Spectrum Reviews

Reminder: The Meaning of Jesus and Jesus of Montreal Coming Up

Daneen Akers — Thu, 15 May 2008 07:04:05 -0700

Just a reminder of this month's book and film club discussion selections. In keeping with the quarterly's focus, we're choosing a book and a film about Jesus. Please encourage friends, family, Sabbath School class members--anyone you think might be interested--to join us.

May 2008 (Discussion starts June 2)
Book: The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions by N.T. Wright and Marcus Borg

Amazon.com Editorial Description:
The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions is a theological remix of the old Cole Porter song "Let's Call the Whole Thing Off." In alternating chapters, the (mostly) liberal Marcus J. Borg and the (mostly) conservative N.T. Wright consider the major questions of the historical-Jesus debate that has dominated biblical studies in the 1990s. Borg and Wright agree that Jesus was the Christian messiah and preached the Kingdom of God, but they disagree about the Virgin birth, the purpose of Jesus' death, the issue of his bodily resurrection, and the question of his divinity. The Ping-Pong structure of this book and the fastidious politeness with which the authors treat one another sometimes give The Meaning of Jesus a tomato/tomahto, potato/potahto bounciness, but the project is nevertheless worthy: this is a simple, clear orientation to some of the most important biblical questions of our time, and a record of a lively and loving friendship between two of the best Christian scholars alive.

The book club discussion will be led by Gary Chartier.

Film: (Classic Film Night) Jesus of Montreal Note: This film is also available on Netflix.

See a trailer of the film here.

Amazon.com Editorial Description:
What happens to the people putting on a Passion Play? Someday Mel Gibson may tell us, but Denys Arcand's Jesus of Montreal proposes an engaging possibility. In hip present-day Montreal, a group of actors stages the Passion in an outdoor, somewhat avant-garde style, led by the quietly charismatic and increasingly uncanny young man (Lothaire Bluteau, Black Robe) playing Christ. His identification with the role, and the way it bleeds into real life, gives director Denys Arcand plenty of opportunities for social comment--some of it spot-on, some of it a little facile. But the fragile Bluteau is such a fascinating lead presence (the other actors are familiar from Arcand's Barbarian Invasions and Decline of the American Empire) that the movie's spell lasts long after it's over. Turns out the French-Canadian approach to the Passion can be just as intriguing as the original Aramaic.

The film club discussion will be led by Rich Hannon.

Film Club Discussion on The Power of Forgiveness

Shasta Nelson — Tue, 13 May 2008 02:29:36 -0700

In 1998 there were only a handful of studies researching the subject of forgiveness. By 2005 that number had climbed to 950. The Power of Forgiveness, the latest documentary from Martin Doblmeier, traces the growing scientific interest in forgiveness during these years, ironically reflecting my own journey in those same years as I developed my own expertise on the subject, not so much from studying it at Seminary, preaching it as a pastor, or being such a generous giver of it as much as from making life decisions that made me desperately aware of how much I longed to receive it. I confess up front that my experience in extending forgiveness is outweighed by my experience in needing it.

The Power of Forgiveness weaves stories and interviews together from people who have journeyed the road of forgiveness. These stories range from personal injustices to those within entire communities. From generational conflict in Northern Ireland and religious persecution during the days of the Holocaust to the ethnic injustices to African slaves and the losses endured by families of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the stories highlight the complexity that is found within the one word forgiveness.

In watching the film there were multiple themes that continued to be voiced from a range of scientists, victims, mental health professionals, and theologians. Among them was the most obvious: Forgiveness is difficult. Always.

However, scientific evidence and religious teachings from all belief systems seemed to agree that forgiving others was worth the pursuit and of value to the victims. Researchers interviewing those who had had their trust violated showed that whether the person had forgiven their offender or not, all interviewees had spikes in their blood pressure when they began to recount the wrongs done to them. Data seems to agree that one can forgive, but still not forget. The difference only happened as the victims continued in the telling of their story. The blood pressure of those who had forgiven the wrong normalized quickly as they progressed through the details of their memory. While those who hadn’t yet forgiven, regardless of the length of time that had passed or the size of the offense, would continue to not only heighten their blood pressure throughout the telling, but also live with a higher resting heart rate than their forgiving peers.

