and the history of Christianity. We would not agree on some of the basic fundamentals of religion. For example, the nature of the next life, the nature of mankind, and the meaning of many of the words of Jesus. It would indeed be very probable that he and I would find ourselves so far apart on some things that we would have a hard time talking about them in a completely open and honest way in order to prevent contention.
Having said all of these things, I feel tonight a great respect for Pope Benedict. Some of my favorite people in great story of human history are those who have been big enough, to step aside. Examples include George Washington from American History and King Benjamin from the Book of Mormon. (Ironic as it may be)
I can't pretend to know the man, or even to be very well acquainted with his teachings. Only the Judge of all men, both quick and dead, can search out his heart and know the true worth thereof. However, I know that this world could use more men with the kind of moral fiber and conviction of character to realize their own limitations and to look at the greater good accomplished by them gracefully stepping aside. I would do very well to learn that myself.
Jesus taught "whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted."
I pray that this promise is kept in the case of this good man, whose example of piety and humility has blessed my life this day. He has lived a life of courage and conviction, and I pray God that in his final years he may have peace and joy in that faith that he has so nobly served.
I feel also to say that I am grateful for the security and stability that I have in my own faith. Those who I look to as my spiritual leaders operate within a divinely inspired system that provides Latter-Day Saints a wonderful sense of continuity. If President Monson were to grow ill, there are two men who are called and authorized to act in his behalf and direct the affairs of the church until such time as he might recover or the Lord should call him home. This system could last for a few days or for many years if needed. When the president of the church does die, there is no debate or question as to who will replace him. It is a solemn occasion, but not at time of conjecture.
I am grateful for the wonderful Christlike example provided by the leaders of my church. I have come to know for myself through prayer and experience that they are called of God to lead His church. They are vested with the powers and authority of the Holy Priesthood, and they know the voice of the Master we all seek to serve.
I am grateful for all of the wonderful men and women all over the world that seek to live lives guided by inspiration and faith. As time goes on, I come to feel more deeply that we are all children of God, and that almost all of us are doing the best we know how. We can all do better, but I think that most people have good hearts.
As the Good Book says, "No man can serve two masters." Though we may not believe the same things or worship Him in the same way, I feel in my heart that men like Pope Benedict are serving God. And that means that we are on the same team. I pray that I might be as faithful a servant in my own sphere as he has been in his.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Monday, January 14, 2013
Control
Before I begin sharing my thoughts on Gun Control, I want to clarify a few things. First off, I feel that reasonable people can reasonably disagree on important topics without the need to descend into personal invective or recriminating slander. Perhaps my biggest beef with the current gun control debate is it's hyper-polarization. While I realize that this has become somewhat of the norm, I cant help but ask myself, "What's a moderate supposed to do here?"
I have done my best to listen to both sides of this argument, and I think that there are thoughtful, moral, intelligent people on both sides of the line. Like most other issues, the matter of gun control is complex, and deserves genuine discussion. Finally, before you huff and puff away, please read the whole thing. Then lets talk about it.
Lets start off with me venting a little bit:
Gun Control Advocates:
I am not sure how many of them have fired a gun or owned one themselves, but I would be willing to say that most of them haven't. If they have, I would hazard the guess that they didn't enjoy themselves. The simple fact is that tens of millions of Americans derive a fair amount of enjoyment from shooting firearms. It is often a family activity that has special significance as a strong tradition. In my own home we fire "Granddaddy's Old .22" with special love and pride. I believe that it is nearly 100 years old, and it is usually the first weapon that kids in my family fire. For those of us who grew up in rural parts of the country, "going out shooting" is a cornerstone activity. One of my first dates was to take out a girl with a group of friends out into the hills shooting. Her daddy required someone to take personal responsibility for her safety and it scared the snot out of me. Hunting is not only a powerful tradition, it is an important conservation method. State game and fish departments carefully structure hunting in order to cultivate healthy populations of wildlife. The funds from hunters buying tags are one of the most powerful and direct means of protecting the natural environment. Nobody likes to be treated like a hick, or talked to like an idiot. I detest listening to the condescending tone assumed by an awful lot of gun control advocates. Its not only usually unjustified, but even more damning, it is counterproductive.
Guns are not just for hunting and recreation. They are a legitimate means of self defense. There are plenty of cases where responsible citizens have used firearms to protect themselves, their families, and innocent bystanders in the face of a determined and violent criminal. Gun control advocates often paint a picture of guns being the sure mark of a paranoid fanatic. This is simply not true. There are circumstances when the use of lethal force is not only justified, it is necessary to protect the innocent.
Gun Rights Activists:
I appreciated the NRA until I started to pay attention to politics. When I was growing up I thought that they were all that stood between my family and the ravenous liberals who wanted to turn our country into England. I don't see them that way anymore. Most of the time I see them as an embarrassment. You would swear that the Bill of Rights had only one amendment with these folks. I know a whole bunch of people who are memebers of the NRA, who support them financially. I don't want anyone to think that I am embarrassed by them. I am just saying that I don't think that they want to be political participants, they want to be political enforcers. They have put many a moderate republican into a tailspin during primaries because they were willing to TALK about gun regulation. They are part of our country's problem of brinkmanship. If you cant keep the NRA happy during your primary then you never even get a chance on the general ticket. We don't get very many middle of the road guys that way.
