I’m still working through the question asked a few weeks back about navigating extravagant expressions of devotion. We looked at, in the first part of this accidental series, the high cost of extravagance as depicted through the lens of Mary of Bethany. After a bit of clarification, we looked at some of the factors that possibly hindered the disciples from expressing their devotion to Jesus in a similar manner. We then focused for a moment on how one might navigate the extravagant devotion of a fellow believer in the manner that love expresses itself through consistently radical lifestyle choices.
As I said last week, I feel that the dynamics of walking with a fellow believer who is making radical lifestyle choices are both clear-cut yet subtly difficult. “Clear-cut” in that one can biblically and logically conclude what our proper response should be regarding a brother who is giving themselves to Jesus with unusual devotion. “Subtly difficult” in that the heart, deceitfully wicked, often tugs at my sensibilities and my pride as I am tested in the midst of provocation. In regards to the original post, I would say that this context was what I originally had in mind.
Of course, the more precise application one can easily draw from the Mary of Bethany passage is directly related to extravagant expressions of worship rather than lifestyle. Thus the question one would naturally ask is, “how do we respond to extravagant expressions of devotion during the worship service?” (I am paraphrasing, of course) When I read the Mary of Bethany account, however, this is not what I tend to focus on. Mary seemed to make these kinds of choices repeatedly and honestly over a long period of time, and it’s that kind of extravagance I tend to gravitate towards - the consistently authentic kind. When I read, then, the Mary of Bethany passage, a few things come to mind related to the difficulty of extravagance and its cost before other believers. Extravagance rarely is as costly when one is surrounded by non-Christians, who might find your fervency strange but honest. They have little to lose when relating with a fervent, devoted believer and are more apt to treat such a devotee of Jesus as a curiosity worthy of respect or contempt. Yet it would rarely cross their minds to try to talk a believer out of extravagance. Sharp criticism comes from those with something to lose.
Thus, when I study the passage I think of Mary’s lifestyle over time more than her momentary burst of love. I naturally think of the implications of one who consistently chooses radical devotion and the manner in which those choices naturally chafe at the dross and complacency in my own soul. I think of the false grace message and the manner in which it excuses all manner of compromise in the name of easy forgiveness with little to no consequence in the life of the believer. Those who live according to this false message of grace that empowers “lewdness” and, ultimately, a denial of the Lord God (Jude 4). Simultaneously, those who live according to this message (or variance that excuses compromise) often strike with mocking and contempt at a message of holiness, righteousness, and purity.
Momentary bursts of devotion are easy targets that are often harmless. Long-term consistency in fervency is costly for all who claim devotion to Jesus or the designation of “Christian”.
The Water Level is Rising
We are at a crossroads as believers. There is a real war taking place around us, and there are many casualties. The analogy that fits best for our current condition is that of the lobster in the pot of water: the slow boil inoculates the lobster to his imminent danger. There is a slow boil happening in our western culture as we speak: the west is becoming sexualized, immoral, and corrupt in ways that were unimaginable years ago. The allure of money has always been a real and powerful attraction for the nations, but has there ever been a time in history like this one, where so many can have more money than any of their ancestors or forefathers could have ever dreamed of? To obtain such riches, all one has to be willing to do is compromise just a little; lower the standards just a bit and you can access greater degrees of wealth and notoriety. In an hour of moral relativism, lowering the standards for wealth or fame is a simple and easy choice.
The church does not seem to be paying attention to the cultural attrition that is happening around her. At least, the church in America is not doing so in a way that is stirring her to make radical choices of devotion, fervency, and time pursuing purity of thought, perspective, and action. Many seem content to live “comfortably separate”, enjoying the trappings and lifestyle of their neighbors while seemingly avoiding the pitfalls and dangers of the increasingly dark world that is closing in around them. This should be an hour in which every believer is greatly uncomfortable with the invasion of darkness and perversity in areas that were previously “safe” from such influences. This should be the moment where the church is greatly alarmed at the rampant injustice that is taking root in our nation.