Undoubtedly there seems to be benefits, both spiritually and physically, in the process of forgiveness. But that didn’t seem to necessarily answer the question that was voiced from a mother whose son was killed when the Twin Towers collapsed, and whose body now lies in a trash heap outside of New York City, as she asked the question that was echoed through out the interviews of various victims: Are there some acts that are unforgivable?

Apparently there is a proposal for a Garden of Forgiveness to be created at Ground Zero. Some find comfort in the idea of that space being provided for their reflection, while others think it offensive to even suggest that such a place is appropriate at a site of such acts of wrongdoing. The question lingers in so many various forms but all hinting of the same ache: Can you forgive someone who doesn’t take responsibility and ask for forgiveness? Or whose atonement or punishment hasn’t been completed? Or, even with those factors in place, are there occasions where forgiveness is impossible or wrong to extend? In other words: Are there transgressions that outweigh the value of forgiveness?

As we enter into a format of a movie discussion, I encourage those who have seen the movie to offer pieces of the interviews that most spoke to you, taught you, inspired you, convicted you and touched you. What did you see and hear that moved you on the subject of forgiveness? And, how would you answer those haunting questions of people who hurt so deeply as they grapple with the concept of whether forgiveness really is the right pursuit for all of us?

Shasta Nelson writes from San Francisco where she is a life coach and pastor.

Read an interview with filmmaker Martin Doblmeier here.
.

Testament: A Fictional Look at Jesus

Trudy Morgan-Cole — Mon, 12 May 2008 04:04:52 -0700

Testament is a gorgeously written re-telling of the story of Jesus of Nazareth — not the story of the divine Son of God, but of a compelling and complex human being in first-century Galilee. The story is told in four parts from the perspective of four different characters — Judas Iscariot, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, and an extra-Biblical character of the author’s own invention, Simon of Gergesa. Each of these characters had a very different relationship with Jesus and, as with the four Gospels, the four different stories reveal different facets of Jesus’ character, not always agreeing with each other but adding up to an intriguing whole.

Testament is not Biblical fiction for the faint of heart — by which I mean it’s not for those devout believers who don’t like seeing the Biblical text questioned or challenged. It’s somewhat in the vein of The Red Tent in the sense of subverting the “official” story, only this is even more challenging than The Red Tent because it touches on the story at the heart of the Christian faith — the life of Jesus, and even more specifically His death and resurrection.

Ricci’s Jesus is not a divine Jesus; he is a human being, the son not of God but of an illicit encounter between a Jewish girl and a Roman soldier. He is an brilliant but enigmatic teacher; a gifted healer rather than a supernatural miracle-worker. He is a good man but not a perfect one, and the legacy he leaves behind is confusing at best. Ricci credits the work of the Jesus Seminar in his Acknowledgements, and that’s no surprise to anyone who’s followed the “historical Jesus” debates. This is John Dominic Crossan’s Jesus, Marcus Borg’s Jesus, brought to life in a vivid and compelling story. This is a fully human Jesus, a product not only of Galilee but of his family’s early years in Egypt, which Ricci sets in cosmopolitan Alexandria and continues until Jesus’ early teens. Ricci’s Jesus is primarily a product of the Greco-Roman world and only incidentally Jewish, though he does worship the God of Israel: he stands outside the Jewish religious system and has more in common with the Cynic philosophers than with the Jewish prophets.

Read purely as a work of historical fiction, Testament is a wonderful story, brilliantly portrayed. I had some quibbles with the last section, that told from the point of view of the fictional Simon — I understand why this Gentile character’s perspective was included, but I thought shifting to the view of an outsider weakened the impact of the story’s end, and I didn’t fully understand the purpose of another fictional character, a con man named Jerubal, who is introduced in this section. In general I thought Ricci’s story was strongest when he used the characters and incidents included in the canonical gospels and put his own “spin” on them, rather than when inventing his own fictional characters and incidents. But this is one quibble with a marvellous literary work.

Read as the fictional outworking of a particular theological stance, the book was thought-provoking. Not every Christian is comfortable with the story of a Jesus who was not born of a virgin, did not walk on water and did not appear to his followers after he died. But for theological conservatives like me, the book may help to answer the question of what people see in the man Jesus even if they don’t believe in the divine Son of God — why many people who don’t accept all the baggage of Christian theology still find the character of Jesus attractive, compelling and challenging 2000 years later. And even for those of us who do believe Jesus was divine, it’s fascinating to speculate on what He was like as a human being. This novel opens up layers of possibility and invites us into the world in which Jesus — whoever we believe Him to be — lived and taught.