I was severely disappointed by the NRA's public comments following sandy hook. I had high hopes, since they elected to hold their comments until the funerals were complete I thought that they were developing a new sense of sensitivity. Boy was I wrong. Armed gaurds at every school? Are you kidding me? And who is going to pay for that? These people make no sense to me. They are the same guys who scream for smaller government. They had a great opportunity to contribute to a discussion. To provide a reasonable perspective. Instead they sounded like fanatics, they made every gun owner look like a fanatic.
And then there is Alex Jones and his insanity on Piers Morgan. I'm not 100% sure that this guy isn't a closet gun control advocate who is playing the role of the perfectly ignorant conspiracy theorist. He sounded downright dangerous. I couldn't believe how crazy this guy was! He was sure not only that the UN was planning to take our guns, but that elements of the Bush administration orchestrated 9/11/2001. That is right up there with the government of Iran guys. I mean seriously. They say the same dang things.
First: Who in the UN is going to come and take America's guns, against its will. WE have been the biggest contributor of military resources to the UN since its inception. Besides, if the UN wont go in and disarm a dictator that has killed 60,000 people over the last year and a half what makes anyone think that they will get the gumption to try and insert themselves into our domestic policy. The conspiracy theories here simply boggle me. Just about anyone who sits down and thinks about it objectively comes to realize that it is a bunch of hokum.
Next, we hear about modern psychiatric medications as the root of all evil. If we didn't have so many people on the meds, then we wouldn't have this problem, right? Well, kinda. If we didn't have so many people receiving inadequate care and supervision, we would have much less of a problem. However, nothing is solved by trying to get between a doctor and their patients. Problems like this are solved by giving the doctors and patients more resources. More case workers, more follow up, more treatment facilities, more legal support, more everything. And yes, that is all expensive. Welcome to healthcare. Sure we can be careful stewards, but screaming at pharmaceutical companies wont fix this problem. Pills have side effects, not even big pharm can change that. They would love to, because it would mean fewer lawsuits. There are no silver bullets. Sometimes mental health is long hard work.
So, what is my point? What is my proposed solution? Do I really think an assault weapons ban (that didn't work that well back in the day) is really the answer? Am I siding with the godless liberal horde? Do I need to reread the bill of rights?
Lets look at that last question first. As it so happens, I know the bill of rights fairly well. The second amendment reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
How about that first phrase, "A well regulated Militia." What do you know! The word REGULATED right there in the constitution. We are, after all, a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Order is a critical element of providing security to a free state. We prevent people from buying explosives, radioactive material, and dangerous chemicals. Those are all elements of modern warfare that are excluded from the public domain.
Next, lets consider the question of God. Most of the people who will read this are Mormon, or they know a bunch of Mormons. Like many religious people, we believe that there will eventually come a time when the world will be consumed in wickedness and war. A time of great trial and tribulation. We believe that when the time is right, Jesus Christ will return to the Earth in power and glory. He shall usher in a time of peace and hope and the end of the world.
To our friends who do not share our faith, or have different opinions on how everything will happen this eschatological fascination can be difficult to understand. I am convinced that many of the people who buy modern sporting rifles and high capacity magazines do so out of a genuine desire to be able to protect their families in any circumstance. They further see any sign that the government would want to limit their access to these kinds of weapons as a sign of the corruption that could produce a biblical apocalypse.
I believe that the most meaningful way to prepare for the future is to look forward with faith. The prophet has never told us to buy guns, he has asked us to grow gardens. He has never told us to build arsenals, but encouraged us to reach out and build up our communities. Christ's gospel is not one of conquest, or of violence. Yes, he wants us to stand up for the right, and war is sometimes necessary. What I am saying is that I will not accept religious justifications for armament until I am given that council from my religious leaders. We have much bigger fish to fry at the moment. We should be more worried about the things that they do talk to us about.
As for strict constitutionalism, Mormons should be more understanding than any other religious group to the need for ongoing revelation. Yes, I said revelation. Several prophets have talked about how the constitution was an inspired document, and that the founding fathers where inspired men. Well guess what! Joseph Smith taught that good governance is based on principles adapted to circumstance. I believe that the CURRENT leaders of our government are just as entitled to revelation as where our founding fathers. They weren't exactly angels themselves you know. The founding fathers also didn't think women should vote, blacks were really people, or that the federal government ought to collect income taxes. I don't personally feel that liming access to very dangerous weapons constitutes a betrayal of the second amendment. One disturbed person ought not to be able to do that much damage.
So finally we are down to it. What is my proposed solution?
I don't think that a weapons ban will work. The wrong people will still have access to guns. Crazy people will still be crazy, and then we wont be able to have a real conversation about this for another 20 years. Straight up prohibition is nearly unenforceable. Only law abiding people will abide the law.
My solution is to tax the living tar out of the stuff.
