Manson's Memo - six man football

Football season is upon us. It's not as big a thing here as it is in some parts of the country. Texas is famous for its high school football frenzy. When I was in Texas I officiated football games. There are definite parallels to religion when you go to Texas high school football games.

A couple times each year I'd be assigned to call a six man football game. Most people know nothing about six man football. Six man is for schools that aren't big enough to field a regular football team. These are mostly rural schools, but now some small private schools are playing six man. There are various rules differences including the size of the field, and yards needed for a first down. It is a very wide open game (there aren't many players on the field so there's lots of room to run.) It was fun to watch (although it involved a lot more running for officials), and sometimes we got done early because there is a mercy rule (a team ahead by 45 points after the first half wins).

Earlier this year I read a book, Where Dreams Die Hard by Carlton Stowers, that followed a six man team through its season. It reminded me of what those games were like. Some officials really didn't like to go to six man games (we got paid according to the gate, so such small schools would mean small pay). But I liked the change. And I treated the games as important as I did the NAIA national playoff games that I worked on the side lines.

These are not players that dream of careers in the NFL (except for Jack Pardee who played in Christoval before being All American and All Pro.) They only want to do well with the chance they have -- to represent their school and their families and their community. Their mission isn't a scholarship or endorsements, it's just to do what they can do.

We aren't all called to be stars. We are all called to do what we can do.

Notes from interview with Jesus Camp filmmakers

I shared in a round table interview with the directors of Jesus Camp, Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady. Most of those taking part were from secular media. It was interesting to gauge their take on the film. Actually it was not all that different from mine in that there was a certain level of distress at the way the children in the film were treated by parents and ministers. Jesus Camp does indeed show a part of church that is alien to many people in the church and even more so to people outside the church. One of the potential flaws of Jesus Camp is that it might be seen merely as an oddity -- a look into a strange world on the fringe that can easily be dismissed. Much of the questioning in the interview dealt with that strangeness. Throughout much of the interview, the filmmakers spent time defending the people in the film -- not because they believe in what they are doing, but because they have come to understand what most people we see only as bizarre.

The filmmakers demonstrated their understanding of the context in which the film is set and in which these people live. Even though they may not be part of that world, they are willing to see it as best they can through the eyes and world views of their subjects. When asked if this were some kind of psychological disorder, Ewing replied, "It's called faith," which I took to mean not that faith is a psychological disorder, but that what the questioner saw as disorder was really something that needs to be respected.

Some of the questions dealt with the political involvement of the people in the film. One question was about what seemed a complete blending of religion and politics. Grady responded:

The people we focused on in our film definitely believe that being politically engaged and living up to their civic duty as American citizens is part of being a good Christian. And I think what makes that case in point is that, in fact, when we've shown the film to the participants and had many conversations with them about it … what's been surprising to Heidi and I is that they absolutely don't consider themselves political activists. Whereas other people with a different world view couldn't separate them, that it's obvious to certain people that their political engagement is part and parcel with their religion. And what's happened, I think, is that it's so married and so dove-tailed together, they don't see the difference between one and the other.

In response to another question about whether the people I the film got real facts or only a narrow set of political views, Grady said:

I'll tell you something. Heidi and I did not engage in political conversations with them, just because it didn't really seem appropriate. But I have to say that I was blown away by the level of civic engagement that was going on in these homes as far as they know all the names and positions of everyone on their city council. They know everyone who is working on the school board. They know all the different votes their congressmen have rejected or embraced. They know a lot more, as far as looking out for their values and their point of view. They know the people who support them.

And we've had this conversation with a lot of audiences that have a problem with what the people in our film are doing. And Heidi and I have told them, "You know, they're not doing anything that you're not allowed to do -- that you're closed off from." They are spending the time and the energy to get so engaged on every level of government. No level of government is too small or too irrelevant for them. For them working with the public library and making sure certain books don't get to the public is as relevant as voting for president. So for them it's all part of the same goal, which is to create and shape a culture that is a more moral place.

Another question that brought out an extended response was whether what we saw in the film amounted to child abuse. Grady said:

Well, you know, that's an interesting question that's come up a lot. Heidi and I made another film called The Boys of Baraka last year and, you know, we spent a lot of time comparing the kids in this film with the kids in our last film. I think that's a very, very complicated thing to make a film about and a very complicated thing to wrap your head around as far as where do you draw the line between parenting and your right as a parent to teach your kid what you think is right, which is what the parents in Jesus Camp are doing. They're teaching their kids just exactly what they think is proper. They want their kids to go to heaven, to live a moral life. And they fell that it would actually be bad parenting to not do what they're doing.

And then you look at the kids in The Boys of Baraka, where a lot of the kids come from very dysfunctional homes, and we spent a lot of time with kids who frankly weren't eating enough, and mom wasn't coming home, and they weren't getting the attention that they crave so much.