Trudy Morgan-Cole is a writer, teacher and mom from Newfoundland who writes regular book reviews over at Compulsive Overreader, where this review was originally published.

You can buy Testament from our Amazon affiliate account and support Spectrum with your purchase.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed Reviewed

Aimee C. Wyrick-Brownworth — Wed, 07 May 2008 03:57:13 -0700

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, written by Kevin Miller and Ben Stein, begins with intense footage of the building of the Berlin Wall. As the introductory credits roll, the confusion and shock at the wall’s construction is made very real as several young boys kick around a ball. As the ball is kicked into the air it flies up and over the wall, apparently lost forever. Numerous black and white film sequences are used throughout the film and are an effective (though cheap) way to elicit strong feelings from the viewer.

At the beginning of Expelled we watch Ben Stein, the infamously droll economics teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off and former speech writer for President Nixon, address a college group. In his presentation Stein introduces the major theme of this movie and it’s not necessarily intelligent design! Instead, Stein focuses on freedom of speech in the United States of America and suggests that as Americans we are “losing freedom in science.” In this way, the movie jumps into an investigation of whether this is the case.

Stein interviews several scientists who have lost their jobs and been “black balled” from mainstream science because of minor admissions of the plausibility of design. Richard von Sternberg, former editor of The Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, was fired by the Smithsonian Institute after he authorized the inclusion of a paper by Stephen Meyer that was supportive of intelligent design. Stein interviews two professors who each lost their jobs (from separate universities) after supposedly sympathizing with intelligent design. In addition, several more scientists are interviewed but their appearance is distorted because they fear repercussions from the scientific community. Overall, the conclusion appears clear that if you are a scientist you best never (publicly) discuss intelligent design.

So what is the problem with intelligent design? In one scientist’s mind ID is simply a “bore.” Another equates intelligent design with fundamental creationism and says that the only thing “intelligent” about ID is the clever way that this old idea has been repackaged. Still another scientist feels that an allowance of intelligent design in the classroom will eventually give way to mandated prayer in schools and religious intolerance. Ben Stein wonders if the ID movement is really the conspiracy that these scientists suggest.

The Discovery Institute is the primary think-tank of the intelligent design movement. This “institute,” according to its spokesperson, wishes only to encourage robust dialogue on the issues that Darwinism faces and intelligent design proposes. Stein interviews several other scientists that agree with ID and the impression is that these individuals are intelligent and are simply concerned about working under a set of scientific rules (Darwinism) that don’t totally work. David Berlinski questions whether Darwin is correct and/or whether these ideas are “clean enough” to really be worthwhile.

No movie that focuses on this issue would be complete without input from Richard Dawkins and we actually get to hear quite a bit of him. Dawkins is very direct and does not mince words. He knows that evolution is a fact and anyone who disagrees is “insane, stupid, or ignorant.” The movie delves into one of the questions that should be at forefront in the evolution-intelligent design conversation, how did life begin? Dawkins and others repeatedly state that we don’t know how life began. Maybe life on earth began on the backs of crystals or was seeded from an extraterrestrial source. What comes next is one of the best moments of the movie – a cartoon sequence starring Dawkins. Although the clip is a bit naive and dismisses the abiotic origin of life from a probability standpoint (argument from incredulity), it is hilarious to watch. In the end, evolutionary biologists believe that their hypotheses for life’s origin are less far-fetched than the explanation provided by intelligent design proponents.

The argument is made that our current understanding of cells and cellular technology goes far beyond what Darwin could have ever imagined when he first published Origin of Species in 1859. Several scientists wonder where the initial direction for cells and molecules (e.g., DNA) came from and suggest that this is a major area of biology with design implications. This point is made apparent as you watch a phenomenal three-dimensional sequence that puts the viewer on a ride through a working cell. I plan to buy a copy of the Expelled DVD primarily for this section. This clip was particularly impressive and although there was no explanation of the processes, someone unfamiliar with the cellular machinery would be equally struck by the complexity of the cell as I was.