Remember, I'm a public health guy. There are plenty of things that we wish we could outlaw, like tobacco. But another amendment (the 18th) taught us that it is basically impossible to force people into doing what is good for them. So instead of outlawing cigarettes, we tax them until it hurts. In fact I wish that we taxed them even more, and that we put strict rules in place for how that money is spent. Healthcare and Public Health programs don't see nearly as many of those dollars that they should.
Modern Sporting Rifles, high capacity clips, and other such things represent a public liability. If responsible people want to use and enjoy them I think that they ought to shoulder a portion of that liability. The money should be set aside for gun safety, education, LOTS of mental health resources, and in some high risk environments to supplement police dollars for things like guards.
Some people will think that this is unfair, but I think that it is very very fair. The people who insist that we ought to be able to buy these things should be the first to shoulder up to the consequences of having guns on the street.
Long live the second amendment. But may we all remember the first thing that we were taught when we first shot a gun. Handling a firearm is a serious responsibility. If you cant be serious, then you shouldn't be around guns.
I have done my best to listen to both sides of this argument, and I think that there are thoughtful, moral, intelligent people on both sides of the line. Like most other issues, the matter of gun control is complex, and deserves genuine discussion. Finally, before you huff and puff away, please read the whole thing. Then lets talk about it.
Lets start off with me venting a little bit:
Gun Control Advocates:
I am not sure how many of them have fired a gun or owned one themselves, but I would be willing to say that most of them haven't. If they have, I would hazard the guess that they didn't enjoy themselves. The simple fact is that tens of millions of Americans derive a fair amount of enjoyment from shooting firearms. It is often a family activity that has special significance as a strong tradition. In my own home we fire "Granddaddy's Old .22" with special love and pride. I believe that it is nearly 100 years old, and it is usually the first weapon that kids in my family fire. For those of us who grew up in rural parts of the country, "going out shooting" is a cornerstone activity. One of my first dates was to take out a girl with a group of friends out into the hills shooting. Her daddy required someone to take personal responsibility for her safety and it scared the snot out of me. Hunting is not only a powerful tradition, it is an important conservation method. State game and fish departments carefully structure hunting in order to cultivate healthy populations of wildlife. The funds from hunters buying tags are one of the most powerful and direct means of protecting the natural environment. Nobody likes to be treated like a hick, or talked to like an idiot. I detest listening to the condescending tone assumed by an awful lot of gun control advocates. Its not only usually unjustified, but even more damning, it is counterproductive.
Guns are not just for hunting and recreation. They are a legitimate means of self defense. There are plenty of cases where responsible citizens have used firearms to protect themselves, their families, and innocent bystanders in the face of a determined and violent criminal. Gun control advocates often paint a picture of guns being the sure mark of a paranoid fanatic. This is simply not true. There are circumstances when the use of lethal force is not only justified, it is necessary to protect the innocent.
Gun Rights Activists:
I appreciated the NRA until I started to pay attention to politics. When I was growing up I thought that they were all that stood between my family and the ravenous liberals who wanted to turn our country into England. I don't see them that way anymore. Most of the time I see them as an embarrassment. You would swear that the Bill of Rights had only one amendment with these folks. I know a whole bunch of people who are memebers of the NRA, who support them financially. I don't want anyone to think that I am embarrassed by them. I am just saying that I don't think that they want to be political participants, they want to be political enforcers. They have put many a moderate republican into a tailspin during primaries because they were willing to TALK about gun regulation. They are part of our country's problem of brinkmanship. If you cant keep the NRA happy during your primary then you never even get a chance on the general ticket. We don't get very many middle of the road guys that way.
I was severely disappointed by the NRA's public comments following sandy hook. I had high hopes, since they elected to hold their comments until the funerals were complete I thought that they were developing a new sense of sensitivity. Boy was I wrong. Armed gaurds at every school? Are you kidding me? And who is going to pay for that? These people make no sense to me. They are the same guys who scream for smaller government. They had a great opportunity to contribute to a discussion. To provide a reasonable perspective. Instead they sounded like fanatics, they made every gun owner look like a fanatic.
And then there is Alex Jones and his insanity on Piers Morgan. I'm not 100% sure that this guy isn't a closet gun control advocate who is playing the role of the perfectly ignorant conspiracy theorist. He sounded downright dangerous. I couldn't believe how crazy this guy was! He was sure not only that the UN was planning to take our guns, but that elements of the Bush administration orchestrated 9/11/2001. That is right up there with the government of Iran guys. I mean seriously. They say the same dang things.
First: Who in the UN is going to come and take America's guns, against its will. WE have been the biggest contributor of military resources to the UN since its inception. Besides, if the UN wont go in and disarm a dictator that has killed 60,000 people over the last year and a half what makes anyone think that they will get the gumption to try and insert themselves into our domestic policy. The conspiracy theories here simply boggle me. Just about anyone who sits down and thinks about it objectively comes to realize that it is a bunch of hokum.