Ultimately, the church should be greatly disturbed with the billions of dollars that are spent per year looking to separate them and their children from their dollars; with that much money at stake, the lengths that companies and advertisers are willing to go to entice the nations is frightening. What are the limits? What determines restraint? Where are the moral absolutes that determine the boundaries. The vast wealth that is dangling like a golden carrot before the peoples serves as too rich a temptation - and the ease of the lack of moral clarity only serves a self-preserving end: comfort, success, and ease of living. Even at the expense of the next generation.
We’ve Got to Get Out of the Water
Our only option is to press and fight for a heart alive in love and zeal for the Living God. We need the prayer of Paul in Philippians 1:9-11 realized in vibrant power in the depths of our innermost being. His prayer went as follows:
“And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in knowledge and all discernment, that you may approve the things that are excellent, that you may be sincere and without offense till the day of Christ, being filled with the fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ, to the glory and the praise of God.
In other words, it is not enough to be falsely satisfied with a static relationship with Jesus through the scriptures. It is not enough to attempt to live a good, decent, upstanding life under the banner of Christianity. More is required related to the times in which we find ourselves. Extravagance is necessary, fervency flowing from a heart burning with desire for Jesus is non-negotiable. We cannot negotiate away the tools God desires to give any who ask that can equip our hearts and minds to see clearly and vividly past the billion-dollar deception that is enticing the nations of the earth. We cannot imagine that they are unnecessary. We must fight and contend earnestly for the faith that was once delivered to the saints.
In this war that is being waged against love-fueled holiness and devotion to Jesus, extravagance is a weapon. Extravagance and fervency are the fruit of true grace, or power from the Holy Spirit to express the fruits of righteousness (Gal. 5:16). We need help to lay hold of true wisdom from heaven, that we would have clear, godly perspective related to the invasion of darkness that is descending upon the next generation. We need love to abound and increase in our hearts, that the desire to walk in agreement with the word of God would be alive within us. We need discernment that we might approve of the more excellent way of the love of God, that we would be responsive to the leadership of the Holy Spirit when under conviction, sensitive to His promptings and thus zealous to never grieve Him. Moreover, we need help from God to approve of excellent things - that truth might dwell in our innermost parts.
We need discernment to cut off and turn away. We need the heart to approve of wisdom and excellence in love. We need help from God to be like God, to walk in agreement with Him and burn with passion about the things He is passionate about. As we abound in love, knowledge, discernment, wisdom, and understanding, we can become better equipped to make right choices through grace to remain “without offense”. I want to be clean, pure, and sharp in my thinking, clear-minded and tender-hearted. I want to war against dullness in my own soul, lest I become swept away in the compromise and subtle dissipation of the wicked. I want to be filled with the fruits of righteousness in my own life. That, to me, is the about pursuing extravagance through grace. I want to be fervently devoted and authentically dedicated to Jesus in every way and every choice.
I want to get out of the water and experience the fullness of Christ (Eph. 3:19). I could not imagine a difficult endeavor in a more difficult time. Thus I cry, “Help, Lord, for the godly man ceases! For the faithful disappear from among the sons of men.” (Ps. 12:1) It is because I need help, and because of my awareness and connectivity to my own capacities and potential for sin, that I cry out for help. I am in great need, and greatly desire breakthrough and life and strength in my inner man (Eph. 3:16). I want to be uncomfortable, disturbed, and disrupted - and compelled to be extravagant in the process.
David
March 12th, 2008
It’s been a while since I set out to answer Colin’s two-part question on extravagance. The first part of his question focused on the historical context - how should have the disciples responded to Mary’s act of devotion? We discussed that last week here. His second was a more personal one - after being slightly autobiographical in the original post on extravagance, how do I currently navigate extravagant expressions of devotion to Jesus?
There are a few “layers” to the question that must be considered to answer the question adequately. I’ll try to hit them one at a time, hopefully in something approaching logical sequence. I’ll hit one today, and another “tomorrow”. I’m hoping that I can follow up with another post on the “real tomorrow”, but I’ll leave room for life to intervene. The subjects related to the answer to the question include “extravagant lifestyles”, “extravagant worship”, and “extravagantly unhelpful expressions of devotion”. In other words, some expressions of extravagance are helpful and provoking in nature, while others are sincere but unhelpful. I’ll start with what I consider to be helpful:
1. Extravagant Lifestyles
It would be helpful to assume, for the sake of this part of the discussion, that “extravagant lifestyles” equals “extravagantly biblical” and “extravagantly devoted” related to passion for Jesus. “Extravagantly off-kilter” I’ll address in a moment. I hit this category first because I wanted to progress from easy to delicate in the manner in which I deal with the extravagant devotion of others. The natural picture that enters the mind when someone introduces the subject of extravagance knit to the Mary of Bethany account is a picture of a believer in the place of heartfelt worship expressing deep devotion. I am more interested, in general, with exploring the subject of extravagant devotion as it translates into a lifestyle of “spiritual violence” and the internal fight to love Jesus with all of our heart, mind, soul, and strength.