After all of this discussion, the Berlin Wall footage returns and we are reminded of the freedom of speech angle. Not only scientists are to blame for the barricade that exists between those with reasonable intelligent design ideas and mainstream science. The government, media, and the courts are also responsible for the current stalemate. There is a disagreement from either side with one saying that intelligent design is misrepresented in scientific circles and the other saying that design is a religious war. At this point, much more of an attack on the opposition is seen from both camps. Although several people interviewed (i.e., John Polkinghorne) state that the ideas of Darwin and religious undertones of intelligent design can coexist, the film seems to focus on more of the extreme views and the particular evils of Darwinism.

One of the tangents explored by Expelled is the relationship between Darwinism and Nazism. It is likely that some of the ideas presented by Hitler in Mein Kampf were based on ideas of natural selection formulated by Darwin (but borrowed from Malthus). Stein and the producers of the film make a lot of the negative outcomes when Darwinism is overlaid onto human society. Nazism, racism, eugenics, and euthanasia are all presented as very real dangers of accepting Darwinism. While many may resonate with this viewpoint, most scientists, atheistic and otherwise follow the basic laws of society and an agreement with Darwinism does not automatically lead to these heinous acts. This connection is unfair and overstates the case by focusing on the extreme (and rare) examples.

In the end, we return to the metaphor of the wall and Stein makes an appeal to break down the wall that exists between entrenched science and novel (maybe better) explanations of life and its inner-workings. As the movie winds down we hear Ronald Reagan state that “the wall cannot withstand freedom” and watch as the Berlin Wall crumbles. In the same way, we can destroy the wall that exists in science by allowing a discussion of both perspectives and for the freedom of ideas in the scientific realm. This is a call to action. “Anyone? Anyone?”

I expected this movie to be more propaganda than anything and am pleasantly surprised that there is representation from both sides of the debate. What frustrates me is that this movie really doesn’t add to the viewer’s understanding of the real issue. Maybe the nuts and bolts of the issues are omitted because it is expected that anyone paying $7 (for a matinee) must already be informed. Unfortunately, this is probably not the case. In fact, if one was not aware of the issues at hand, there would be little solid evidence gathered from the movie to formulate an opinion. This is problematic in that there is much more to the Darwinist and Intelligent Design arguments, both of which can be incredibly convincing when presented in the “right” way. In fact, someone who did not hold a strong opinion either way before the movie might come out equating Darwinism with Nazism!

Another disappointing feature is the focus on the “wall” metaphor. While there is a divide between origins philosophy, most scientists agree on basic processes and mechanisms. It is more the metaphysical worldviews that divide us than the evidence that we gather from science. Though the request is made for scientists to consider design implications, the movie tends to paint the scientific community into a corner and adds more fuel to the debate than providing any relief.

I was very excited when I first learned of this movie’s release. In fact, I announced to my Philosophy of Origins class to watch for it last quarter and told students that I was going to see it this past week. Several students have since asked me for my reaction and unfortunately, I am not able to tell them much other than I am left empty by the film. In my mind, the status of the debate is unchanged by watching Expelled. While I do appreciate several aspects of what is presented, I remain decidedly unaffected by what I saw and heard.

Aimee C. Wyrick-Brownworth writes from Angwin, California where she is an assistant professor of biology at Pacific Union College.

Note: One of the associate producers of Expelled, Mark Mathis, spoke with Spectrum about the film. You can read that interview here.

Spectrum Book Club on Prayer--All Welcome to Join the Discussion

Daneen Akers — Thu, 01 May 2008 05:14:21 -0700

I’ve always appreciated Philip Yancey’s books because he writes as a pilgrim, not a pastor. Not that I don’t appreciate pastoral perspectives, but often they seem to skip over the doubts, questions, and laments that I have. Yancey dives into thorny and complicated problems, seemingly without fear that truly mining their depths could leave him or his readers with less faith than they started with. It’s his honesty and rawness that allows me to listen to his eventual conclusions (or even just continuing questions).

In Prayer: Does It Make Any Difference?, Yancey addresses the big questions—why pray if God already knows the future? Why are so many prayers seemingly unanswered? What about all of those seemingly clear promises in the Gospels about asking and then receiving? If we agree to pray, how do we go about it?