Next, we hear about modern psychiatric medications as the root of all evil. If we didn't have so many people on the meds, then we wouldn't have this problem, right? Well, kinda. If we didn't have so many people receiving inadequate care and supervision, we would have much less of a problem. However, nothing is solved by trying to get between a doctor and their patients. Problems like this are solved by giving the doctors and patients more resources. More case workers, more follow up, more treatment facilities, more legal support, more everything. And yes, that is all expensive. Welcome to healthcare. Sure we can be careful stewards, but screaming at pharmaceutical companies wont fix this problem. Pills have side effects, not even big pharm can change that. They would love to, because it would mean fewer lawsuits. There are no silver bullets. Sometimes mental health is long hard work.
So, what is my point? What is my proposed solution? Do I really think an assault weapons ban (that didn't work that well back in the day) is really the answer? Am I siding with the godless liberal horde? Do I need to reread the bill of rights?
Lets look at that last question first. As it so happens, I know the bill of rights fairly well. The second amendment reads:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
How about that first phrase, "A well regulated Militia." What do you know! The word REGULATED right there in the constitution. We are, after all, a government of the people, by the people, for the people. Order is a critical element of providing security to a free state. We prevent people from buying explosives, radioactive material, and dangerous chemicals. Those are all elements of modern warfare that are excluded from the public domain.
Next, lets consider the question of God. Most of the people who will read this are Mormon, or they know a bunch of Mormons. Like many religious people, we believe that there will eventually come a time when the world will be consumed in wickedness and war. A time of great trial and tribulation. We believe that when the time is right, Jesus Christ will return to the Earth in power and glory. He shall usher in a time of peace and hope and the end of the world.
To our friends who do not share our faith, or have different opinions on how everything will happen this eschatological fascination can be difficult to understand. I am convinced that many of the people who buy modern sporting rifles and high capacity magazines do so out of a genuine desire to be able to protect their families in any circumstance. They further see any sign that the government would want to limit their access to these kinds of weapons as a sign of the corruption that could produce a biblical apocalypse.
I believe that the most meaningful way to prepare for the future is to look forward with faith. The prophet has never told us to buy guns, he has asked us to grow gardens. He has never told us to build arsenals, but encouraged us to reach out and build up our communities. Christ's gospel is not one of conquest, or of violence. Yes, he wants us to stand up for the right, and war is sometimes necessary. What I am saying is that I will not accept religious justifications for armament until I am given that council from my religious leaders. We have much bigger fish to fry at the moment. We should be more worried about the things that they do talk to us about.
As for strict constitutionalism, Mormons should be more understanding than any other religious group to the need for ongoing revelation. Yes, I said revelation. Several prophets have talked about how the constitution was an inspired document, and that the founding fathers where inspired men. Well guess what! Joseph Smith taught that good governance is based on principles adapted to circumstance. I believe that the CURRENT leaders of our government are just as entitled to revelation as where our founding fathers. They weren't exactly angels themselves you know. The founding fathers also didn't think women should vote, blacks were really people, or that the federal government ought to collect income taxes. I don't personally feel that liming access to very dangerous weapons constitutes a betrayal of the second amendment. One disturbed person ought not to be able to do that much damage.
So finally we are down to it. What is my proposed solution?
I don't think that a weapons ban will work. The wrong people will still have access to guns. Crazy people will still be crazy, and then we wont be able to have a real conversation about this for another 20 years. Straight up prohibition is nearly unenforceable. Only law abiding people will abide the law.
My solution is to tax the living tar out of the stuff.
Remember, I'm a public health guy. There are plenty of things that we wish we could outlaw, like tobacco. But another amendment (the 18th) taught us that it is basically impossible to force people into doing what is good for them. So instead of outlawing cigarettes, we tax them until it hurts. In fact I wish that we taxed them even more, and that we put strict rules in place for how that money is spent. Healthcare and Public Health programs don't see nearly as many of those dollars that they should.
Modern Sporting Rifles, high capacity clips, and other such things represent a public liability. If responsible people want to use and enjoy them I think that they ought to shoulder a portion of that liability. The money should be set aside for gun safety, education, LOTS of mental health resources, and in some high risk environments to supplement police dollars for things like guards.
Some people will think that this is unfair, but I think that it is very very fair. The people who insist that we ought to be able to buy these things should be the first to shoulder up to the consequences of having guns on the street.
Long live the second amendment. But may we all remember the first thing that we were taught when we first shot a gun. Handling a firearm is a serious responsibility. If you cant be serious, then you shouldn't be around guns.
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Young Love
1. I work as a stage manager at BYU; and therefore have been somewhat involved in the preparations for the upcoming production of the Phantom of the Opera. Most of what I have helped with has had more to do with orchestra chairs and hanging curtains, but I have been in the space while the cast and crew have worked through flight rehearsals and so forth. Suffice it to say that it has been in my peripheral for the last month and a half or so.
2. Zeffirelli's 1968 "Romeo & Juliet" is on Netflix. It's actually quite well done. (FYI although it says PG, there is a brief moment of nudity. I still think it is worth watching.) I'm a hopeless Shakespeare fanboy, so even though it is Romeo and Juliet I was pretty excited to watch it. It makes the 1998 version everyone watched in High School look overdone and kitschy (not that it needed any help.)