As such, when I meet someone who is unusually dedicated, someone who would be labeled as “radical” in the manner in which they live their Christianity before God, I sometimes find myself tested and provoked in the exchange. When I think back to the original post on the subject, I thought of fervency and zeal in this regard s much as I thought about a worship setting. In other words, the guy that always wants to call a fast or the other guy that always wants to have the deep repentance time. I don’t always want to fast, nor do I always feel like repenting on someone else’s terms. In the past I have found myself flirting with a cynical heart or rolling my eyes when the usual suspects called for a group expression of something radical.
In that regard, I have had to grow in my confidence in my identity in Christ as one whom He loves and enjoys. As my heart became knit to Jesus in the place of prayer, and I became a bit more settled in His heart for me, I became more comfortable with the journey that I was on. I realized that part of my cynicism or frustration stemmed from a subtle defensiveness and unsettledness with my own standing before the Lord. Growing in becoming “rooted and grounded” in love (Eph. 3:16-19) and settled on the inside with true Spirit-filled confidence helped me enjoy others (and even jump in and participate at times) in the moments of their expressed zeal rather than feeling threatened by them.
Secondly, I began to enjoy the provocation that followed the stories and testimonies of my comrades and friends as they made extravagant choices to live as consistently with the word as they were able to, by grace. Their choices, flowing from the place of conviction and creativity, have inspired and helped me over the years as I have been provoked to make similar choices and resolutions before the Lord. The common values and vision have served my own desire to walk out extravagant devotion in a manner that cultivates a heart alive and connected to the Holy Spirit with true vibrancy. I have greatly appreciated the comrades that I have the privilege of walking alongside on a daily basis, and I am sure that they have no idea how helpful each of them have been in my journey towards the “fullness of God” that Paul spoke of (Eph. 3:19).
Tomorrow (-ish):
How do I react to extravagance in worship?
David
March 6th, 2008
Oh yeah, you want one.
I especially loved this line from the designers: “Finger painting is fun — when you’re four,” Haas said. “I’m not going to be selling to the same people who are buying an iPhone.”
In other words, they have zero angst about the forthcoming, official Apple™ Tablet Mac that is coming out sometime soon.
Thank you, Mr. Haas, for helping me one-up ol’ Mr. Tablet PC and his cool scrawly email messages. At least in theory, because I probably won’t own one for a while. Remember? I just got on Facebook? “Early adopter” in my house means that we just bought a cast-iron skillet.
David
February 28th, 2008
A new and tremulous day has dawned in my life as of late, and like Bambi getting up for the first time before trying to walk, I’m a bit wobbly. Yup, I’ve signed up for the Facebook™ experiment, that paragon of social networking in the Web 2.0 world. Facebook is excited that I am telling you this right now. Facebook is monitoring all outgoing transmissions.
I was fairly cool, to say the least, to the whole “social networking” scene - and oh, there is quite a scene - being the late adopter that I am with things of this nature. I cooled down even greater when news began to emerge about Facebook’s tendency to keep your personal information regardless of your desire for them to possess it. Stories abound of those who have tried (and failed) to have all of their personal information, journal entries, contacts, pictures, and other “helpful to figure out what you’d like to buy”-type info from their site upon cancellation. Knowledge is power, and contact info is worth more than fine gold. Trying to understand the purchasing habits of youth and young adults today is a billion-dollar cottage industry, as a recent Frontline report documented (it’s called, “The Merchants of Cool” and I highly recommend you catch a minute or two).