As someone who has always struggled with prayer, I appreciated exploring these questions with a fellow pilgrim, even if at the end I still have doubts. I especially enjoyed the stories Yancey shared. Somehow when faced with big theological issues like how prayer works, I find the most meaning in the shared humanity I find in the stories of others facing struggles. A few nuggets that leaped out at me in my reading:

Prayer in the Bible frequently “lacks serenity, to put it mildly. In prayer, God seems to encourage ritual lament,” (p. 67). Just read the psalms to see how prayer can be filled alternately with hope and joy and the next minute despair and sorrow. The range of human emotion and experience is appropriate—even necessary—prayer material.
The problem of prayer is profound and great minds have explored its depths. C.S. Lewis found that the same argument against prayer (why do it if God knows best) can be made for any human activity—isn’t it all meaningless if God’s going to make it work out one way or another? “God could have arranged things so that our bodies nourished themselves miraculously without food, knowledge entered our brains without studying, umbrellas magically appeared to protect us from rainstorms. God chose a different style of governing the world, a partnership which relies on human agency and choice.”
This partnership with God means that prayer must be accompanied by action. Yancey returns to this point again and again. God works through human agency. The Good Samaritan didn’t just pray for the man lying half dead on the side of the road, he also acted. Yancey repeatedly emphasizes that we are God’s hands in the world. He quotes the Catholic priest and author Ronald Rolheiser on this point:

A theist believes in a God in heaven whereas a Christian believes in a God in heaven who is also physically present on this earth inside human beings…God is still present, as physical and as real today as God was in the historical Jesus. God still has skin, human skin, and physically walk on this earth just as Jesus did…To pray ‘God, please help my neighbor cope with her financial problems,’ or ‘God, do something about the homeless downtown’ is the approach of a theist, not a Christian. God has chosen to express love and greace in the world through those of us who embody Christ.” (p. 244)

I found this point to be the single most profound take-away from the entire book. He also comes back to this when looking at Jesus’ life and miracles. Why didn’t Jesus miraculously cure world poverty instead of feeding 5,000? Why didn’t he eradicate the polio vaccine instead of healing the paraplegic? Jesus touched the lives of the people in his life just as I have a responsibility to those whose lives I’m a part of—this means some of us will have wide circles, some of us small, but we are all the living embodiment of what God’s love in the world looks like.
There’s something to be said for fixed prayers, especially during times of “spiritual dryness, when spontaneous prayer seems an impossible chore,” (p. 179). As someone who grew up Adventist without ever seeing something like The Book of Common Prayer, this especially caught my eye. Also as someone who seems to go through a lot of dry spells in the praying department, I think I’m going to experiment with this.
In addition to fixed prayers, there’s something to be said for silent, meditative prayers. Martin Luther was said to counsel that, “The fewer the words, the better the prayer,” (p. 190). I'm reminded of the portions of Eat, Pray, Love where Liz Gilbert finally quiets her mind in meditation through the use of short prayers or mantras. For a verbivore like myself, being quiet doesn't come naturally, so finding something to pray about isn't my problem--rather, I need to learn the discipline of silence. Yancey reminded me that this is probably deeper prayer than my extemporaneous babblings.
Like me, Yancey finds the miraculous stories of God saving Christians from the twin towers or from plane wrecks to be problematic. Were not the other people praying? Were they not also good people? When we throw around miracles like this, we lesson the impact of miracles, which Yancey does believe in but finds them to be truly miracles—rare events. This is an especially sensitive topic when dealing with medical healings, and Yancey recounts stories of letters he has received from readers talking about their personal horrors—stories that made me weep—and the seemingly empty, unanswered prayers for healing.
The great problem lies in what Yancey terms the “Sweeping Promises” of the Bible. “In a nutshell, the main difficulty with unanswered prayers in that Jesus seemed to promise there need not be any,” (p. 234). This was the section I personally had the most trouble with. It’s one thing to read theologians address the thorny issues of prayer, but the challenge is that the Bible is pretty explicit in some places, such as: “Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours” (and many other examples). Yancey valiantly looks at many reasons why prayers go unanswered—some are trivial, some are contradictory or inconsistent (look at football games or wars), some are made without good intentions on the part of the pray-er, some are answered in bigger picture terms, etc. However, I wished that Yancey would have delved into how we got Jesus’ words (I’m sure he’s aware of translation history)—maybe those verses reflect a bias of the writer? But that brings up such a complex topic that I can imagine he realized this book would turn into a series. Although Yancey does provide some conclusions, I'm still left thinking this is a big problem (and one commonly exploited by pastors who make their parishioners feel they just don't have enough faith, that's why their prayers are unanswered).
In the end, one of the best reasons we have for praying is Jesus. Surely if anyone was privy to God’s will it was him, but he still prayed—even angrily and tearfully at times. That's probably a good example for us all.