Two very popular love stories. In fact they are so popular that the hipster bibliophile in me doesn't want to like them. They both showcase highly malleable female characters and relatively weak plot lines. They also sell out theaters time and time and time again. BYU has poured enough time and money into Phantom to do at least two Shakespeare plays at a very high level. (Not that we don't do Shakespeare, I absolutely loved Stephanie Brinholt's adaptation and directing of last season's "Love's Labors Lost") What is the magic of these works? Phantom is a deeply experiential work, lots of rich visuals and vocals. In a way it somehow manages to encapsulate and replicate the deeply moving experience of love. Romeo and Juliet is all about the conflict of love. Conflicting identities, conflicting obligations, conflicting emotions, and at the very last the conviction of love and the converting power of love.
Now don't get me wrong, there are PLENTY of other plays/operas/stories out there that hit these same concepts. In fact there are many that do a better job of it. But I think that is why these stories are told time and time again. Why we want to hear them time and time again.
For the first time in my life I am both young, and in love. I've been infatuated before, but I always knew that it was infatuation. There are other works that cover that ground (Midsummer Night's dream anyone?) In a way that I never fully realized, these stories tell some pretty timeless truth. Love is deeply experiential and sensational. A quiet moment together with that special someone can really be like listening to a symphony. (The experience is made manifold when you happen to be listening to a symphony together, but I digress.) Your heart sings songs that only the angels can hear. Love becomes the Phantom and the Opera.
And yet there is terrible conflict. Talk about an identity shift for everyone. In my case I don't have to worry about my girlfriend's family wanting to kill me (at least I hope not) but I have to worry about my own sensibilities driving me away from faith in the future and into fear of the unknown. There are days that my logical self drives my amorous self away to Mantua. But there is also conviction in old Will's story. Courage to face whatever odds because of how you feel. Is there any scene more courageous than Juliet facing the Friars tincture in the name of love? I can't think of one. Eventually love has the power to heal old divisions, and redefine us.
BUT WAAAAIIIIT! You mean to tell me that your fine with all of the silly plot problems? The teenagers who kill themselves, the girl who is in love with one guy when he is with her and the other guy when she is around him? You mean to tell me that Romeo and Juliet were really in "love" after 2 minutes?
No, I didn't say that. I think that people looking at these sorts of things microscopically are bound to find lots of problems. I usually find myself in this pickle. I almost can't help but snicker at the rather large leaps that authors and directors and actors make in these stories.
What I am saying is that when you look at these things macroscopically and conceptually, some powerful things show up. Powerful things that help to justify the masses and the theaters that give them what they want so that they can afford other projects throughout the year.
Young love is powerful, and it doesn't always make sense and we don't really care. It embodies some of the things that we most seek after as humans. We want for someone to love us as deeply as did Romeo and Juliet love eachother. We want love to make us sing like Raul and Christine (even if the song is only in our hearts). We want to be young at heart, and full of life and strength. We want to remember that when love and her courage are lined up toe to toe with circumstance and all its fears, in the end love wins.
So even though part of me would prefer to have BYU pull off "A Doll's House" by Ibsen.
Which is story about love from a whole different side of things, but a powerful one nonetheless, I am excited for Phantom.
2. Zeffirelli's 1968 "Romeo & Juliet" is on Netflix. It's actually quite well done. (FYI although it says PG, there is a brief moment of nudity. I still think it is worth watching.) I'm a hopeless Shakespeare fanboy, so even though it is Romeo and Juliet I was pretty excited to watch it. It makes the 1998 version everyone watched in High School look overdone and kitschy (not that it needed any help.)
Two very popular love stories. In fact they are so popular that the hipster bibliophile in me doesn't want to like them. They both showcase highly malleable female characters and relatively weak plot lines. They also sell out theaters time and time and time again. BYU has poured enough time and money into Phantom to do at least two Shakespeare plays at a very high level. (Not that we don't do Shakespeare, I absolutely loved Stephanie Brinholt's adaptation and directing of last season's "Love's Labors Lost") What is the magic of these works? Phantom is a deeply experiential work, lots of rich visuals and vocals. In a way it somehow manages to encapsulate and replicate the deeply moving experience of love. Romeo and Juliet is all about the conflict of love. Conflicting identities, conflicting obligations, conflicting emotions, and at the very last the conviction of love and the converting power of love.
Now don't get me wrong, there are PLENTY of other plays/operas/stories out there that hit these same concepts. In fact there are many that do a better job of it. But I think that is why these stories are told time and time again. Why we want to hear them time and time again.
For the first time in my life I am both young, and in love. I've been infatuated before, but I always knew that it was infatuation. There are other works that cover that ground (Midsummer Night's dream anyone?) In a way that I never fully realized, these stories tell some pretty timeless truth. Love is deeply experiential and sensational. A quiet moment together with that special someone can really be like listening to a symphony. (The experience is made manifold when you happen to be listening to a symphony together, but I digress.) Your heart sings songs that only the angels can hear. Love becomes the Phantom and the Opera.