Me No Likey Myspace
So, as you can tell, I was more than hesitant to sign up when prompted. To make matters more complicated (as I am skilled at doing), I have been openly and publicly decrying the horrors of Myspace™ to anyone willing to listen to my tirade. (Facebook is pleased) Beyond the manner in which it serves as a portal to ungodly grossness and the silly ways that hip marketers attempt to remain relevant to teenager’s wallets, I’ve found that Myspace functions as a cruel haven for the lonely, happy to provide the illusion of real connections, substantive conversations, and numerous comrades. I have found that space, in general, to be a jumbly, chaotic mess of pseudo-hip sappiness filled with trite, pithy phrases of empty vanity. Yup, I haven’t been a big fan of Myspace.
I also have been horrified as a shepherd, and one who cares about youth and young adults, at the massive time-drain that Myspace (and many other places on the internet in general) has become for a generation of computer-addicted, lonely, bored people. So, I’ve voiced my concern. I’ve preached the sermons. I’ve heard, all the while, that Facebook was the cleaner, safer version of Myspace. I mostly grunted and moved on with my life.
The Toe is in the Water
Then, a month ago, on a quiet Saturday morning, I signed up for Facebook. Why? Simple. People were having conversations about subjects I wanted to eavesdrop on. I’m nosy, and I’m a rabid researcher and curious analyst. The problem, I found, is that I had to listen to Facebook conversations on Facebook’s terms. I had to register. Swallowing hard, I took the plunge. I quickly gathered my intelligence, then quietly snuck away - giving my morning activities no more thought or time. I forgot that I even signed up.
Then, one morning, it came.
The “friend” request.
I can’t even tell you how it works. I have no clue how anyone found me, or discovered that my name was tagged to a Facebook profile. I barely know how to run a VCR. Someone else is typing these words right now. Yet somehow, magically, the requests began to trickle in. A few messages. Like a pesky younger brother, or an insistent thirsty child, the emails excitedly reported the news. The Facebook Team needed to confirm that I was actually friends with the people that were saying that they wanted to be my friend. Huh. Am I?
Well, sure! I mean, these were my friends, from back east before I moved to Kansas City. I had not heard from them in quite some time. I was genuinely excited to hear from them, and see that they were doing well. Still, my pride and my stubborness demanded that I ignore their request for friendship. So, for a week or so I resisted their brazen pleas. Bah, and humbug! Yet, over time, the emotional hold of their impact on my life tugged away at my calloused heart-strings. Garrr! The power of Facebook! Who is able to make war with them? So I gave in. I “approved” of our budding friendships, re-kindled again by my fondness of the actual humans on the other side of the requests. Thusly did my toe find its way into the social networking waters.
What Have I Gotten Myself Into?
It was like a mini-avalanche. More friend requests began to roll in - this time, from IHOP-KC folks and local teenagers, whom I love. A few from the Summer Teen Intensive. Then, complete strangers looking for friendship. Games and activities began to flow my way. Options galore! As I peeked at a few other pages, I was astonished at these clean little worlds of information and activities that unfolded before my eyes! As I said, I find Myspace a horribly unorganized disaster to look at - but Facebook! For a Mac-guy with a love of clean lines and lots of “white” in the background, making the words clear and easy to digest, I was more than entertained! As you can tell by my copious and generous use of exclamation points, I was surprised how easy it was for me to get sucked into this little orb.
Again, being horribly and tragically un-tech minded, I’m stumbling my way through it all. I don’t quite know yet how to respond to the salutations, greetings and welcomings. I don’t know the protocol, so I’m mostly brazenly advertising this website and my book. That’s probably bad social networking protocol. I’m figuring it out. For now, I’m keeping it simple, learning a little as I go. I even threw a few greetings on some other “walls”, though I’m not yet sold on that entire exercise. Why? Because I’m wondering where we go next, after the initial, “Hey! Wow! It’s you!” phase. From what I’ve observed initially, it’s not too promising.
On the other hand, there is something fun about “Hey! Wow! It’s you!” No doubt about it - you can’t beat being reunited with old friends and folks that you think about lots but don’t often get a chance to throw a “hey there” at. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the age to come will have lots of that kind of thing - happy reunions and joyful embraces. Facebook can’t compare to what’s coming, but it’s good practice. And, as an old youth guy who can throw a quick “hey” to different ones to make sure they’re keeping their noses clean, well, I do love that.