These are just a few ideas that struck me--this is actually quite a lengthy book, so I'm barely doing it justice to pick out a few nuggets, but I would love your thoughts too. Anything really stand out for you? Did anything challenge you? Did anything leave you frustrated and wanting more? If you haven't read the book, you're still welcome to join in on questions/thoughts you've had on this topic.

Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day: or, Should You Seize the Day if it Requires You to be Immoral?

Elizabeth Rivera — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 02:28:52 -0700

Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day is a rollicking adventure set in England in the days before World War Two. Guinevere Pettigrew (Frances McDormand) is a governess who finds herself out of work, again. But this time the employment agency sends her away. These are tough times, work is hard to find and there is a war coming. So what to do when you find yourself homeless and penniless? Take any opportunity you can. Miss Pettigrew steals a calling card from the employment agency and appears at Delysia La Fosse’s door ready to be a governess. Delysia answers the door expecting a social secretary who will help her reach the pinnacle of fame. High jinks ensue immediately as Miss Pettigrew finally wakes up to how exciting life can be and adapts to the complicated rituals of high society.

Miss Pettigrew has frizzy hair, a brown sack of a dress that screams get me some Prozac and a very sheltered life. She grew up the daughter of a clergy man and in her words it was, “ a wonderful upbringing; a bit sheltered perhaps.” She now finds herself completely out of her element posing as Miss La Fosse’s social secretary and doing things she hadn’t dreamt of: mingling at cocktail parties, cursing, and flirting. Delysia La Fosse is an American singer/actress with fame as her primary objective. She’s making things happen for herself by entertaining three men: Phil the son of a theater producer, Nick a rich club owner, and Michael a penniless piano player. From Phil she gets the chance to be a star, Nick gives her a job as a club singer and a fabulous flat, and Michael gives her love. The trouble: an ultimatum from Michael – just him or he’s out. Suddenly Delysia must choose what she’s wiling to sacrifice for fame and manage to keep all her options open until she’s ready to say yes to just one man. Delysia and Miss Pettigrew are different as night and day and just as complimentary. Posing as Delysia’s social secretary, Miss Pettigrew is thrown into a high stakes game of love, keeping up appearances and keeping herself off the street. (Plus she gets a nice love interest)

Miss Pettigrew is a fun film that never lags and constantly keeps you rooting for our two heroines, even while they dabble in the most unladylike of behavior. Which brings up the question: should you seize the day if it requires you to be immoral? Breaking the rules seems to be part of having fun, but how far is too far? Delysia is playing with the hearts of three men and Miss Pettigrew is telling as many lies as truths. They are both posers of the highest skill, and yet we love them. Miss Pettigrew calls us to seize the day, but can you do that while still being moral, and if you can’t does the end justify the means?

Most of the immoralities committed in the film are minor. A few white lies, letting someone believe their own assumptions. I am personally guilty of that. I once lied, without even blinking about being a lesbian to get 10% off at a Target. (I’m a college student ok? Don’t judge, just send money.) Ten percent off is basically tax, and yet without even pausing, when the cashier refused to let me use my friend’s discount card because I wasn’t her family member I said , “Oh, we’re life partners.” He then looked down, swiped the card in silence and said, “Well you two look very happy together.” After we walked out of the store my friends and I erupted into peals of laughter. It felt like we had seized the day and I had enough for a cheeseburger at In-n-Out.

Ok, so maybe not the best example of seizing the day. Really more like seizing a minor discount, but still I was bold, unapologetic and got what I wanted. The point of Miss Pettigrew is not so much that you should be immoral to get what you want, but that you should be brave and trust that you are capable of making things happen for yourself. Delysia and Miss Pettigrew lose me a bit in how they choose to accomplish this. I would someday love to have a book published, but sleeping with an editor is not a viable option. Though Delysia is comfortable sacrificing all morality to get to the top Miss Pettigrew is the voice of reason telling her not to throw away love for fame.