And yet there is terrible conflict. Talk about an identity shift for everyone. In my case I don't have to worry about my girlfriend's family wanting to kill me (at least I hope not) but I have to worry about my own sensibilities driving me away from faith in the future and into fear of the unknown. There are days that my logical self drives my amorous self away to Mantua. But there is also conviction in old Will's story. Courage to face whatever odds because of how you feel. Is there any scene more courageous than Juliet facing the Friars tincture in the name of love? I can't think of one. Eventually love has the power to heal old divisions, and redefine us.
BUT WAAAAIIIIT! You mean to tell me that your fine with all of the silly plot problems? The teenagers who kill themselves, the girl who is in love with one guy when he is with her and the other guy when she is around him? You mean to tell me that Romeo and Juliet were really in "love" after 2 minutes?
No, I didn't say that. I think that people looking at these sorts of things microscopically are bound to find lots of problems. I usually find myself in this pickle. I almost can't help but snicker at the rather large leaps that authors and directors and actors make in these stories.
What I am saying is that when you look at these things macroscopically and conceptually, some powerful things show up. Powerful things that help to justify the masses and the theaters that give them what they want so that they can afford other projects throughout the year.
Young love is powerful, and it doesn't always make sense and we don't really care. It embodies some of the things that we most seek after as humans. We want for someone to love us as deeply as did Romeo and Juliet love eachother. We want love to make us sing like Raul and Christine (even if the song is only in our hearts). We want to be young at heart, and full of life and strength. We want to remember that when love and her courage are lined up toe to toe with circumstance and all its fears, in the end love wins.
So even though part of me would prefer to have BYU pull off "A Doll's House" by Ibsen.
Which is story about love from a whole different side of things, but a powerful one nonetheless, I am excited for Phantom.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
For Whom the Bell Tolls
John Donne's line, made famous by Hemmingway's novel, resonates with each of us as we consider the ties that bind the human family. The death, darkness, and doubt that trouble others also wounds us. When sin and sadness shroud the divine sparks behind the eyes of strangers, it is we who see through a glass but dimly. Often we are made to feel the oppressive weight of our humanity. That we are doomed not only by our own failings, but by the frailty of our species. Fallen beings who are helplessly bound by our common experience and parentage.
Yet, it is in these innumerable and adamantine fetters that we find the greatest of human joys. I need not send to know for who whom the sun rises, the birds sing, or the flowers bloom. Their joy is mine. Their hope is my light. Their love is my solace. No man is an island.
What manner of men then ought we be? Each of us some small clod of clay facing the might of the sea? Even as He who was most involved in mankind, that great Promontory. Because we are things of earth, meant to end in the storm and surf we simply must choose the manner in which we will end. As that great one who lifted the whole of our family with His fall. Or as as the mean and slimy stone that sinks into the abyss and drags each of us closer to it. Though we are base in form and substance, we may follow each day we live the course set by Him who great love blesses all of us. That love that lives because He chose to die.
No man is an island. Bells do not only ring at funerals.
Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Stories and Thoughts
The best stories are those that teach us about ourselves. Wars may rage, and darkness may lash out in anger, but good men rise up, and the dawn eventually comes. We each face private tragedies, and there are times when all seems lost. Yet, there comes through the dissonance and doubt a heavenly melody. Underneath the chaos, behind the swirling mists, beyond and above all things, there is God, and His love. There are so many things that I do not understand. There are nights when I feel alone, and insufficient. In dark moments I am afraid to ask questions too loudly, because of how painful the answers might be.
Somehow, in those seasons of fear I begin to see and hear the world around me come alive. The clamor of doubt is suddenly hushed with the gentle song of a bird, or the elegant grace of a newborn flower, or perhaps with the reverent peace that clings to mountaintops. A quiet word, a kindly voice, a page filled with printed perspective and wisdom.
Praise be to God for the Gift of His Son. The Divine Emmanuel. Surely the Lord is the Prince of Peace, who's arm is stretched out unto all nations. Lo, He came into the world, that through Him it might be saved, that men might not perish. I know that there are many good people, and many good things in this world that do not claim Christ. I know that had I been born in another time, or to another family, or in a different country, that I might believe differently then I do. I understand that every religion has always thought it was true, and that the people who believed so did so sincerely. I understand that it is an awfully bold thing for any intelligent or educated man to claim that their faith is the truth in its fullness, universal and unending.
But I do know that my faith is my own. I know that it has always lead me towards goodness and light. I know that it has strengthened me in my trials. I know that I have felt and heard and seen and done things that no earthly power can explain. And I know in my heart that all that I hope for and in is not just some story. It is true. I can love the rest of my brothers and sisters, and the beautiful things that lead them to greater light, but that does not mean that I must forget my own. Nor does it mean that there is no real light. It means that I am blessed beyond my ability to comprehend.