That will do, for now.
David
February 28th, 2008
…and it’s not because Nader is running again. I do find that stunning, but consistent (again, you would have to see the documentary). I would have been a bit disappointed if he wasn’t running - but to me, this simply means that he means what he says and, whether you agree with him or not, you can believe that he is sincere. Nope, I’m writing this one today because I tend to be unreasonable, particularly related to my little forum that I have established here. I’ll explain more at the end.
Just a quick response to a commenter whom I did not publish related to “Navigating Extravagance”:
1. I love that the post was so similar to one of Mike’s messages on Mary of Bethany. I had not heard that message, so that was kind of encouraging, actually. Thanks for the tip-off, I’m going to try to dig it up and listen to it.
2. The point about devotion flowing from understanding in a way that differentiated Mary from the disciples is that she, according to those same disciples, “anointed Jesus for burial.” That was a remarkable thing to do, since those who had worked closely with Jesus seemingly had no idea about what was around the corner. Mary, however, seemed to grasp what Jesus was about to do and thus felt compelled to minister to Him and bless Him in preparation for what lay ahead.
3. The question about “secret knowledge” was the tip-off that our “conversation” was probably either:
a. going to turn this conversation into an incredibly unproductive use of my time; or…
b. attract others like you that would turn this conversation into (you guessed it) an incredibly unproductive use of my time.
So, while I may answer the occasional odd comment every once in a while, I, being the unreasonable man that I am, will do so on my terms. Thankfully, I am under no obligation to do otherwise.
How do I believe that Mary grasped what lay ahead for Jesus when the disciples missed it? Um, probably because Jesus said it and she was paying attention. There was nothing “secret” about the cross and the manner in which Jesus was going to suffer and die; as I said (clearly, I had hoped) in the previous post, the disciples personal agendas may have clouded their ability to pay attention to what had to happen next. Mary seemed to have no agenda outside of loyal devotion to Jesus, which helped her hear clearly what Jesus was saying in a manner that the guys with ambition couldn’t catch.
Hope that helps clear things up. Feel free to read and comment away - but don’t take it personally if you never, ever see your comments posted here. This site was always meant to be a mostly devotional one. If it shifts fully into apologetics (which isn’t bad, is critical to our faith, and not what I want to do here but do in lots of other contexts); or devolves into useless “wranglings with words” that Paul counseled us to avoid, then I will probably move on. As, I am guessing, you already have. Be blessed as you do!
David
February 25th, 2008
I had to delete temporarily remove my “About” page, as it got messed up by a hacker who messed with my site for reasons I can’t quite follow. So, I want to make sure I save the Martin Lloyd Jones quote I had stored there to keep me oriented rightly:
“The glory of the gospel is that when the Church is absolutely different from the world, she invariably attracts it. It is then that the world is made to listen to her message, though it may hate it at first. That is how revival comes. That must also be true of us as individuals. It should not be our ambition to be as much like everybody else as we can, though we happen to be Christian, but rather to be as different from everybody who is not a Christian as we can possibly be. Our ambition should be to be like Christ, the more like Him the better, and the more like Him we become, the more we shall be unlike everybody who is not a Christian”
- Martin Lloyd-Jones, Introduction to the Beatitudes
I love that quote, so I wanted to save it here. As “savable” as things are on a medium such as this one, I suppose.
UPDATE: Josh Hawkins, techie par excellence, restored my “About” page in all of it’s simple glory. I’m still saving this quote here, though, ’cause I like it so much.
David
February 24th, 2008
A couple of weeks back I posted some thoughts on “The High Cost of Extravagance“. In the comments section, Colin asked some helpful questions that I have been pondering for a bit. The answers did not seem to lend themselves to a comment - I wanted to extend the conversation here with the theme of his questions: how do we navigate extravagance? Here is his first question as he asked it:
“How should have the disciples reacted to Mary pouring the oil on Jesus’ head?”
In the original article, I simply presented the narrative as the gospels did - when, as the disciples were gathered together, Mary of Bethany came in and anointed Jesus for His burial. It was an act of devotion so costly that the disciples were offended with the seeming waste of resource and thus “criticized her sharply”, according to Mark. Why? Because it was most likely her inheritance that she broke and poured over Jesus’ head; the monetary value would have been somewhere around a year’s wages. One particular objection that the apostle John noted was that of Judas - his “concern” for the poor sparking a touch of irony from the beloved disciple as he reports the event.