Miss Pettigrew urges Delysia to make good choices and while she does dabble a bit in some non-approved Adventist activities (smoking, partying, and lying) she never gives us believing that true love is the most valuable thing in the world. She sticks up for what she believes in and genuinely looks out for Delysia urging her to make good choices. Although she does lie she never gives up on her highest principles. She behaves ethically (minus the posing as someone else bit of course) and with great dignity, even though she stands to loose everything she has at any moment.

Ultimately Miss Pettigrew is a coming of age/buddy story. Both Delysia and Miss Pettigrew grow in extraordinary ways. Delysia matures and is hilarious as she does it; Miss Pettigrew learns that she is valuable and capable of having a rich and happy life. After years of living a life of drab existence Miss Pettigrew is taking risks, putting herself and her heart out there and enjoying life. Extreme situations caused her to leave her comfort zone of governess-ing and drab dresses, but all that did was uncover what was there all along. In one scene Delysia says to Miss Pettigrew, “It must be extraordinary being you,” and that’s true no matter who you are. Sadly it’s something we forget all too often.

Elizabeth Rivera is a senior at Pacific Union College. This June she will be graduating with a B.A. in English and hoping that the perfect writing job will come along. In the meantime, she's busy finishing up her first novel and writing about her thoughts on life and movies for Spectrum, Adventist Today and Creative Screenwriting.

How the ‘West’ Was One

Jackson Boren — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 05:29:01 -0700

Darius Weems is just your average 15-year old teenager. He loves cracking jokes, kicking it with his friends, watching MTV and trying his hand at rapping from time to time. However, Darius deals with one thing on a daily basis that is far from the common teenage dilemma, Duchenne muscular dystrophy. It is a form of muscular dystrophy that is classified by the decreasing of muscle mass and function within male children.

Affecting one in 4000 kids, the disease started affecting Darius by his early teen years, restricting him to his wheelchair. But it didn’t hinder his spirit or infectious love of life. Darius has always had dreams of seeing the country; of heading west. But until his friends got together and decided to take him on the road trip of his life he’s never had this chance to.

The film Darius Goes West is the real life story of what happens when Weems’ dream finally comes true. It’s a touching documentary that digs to the root of the human spirit and exposes the lengths of compassion we as human beings are willing to go to for others. In a world of self-service it shows the potential we have for appreciating our lives by contributing to another. Along their trip to the west coast the group of friends decide to test the handicapped-accessibility of the country and find that a good portion of facilities don’t cater to people in Darius’ condition. But like most of the challenges presented on the trek, it doesn’t phase Weem’s hopeful character.

In a film that takes the young man and his friends from beaches of Panama City to the cliffs of the Grand Canyon, through the healing streets of New Orleans and across the Golden Gate Bridge, the greatest journey is the one that takes place internally. The group of young men taking Darius on this adventure, which include filmmakers Logan Smalley, John Hadden and Dylan Wilson, find that it changes their lives just as much as it does Darius’.

Darius Goes West is just as much of a journey for the audience as it is for Darius and his friends. The optimism and heart that Weems exudes is undeniable. He commands your understanding of his condition but doesn’t ask for your sympathy. The honesty in his raps, which serves as somewhat of a narrative soundtrack to the film, present an appeal to empower one’s self with the knowledge of the disease. As Darius puts it, he wants to reach the kids that don’t know who Jerry Lewis is.

The strong point in Darius Goes West is that the director, Logan Smalley, chooses not to focus on the terminal disease itself, but how the young man deals with it in such a positive way. One hundred percent of those with Duchenne muscular dystrophy die before the age of 30. Darius shows discouragement over this reality but rather chooses to use his story to insight others about it. Rarely do you see a true story on such a serious issue brought to the screen in the form of such a “feel good” film. It’s a very memorable experience and Smalley & co. have found that audiences across the country feel the same way. Furthermore, Darius Goes West has become somewhat of a festival darling, taking up honors at the Atlanta Film Festival, Omaha International Film Festival, Boston Independent Film Festival and a host of others. Darius continues to garner exposure for his cause as Smalley’s film sees continued success on its journey to more festivals, HBO and possibly a sequel.

You can learn more about the film and buy a copy of it here.

Jackson Boren is a senior at Pacific Union College and documentary filmmaker. He graduated with a degree in film & TV last year and is finishing a degree in Communications and PR & journalism this year.