I bear witness that God lives, and that He loves His children. I know that He has blessed them with truth throughout time, in whatever measure they where ready for. He has always called prophets and revealed scripture in order to teach mankind of His divine plan of happiness. To those who have lived outside of the reach of a prophet's voice he has given light enough to live lives full of faith and honest goodness. Over two thousand years ago He sent His son to Earth in order to provide all of His children with a way to overcome sin through repentance and death through resurrection. His Son, Jesus Christ, lived a life of perfect goodness, and spent His days teaching and blessing all those around Him. In order to fulfill His Father's plan, He suffered the unimaginable weight of the sins and pains and trials of every human heart. He allowed His enemies to take his life, and surrendered willingly because of His great love for each of us. He sacrificed everything in order to save us from the darkness of this world, and the darkness that lies within each of us. Because He was the Son of God, and had lived a life free from sin, He had power even over death, and three days after He was crucified His body and spirit where united in a glorious Resurrection, never again to be parted by death or saddened by sickness or pain. In Him the death that mankind inherited from mortality is swallowed up, ensuring that every person that has ever lived, will live again forever. Through this great Atonement of Christ, all men may be saved through obedience to the laws and ordinances of His Gospel. They can overcome temptation, and become clean and pure.
I know these things and many others, because of the power of the Holy Ghost. I have felt the quiet peace and understanding that comes from learning truth. I love the Lord, and know in my heart that despite my many failings that I am the son of a loving Father in Heaven who has a plan for me, and for everyone else. He wants for us to be happy, and watches over each of us.
I know that everyone who reads this might not share my faith. I hope that any who do know that I don't think of myself, or even my people, as better than anyone else. We are all children of the same God. We are all looking for the same things in life, and doing the best that we know how. I do not think any man can read the Bible with an open mind and come away feeling like Jesus wanted them to exclude or belittle anybody. As a simple man, seeking to follow Him, I take these words very seriously. "By this shall men know ye are my deciples, if ye have love, one to another."
Bryon Davis
Somehow, in those seasons of fear I begin to see and hear the world around me come alive. The clamor of doubt is suddenly hushed with the gentle song of a bird, or the elegant grace of a newborn flower, or perhaps with the reverent peace that clings to mountaintops. A quiet word, a kindly voice, a page filled with printed perspective and wisdom.
Praise be to God for the Gift of His Son. The Divine Emmanuel. Surely the Lord is the Prince of Peace, who's arm is stretched out unto all nations. Lo, He came into the world, that through Him it might be saved, that men might not perish. I know that there are many good people, and many good things in this world that do not claim Christ. I know that had I been born in another time, or to another family, or in a different country, that I might believe differently then I do. I understand that every religion has always thought it was true, and that the people who believed so did so sincerely. I understand that it is an awfully bold thing for any intelligent or educated man to claim that their faith is the truth in its fullness, universal and unending.
But I do know that my faith is my own. I know that it has always lead me towards goodness and light. I know that it has strengthened me in my trials. I know that I have felt and heard and seen and done things that no earthly power can explain. And I know in my heart that all that I hope for and in is not just some story. It is true. I can love the rest of my brothers and sisters, and the beautiful things that lead them to greater light, but that does not mean that I must forget my own. Nor does it mean that there is no real light. It means that I am blessed beyond my ability to comprehend.
I bear witness that God lives, and that He loves His children. I know that He has blessed them with truth throughout time, in whatever measure they where ready for. He has always called prophets and revealed scripture in order to teach mankind of His divine plan of happiness. To those who have lived outside of the reach of a prophet's voice he has given light enough to live lives full of faith and honest goodness. Over two thousand years ago He sent His son to Earth in order to provide all of His children with a way to overcome sin through repentance and death through resurrection. His Son, Jesus Christ, lived a life of perfect goodness, and spent His days teaching and blessing all those around Him. In order to fulfill His Father's plan, He suffered the unimaginable weight of the sins and pains and trials of every human heart. He allowed His enemies to take his life, and surrendered willingly because of His great love for each of us. He sacrificed everything in order to save us from the darkness of this world, and the darkness that lies within each of us. Because He was the Son of God, and had lived a life free from sin, He had power even over death, and three days after He was crucified His body and spirit where united in a glorious Resurrection, never again to be parted by death or saddened by sickness or pain. In Him the death that mankind inherited from mortality is swallowed up, ensuring that every person that has ever lived, will live again forever. Through this great Atonement of Christ, all men may be saved through obedience to the laws and ordinances of His Gospel. They can overcome temptation, and become clean and pure.
I know these things and many others, because of the power of the Holy Ghost. I have felt the quiet peace and understanding that comes from learning truth. I love the Lord, and know in my heart that despite my many failings that I am the son of a loving Father in Heaven who has a plan for me, and for everyone else. He wants for us to be happy, and watches over each of us.
I know that everyone who reads this might not share my faith. I hope that any who do know that I don't think of myself, or even my people, as better than anyone else. We are all children of the same God. We are all looking for the same things in life, and doing the best that we know how. I do not think any man can read the Bible with an open mind and come away feeling like Jesus wanted them to exclude or belittle anybody. As a simple man, seeking to follow Him, I take these words very seriously. "By this shall men know ye are my deciples, if ye have love, one to another."
Bryon Davis
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Where is Mr. Rogers?