So here is the pertinent and interesting question: how should the disciples have responded to Mary? We have a hint from Jesus Himself, who declares that the act of extravagance on the part of Mary would be made known “wherever the gospel is preached” as a memorial to extravagant love. John understood the root issue of the sharp criticism that sought to devalue the fragrant offering of Mary’s devotion: self-interest. In turning the issue and offering proper perspective, Jesus established a context for the “value” of Mary’s actions - she alone understood the gravity of the hour ahead and the costly nature of the road that Jesus was about to take. There would be, according to Jesus, plenty of opportunities to serve the poor in the days ahead. There would be only one opportunity to anoint Jesus for burial.
Analyzing what the disciples should have done, then, is a difficult exercise - simply because of the many factors that hindered them from truly grasping the implications of Mary’s act of love. Clearly, the proper response would have had to flow from something more than devotion, for in Mary’s case devotion flowed from understanding. She was giving Jesus all she had to serve Him in preparation for what was to come. It was a simple act, but momentous and powerful to Jesus - she was not interested in anything else (particularly the opinions of the disciples or her sister) but ministering to Him and blessing Him. The disciples, in their immaturity (as is the case with many, many young men) were often focused on themselves and their possible roles and positions (or, in Judas’ case, the monetary benefits) that came with being an “early adopter” of what the rest of Israel was slow to grasp related to the true identity of the Messiah.
This understanding was noteworthy in that, by identifying with this Messiah, they were taking a great risk to be associated with Him and thus had much to lose if Mary’s suspicions about the coming Passover and the fate of Jesus were in fact true. Jesus Himself had been hinting about what was to come, but they either could not grasp the truth of it or did not want to. So any analysis of possible right responses has to bear in mind the paradigm that the disciples were operating with related to the Messianic role of the deliverance of Israel and their reward for serving and associating with the Messiah while the spiritual leadership of Israel had soundly rejected Him. In their constant jostling for position mixed in with their genuine devotion and affection for Jesus and His often confusing leadership, Mary’s act had mostly negative implications for each of them related to their own pride and self-interest.
So, to the question: how should they have reacted? It is nearly impossible to speculate. To respond rightly, as I have said, would have involved coming to terms with the journey that Jesus had to take related to the grave and beyond. Mary, because of what had recently transpired with her brother, now understood both aspects of the fate of Jesus: that He would be allowed by the Father to suffer and die, yet would be resurrected, as He had spoken to Martha (John 11:25). If they understood the implications of what had to happen, they would have, possibly, begun to weep and anoint Him with their tears. If they could have laid aside their self-interest and pride that was provoked by the costly offering of Mary, perhaps they could have found their own personally suitable way to minister to Jesus in that moment. The right answer, I think, is found in the place of abandonment and the consuming desire to bless the heart of Jesus, and to do the thing that ministers to His “need”, if one can use that kind of language.
Who thinks this way? How many, to this very day, approach Jesus cloaked in self-interest in the hope that the Messiah will bless them, help them, serve them, and give to them extravagantly? Is this a wrong mindset? Not exactly - to have an expectation of favor and blessing upon a life lived according to the scriptural pattern given to us by God is actually a right mindset. Yet who can live in such a manner, understanding that it is in the heart of Jesus to love extravagantly, while being subsequently consumed with blessing and ministering to Him as well? The fullness of what John called “perfected love” in 1 John 4:17 is the place in which we become consumed and wholly focused on Him and abandoned to self. This is how He loves us, and has loved us, and has offered us the grace to love Him this way in return.
Tomorrow: “How do you now react to people displaying extravagant fervency?”
David
February 19th, 2008
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”
—George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
I wanted to follow up on a few comments I made yesterday related to Ralph Nader. Honestly, Nader has been an unfortunate afterthought for me, as I often have other things on my mind (see: the title of this website). Atlantic Monthly recently named him one of their “100 Most Influential Americans (ever)”, and he is one of only two living americans to make that list (Bill Gates being the other). You can view the list here - it’s actually quite impressive. Margaret Sanger made me cringe, but the inclusion of Jonathan Edwards made me smile.