The Man Who Planted Trees

Rich Hannon — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 04:51:03 -0700

True confessions. I write this more as an evangelist than a reviewer. Or perhaps like a lover who’s still crazy after all these years.

Decades ago I stumbled upon this short story, first published in 1953, by French author Jean Giano. Set in Provençal France between 1910 and 1945, an anonymous narrator tells of initially meeting, then subsequent visits with, a taciturn shepherd named Elzéard Bouffier – the ‘man who planted trees’. Bouffier, after his wife and child died, moved to a remote and barren area to tend sheep. Seeing the devastated land, he resolved to change it by planting trees. And he did so – for forty years. The results of this unrecognized, patient, continual effort, were astonishing.

I hesitate to expand on this ridiculously short plot summary. First, because the entire ‘book’ is just under 4000 words and can be read over a lunch hour. But more importantly, because the soul of this story transcends any skeletal plot details and is really about grace, transformation and human potential. And I am inadequate to provide any Cliff Notes version of that.

Giano writes as if the story is true and he is the narrator. But the work is actually fiction. And perhaps that’s just as well because it is not really about trees or ecology. If Bouffier and his acts were real that very historical fact might impede its central message of showing what redemptive initiative can do and of challenging each of us to find and fulfill our own potentials.

In 1987 a 30 minute animated film was made of the story, narrated by Christopher Plummer, and it won an Oscar. The animation technique used is a visual delight, reminding you of a Monet painting in motion. The story was also the inspiration for original music composed and performed by the Paul Winter Consort.

Because the work is so short the complete text is available in various places on the internet, including here: http://home.infomaniak.ch/arboretum/Man_Tree.htm. [et, en Français, ici: http://www3.sympatico.ca/ismu/Jean_Giono.html].

And surprisingly (but serendipity happens), the complete film is also viewable online, here: http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/man_who_planted_trees.php.

Some years back I preached a sermon (of sorts) at my church where, beginning with a sparse introduction, I simply read this story. At the end I paused and looked over the congregation. There was total silence, and it felt to me as if the entire room was breathing God’s presence. I finished with some summary words of my own, which I tried to keep to the barest minimum, lest I undermine the moment.

I invite you to carve one half hour out of your life to see what this story might do for you.

Rich Hannon is a software engineer who lives in Salt Lake City. His reading interests focus on philosophy and medieval history.

Book Club Selection: Prayer

Daneen Akers — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:24:04 -0700

Just a reminder that this month's book club selection is Prayer by Philip Yancey. In his typically honest voice as a fellow pilgrim, Yancey subtitles the book with the provocative question, "Does it make any difference?" Here's a short summary:

Philip Yancey probes the very heartbeat—the most fundamental, challenging, perplexing, and deeply rewarding aspect—of our relationship with God: prayer. What is prayer? Does it change God’s mind or ours—or both? This book is an invitation to communicate with God the Father who invites us into an eternal partnership through prayer.

The discussion, led by Shasta Nelson and myself will start on May 1st. We're looking forward to hearing your thoughts on this book.

You can buy Prayer from our Amazon affiliate account and support Spectrum with your purchase.

Film Club Selection: The Power of Forgiveness

Daneen Akers — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 08:16:38 -0700

Just a reminder that this month’s film club pick is The Power of Forgiveness, a documentary from the producers of Bonhoeffer. Here’s a short summary:

The Power of Forgiveness explores recent research into the psychological and physical effects of forgiveness on individuals and within relationships under a wide variety of conditions and translates it into a popular, accessible documentary film for national public television. This includes feature stories on the Amish, the 9/11 tragedy and peace-building in Northern Ireland, along with interviews with renowned Buddhist teacher Thich Nhat Hanh, Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel, best-selling authors Thomas Moore and Marianne Williamson and others. The film also explores the role forgiveness holds in various faiths traditions. It provides an honest look at the intensity of anger and grief that human nature is heir to. We see in the film that there are transgressions people find themselves unwilling or unable to forgive. Through character-driven stories the film shows the role forgiveness can play in alleviating anger and grief and the physical, mental and spiritual benefits that come with it.

You can buy The Power of Forgiveness through our Amazon affiliate account and support Spectrum with your purchase.

The discussion, led by Shasta Nelson and yours truly, starts May 8th! (The book discussion on Yancy’s Prayer starts May 1st)