Right now the biggest question in American politics is how to balance our budget. The most severe economic climate this side of Pearl Harbor, not to mention two extended conflicts overseas have seriously effected the fiscal standing of the United States. It seems universally accepted that spending must be brought in check before we find ourselves in financial ruin. Politicians from every conceivable persuasion have forwarded their ideas, but comprehensive solutions are evasive. One program that has attracted a lot of attention is the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the funding that runs PBS and NPR. Seen by some as outdated and unnecessary, the future of publicly funded television and radio programs seems uncertain.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time that these programs have been in jeopardy. In 1969 budget hawks had their eyes on Public Television, and it seemed like the program was doomed to be cut. What they didn't plan on was one seriously sincere man, Fred Rogers. In six minutes of unpretentious, heartfelt testimony, Mr. Rogers taught a jaded senate that "Its great to be able to to stop, when you have planned a thing that's wrong, and so something else instead." For anyone who hasn't seen his testimony before, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXEuEUQIP3Q
Now I want to be clear here, a lot has changed since 1969. I am not so sure that things should be done the same way. In fact I think that it would be best for CBP to fund programs that are then sold to major networks that have better distribution and larger audiences to increase the number of people who are helped by these programs. (Think Disney Channel, Cartoon Network, Discovery, TLC, and so forth.) While maintaining a presence on public broadcasts by NBC CBS and so forth so as to still reach low income families who might not get cable. I think CBP could be leaner, meaner, and more effective. HOWEVER, I have to wonder, where is Mr. Rogers? He didn't have to yell, he didn't have to use big words. He was just right, and he cared about all of those kids, and he wanted to help them. He spent time with them, he knew what they where having to deal with, he knew that they faced a world filled with conflict, and he was going to do whatever he could to give them a neighborhood where they where special.
I study communities, I look at how everything in a persons life influences their health. I am a strong believer in good public programs, and I think that Public Broadcasting seems willing to go out without standing up for the children that they serve a damnable indication of the state of those programs. Where is Mr. Rogers? Is corporate America now to be entrusted with the shepherding tender minds? Do we want our children to remember shallow, mind numbing programs that are better at producing action figures than helping human beings develop? Where is Mr. Rogers? Have we closed the door on forward thinking, genuine programs? Are there no longer markets that programs that operate under similar principles can appeal to? Anyone who says so is a lying fool, and I am willing to take him to neighborhoods and into homes where children desperately need whatever we can give them. I am willing to show you parents who are working as long and hard as they know how, but have trouble finding good influences for their children. I think that there are a lot of people that saw something in Mr. Rogers that they don't see too often in public media: Faith. Faith in the future, in the goodness that lies in every human heart. Faith in the next generation, and above all else faith in a loving Father in Heaven who wants for us all to be neighbors.
Interestingly enough, this is not the first time that these programs have been in jeopardy. In 1969 budget hawks had their eyes on Public Television, and it seemed like the program was doomed to be cut. What they didn't plan on was one seriously sincere man, Fred Rogers. In six minutes of unpretentious, heartfelt testimony, Mr. Rogers taught a jaded senate that "Its great to be able to to stop, when you have planned a thing that's wrong, and so something else instead." For anyone who hasn't seen his testimony before, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXEuEUQIP3Q
Now I want to be clear here, a lot has changed since 1969. I am not so sure that things should be done the same way. In fact I think that it would be best for CBP to fund programs that are then sold to major networks that have better distribution and larger audiences to increase the number of people who are helped by these programs. (Think Disney Channel, Cartoon Network, Discovery, TLC, and so forth.) While maintaining a presence on public broadcasts by NBC CBS and so forth so as to still reach low income families who might not get cable. I think CBP could be leaner, meaner, and more effective. HOWEVER, I have to wonder, where is Mr. Rogers? He didn't have to yell, he didn't have to use big words. He was just right, and he cared about all of those kids, and he wanted to help them. He spent time with them, he knew what they where having to deal with, he knew that they faced a world filled with conflict, and he was going to do whatever he could to give them a neighborhood where they where special.
I study communities, I look at how everything in a persons life influences their health. I am a strong believer in good public programs, and I think that Public Broadcasting seems willing to go out without standing up for the children that they serve a damnable indication of the state of those programs. Where is Mr. Rogers? Is corporate America now to be entrusted with the shepherding tender minds? Do we want our children to remember shallow, mind numbing programs that are better at producing action figures than helping human beings develop? Where is Mr. Rogers? Have we closed the door on forward thinking, genuine programs? Are there no longer markets that programs that operate under similar principles can appeal to? Anyone who says so is a lying fool, and I am willing to take him to neighborhoods and into homes where children desperately need whatever we can give them. I am willing to show you parents who are working as long and hard as they know how, but have trouble finding good influences for their children. I think that there are a lot of people that saw something in Mr. Rogers that they don't see too often in public media: Faith. Faith in the future, in the goodness that lies in every human heart. Faith in the next generation, and above all else faith in a loving Father in Heaven who wants for us all to be neighbors.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Spring
In the silence of the morning
When with rose and amber ray
The dawn breaks upon the mountains
The golden herald of the day
It seems for a moment
That the ancient hills sing
Though the snow lies thick upon them
In our souls there is spring
When with rose and amber ray
The dawn breaks upon the mountains
The golden herald of the day
It seems for a moment
That the ancient hills sing
Though the snow lies thick upon them
In our souls there is spring
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)