A few months ago, I accidentally stumbled onto a documentary that profiled Nader on PBS (and their “Independent Lens” series) called “An Unreasonable Man”. As you can imagine, I loved the title - and enjoyed the George Bernard Shaw quote. Being an unreasonable man happens to be one of my life aspirations - I am convinced that any true intercessor is by nature unreasonable related to the issues of injustice and unrighteousness that characterize this fallen world and the deep darkness that threatens to cover it. Only unreasonable men would set themselves on a night and day pursuit towards speedy justice breaking in over the night sky at the end of the age. What we do seems completely unreasonable at times, and the nobility of our unceasing pursuit seems futile or foolish to some.
I think that’s why I felt a wave of kinship and affection for Ralph Nader as I watched the documentary.
I can’t recommend it highly enough - not because I agree with Nader’s politics or found the documentary enjoyable (though I did), I rarely if ever recommend movies. This particular entry into the Sundance Festival, however, had my attention all the way through. There were two things in particular that I enjoyed about this doc: how mystified and disillusioned Nader’s friends and co-laborers over the years were at his decision to run in 2000 and then run again in 2004; and how angry the right people got at him both times. It’s a fascinating story - and Nader’s convictions are intense.
At the end of the day, his story can be summed up thusly: he’s a man who has discovered that something is not right with our political system, and he decided that he was going to do what he could to effect change. As he began to mov forward with his plans, he became over time rather “unreasonable” in his pursuit of justice. What his friends and former allies could not reconcile is that the same doggedness that served him when he took on General Motors in the sixties (despite the best attempts of the auto maker at the time to expose him, discredit him, and trash his reputation), the same Nader that has taken on so many public safety and health causes over the decades, is the same Nader that attacked this last great cause with equally dogged and stubborn fervor.
Suddenly, however, the Democrats that idealized him related to his social activism suddenly reviled him for his political activism. And he lost most of his friends, allies, and financing in the process. Thus his friends and co-laborers still involved in Democratically-financed organizations built by Nader watched helplessly as all of their funding dried up in vain attempts to buy Nader’s inactivity. Democratic supporters and businessmen openly tried to buy his “non-candidacy”, promising lavish funding if he would simply drop out of the race.
He didn’t. It cost Gore the election.
Enraged, his whole life shifted and friends bailed. Nader insisted to the documentarians that they interview the men and women that opposed him and despise him (I love that). In other words, Nader didn’t care. He was unmoved and dead set on bringing change to what he considered a “one-party system” too heavily influenced by corporations that were unconcerned with the good of most Americans. I happen to agree with his point, and I don’t have a fraction of the information he has on the subject. Not only did Nader shrug off the massive amounts of venom that was spewed at him in liberal publications and broadcasts, he did the unthinkable in 2004:
He ran again.
As you can tell, I really enjoyed the story of those two presidential campaigns and what it cost Nader to run (he actually ran four times, but it was the 2000 election that earned him the most notoriety). I enjoyed some of the baseless and foolish accusations against him, and the way in which liberal rage translated into smart guys being incredibly illogical and well, unreasonable in their anger at Nader. The documentary is worth your time. It was worth mine, for as I want to reiterate, I aspire to be an unreasonable man in my own right.
David
February 12th, 2008
In High School, some would be relieved to see that number next to their name. I would have been unhappy, of course - because in most grading systems a “65″ constitutes a passing grade by the proverbial skin of the tooth. My parents would have been duly disappointed, of course - they would have rightly expected more from me related to my capacities and abilities. It’s hard to put any kind of a shine on 65%, unless it’s your vote count in an election or your completion percentage as a pro quarterback.
Thus John McCain finds himself in a strange dilemma. The last week conservatives watched McCain emerge, seemingly victorious, from his earlier scrap heap of a campaign that saw him completely restructure his team and his strategy mid-stream and attempt the impossible. Does anyone remember the Iraq debacle at this stage of the race? For the short of memory, this was the nightmare photo-op of the decade, involving a seemingly clueless McCain strolling down the streets of Baghdad, intending to prove to all how safe the conditions were while sporting the thickest flack jacket in military history. He wore his sunglasses and tried his best to project his best “Mission Accomplished” face without any hint of irony. These are the kinds of blunders that can kill campaigns. Yet even that event couldn’t compete with his complete inability to raise funds a few months back. He was broke and seemingly at the end of a long road. I expect many will try to trumpet his “comeback” story over the next few months. If there is one thing that McCain has done well, it has been to project the against-all-odds, maverick independent persona.
His dilemma thus stems from the catch-22 that comes from such a persona - and the reality of his voting record that has helped shape that image. The “65″ that I’m referencing, of course, comes from his rating by the American Conservative Union in 2006. The rating is reflective of how McCain voted in the Senate over that year. As one looks at McCain’s voting record over the seven years prior, when McCain began pursuing the presidency, one would find that his voting record in 2006 is hardly an anomaly. In 1998 and 2001, McCain scored a 68 related to his voting record in those years; in 2002 and 2004 he scored a 72. These scores are a stark contrast to the solid conservative voting record he tallied from 1990 - 1996 (from 1994-1996, for example, McCain averaged a 94) .
McCain seemed to learn in the late 90’s the lessons Bill Clinton taught every politician seeking the presidency: the people want moderate leaders with positions that favor consensus thinking. Thus McCain began to position himself as an independent thinker on issues that wouldn’t seem too costly at first glance: campaign finance reform (his signature issue for a while) taxes, the environment, and immigration. He remained conservative (related to his voting record) on social issues such as abortion. In other words, McCain didn’t necessarily become a “liberal” as many have charged him with recently - he has simply played it as safe as one can play it in the political realm. He has taken a pragmatic route that in many ways reflects our current president - and our last one. This was the lament of Ralph Nader a few years back that went largely unheeded - Nader’s “voice crying in the wilderness” of a campaign that mostly bugged the right people (in my opinion) was one decrying the current political crisis of “no choice”.
Modern politics, on a national level, is largely about winning and staying in power. To win one must by necessity adopt a “centrist” reputation. Do so and America - particularly the coveted independent voter, the sacred “undecided” - will sanction your candidacy. For a centrist in our times seems reasonable, rational, able to work with different viewpoints and come to solutions that benefit everyone. Nader’s problem was that “centrist” also stood for few convictions, moldable policies, little substance or ideas outside of those fueled by polls and special interests with financial backing, and a one-party reality with the rhetoric of two. While I disagree with, well, pretty much all of Nader’s politics, there are few men in that arena I respect more than our modern Don Quixote, charging at the windmills of our meandering system filled with flash, style, and speech but little conviction or fortitude of heart.
In that light, a 65 may be as good as it gets for conservatives. For the flow of modern politics on a presidential level seems to favor the “50 percenter”. Today, McCain has carefully crafted a voting record that may well secure him the nomination - but even as the new overwhelming favorite he finds himself in the fight of his life against a candidate with nothing to lose and a groundswell of momentum, riding a wave of evangelical dissatisfaction. For the next three months he will have to prove to his party that he is, ideologically, a true conservative. Then he will have to spend the next three months after that proving to the nation that he is a pragmatic centrist. Since both cannot be right, he will most likely find himself, in the end, conceding the race to the most liberal candidate to ever sit in the oval office.
As badly Republicans crave the presidency, trying to rally your party against a candidate you despise is never as effective as rallying your party to support a candidate you are truly for. Ask John Kerry about the effectiveness of Democratic rage against the other guy. No matter how badly the Democrats wanted George Bush out of office, their zeal could not overcome their own dissatisfaction with the “best” candidate they could produce for the 2004 election. It is shaping up to be an unhappy November for the Republican party.
I just might vote Nader.
David
February 11th, 2008
This one was sent by my wife earlier in the week, straight from IHOP’s “Malachi 4:6″ prayer meeting (led by IHOP kids):
I have been reminding him over and over again today that we are here to pray and worship. He is trying really hard to not play. So he was starting to climb under some chairs. So I got him up and asked him ,”Remember we are here to pray and worship. ” So he nods gets this focused look, almost a scowl on his face and gets right back on the floor to crawl under the chairs again. So then I get him up again and I ask him, “so how does that have to do with prayer or worship?” he says, “I was getting in my prayer cave. “
David
February 8th, 2008
Next Posts
Previous Posts