I can't answer that question; it's very complicated. But it did raise questions for us because the kids did seem happy. They seemed safe, and they enjoyed the structure, and they were close to their families. And there weren't a lot of arguments. There wasn't a lot of whining. There wasn't a lot of complaining. These were incredibly well behaved kids. And I think that put pause to any question that Heidi or I had of whether the kids were enjoying it or not.

And they [parents] really put their kids on a pedestal. And they tell their kids and they believe that their kids have something to do with the second coming of Christ. That's very empowering for a child. I mean, that would be empowering for adults as well.

Ewing added:

What was really interesting, and we tried to show in the film with the way we edited it, was that after these revival meetings where there would be the tears, and the writhing on the floor, and things that disturb a lot of viewers, literally, when the session would end, two or three minutes later, I think there a moment in the films where we cut to the kids on the swing set. That was probably actually accurate as to what happened. There were hot dogs. There were hamburgers. There was gossip. There are go-carts. And they would snap back within two or three minutes of the revival meeting into this regular, normal, everyday kid mode. So it wasn't that they'd do back to their cabins and cry themselves to sleep. They'd go play with flashlights and tell ghost stories, and talk about Harry Potter and all those things you see in the film.

So it's a mystery that I don't know that we ever got our heads around, because they do seem happy and well adjusted in a lot of ways. But the emotion they expressed is something people haven't witnessed before.

And when we asked the parents about the tears: "Why are they crying?" -- and the kids also tried to explain it the same way -- what they said was that God's heart is broken because we let him down and society is vile and people haven't come to Christ. So we are trying to feel God's broken heart. We have to cry and cry the tears for God. That was the answer that was given to us. I think it may go more into the Pentecostal/Charismatic form of worship more than mainline evangelical practice.

To truly appreciate the film, it helps to know that the filmmakers have enough respect for their subjects that they not only understand them, but are able to help others understand them. Even though they aren't part of the worldview of the film and its subjects, they have shared that world with us fairly. For a documentarian, that should be considered high praise.

The War Tapes

When offered the chance to be embedded with the New Hampshire National Guard being deployed to Iraq, Deborah Scranton asked for and received permission to let the soldiers have cameras and send the footage back. We see ninety-seven minutes of over one thousand hours of footage. It is that soldiers' eye view that makes up most of The War Tapes. It is the first must see film to come from the Iraq war.

This film is not put together to either support the war or to oppose it. It serves to give us a look at what these citizen soldiers went through during their deployment. We meet them before they leave; we meet their families while they are away; we see them when they come home. We note the changes that happened to them and see just a bit of the forces that shaped those changes.

Five soldiers shot film for the whole deployment, but for the most part the film focuses on three: Sgt. Steven Pink, a recent college graduate who aspires to write, Spec. Michael Moriarty, a Harley Davidson mechanic who is married with two children, and Sgt. Zack Bazzi, a Lebanese-born American studying at the University of New Hampshire.

These "Soldiers with Cameras" show us the chaos and danger of battle. They also show us the futility and frustration that are a part of their job. They joke that they should make sure recruiting films show the vital mission of escorting and guarding the latrine truck as it dumps the sewage. They show us the off-hour entertainment of scorpion vs. spider fights. They give us insight into what it is like to be in life and death situations.

Along the way, we note subtle changes in their approach to the war. From the beginning, Moriarty is somewhat hard and cynical. Pink is interested in everything around him and describes things as best he can. Bazzi is the most analytical and critical. By the time they return, they all have a large dose of cynicism, not just about the war, but about life itself.

I was struck during the film by a key way that this film reverses an important aspect of the viewing experience. In most films, when there is violence on the screen, we know that it is only a movie. When we see the violence in this film, we know that the violence is real. The shots of dead people are not mannequins from the property department; blood on the street or on a face is not makeup. We are seeing the war happen.

I was also struck by some of the quotes from these soldiers:

• "November 29. I want to kill." (The first words we hear clearly in the film.)
• "If you play the odds, one of us will die before the tour is done."
• "I think any country should be able to have its own civil war without people getting in the way."
• "You know I supported the mission and I supported a lot of things, but I'm starting to say to myself: "What the ___? …." If the problem is not going away then kick it up a notch! And I don't [care] if that means nuking this … country!"
• "I love being a soldier. The only bad thing about the Army is you can't pick your war."

We genuinely like these soldiers, not just for the job they are doing, but because we get a chance to know them. Even when they are at their worst (and they have times we may not like what they do or say), we care about them, and we know that the traumatic experiences they find themselves in will have serious effects on their lives.

The filmmaking team did an excellent job of keeping their own agendas out of the film. I couldn't tell you if they are for or against the war. Instead they let these soldiers tell their stories. It is clear in the film that there is a cost to be paid for any war. The price includes deaths and injuries both to soldiers and civilians. The price is also paid by those who bring home wounds that don't leave a mark on the outside. All of these soldiers -- and all those they served with -- are a part of that price.

Jesus Camp

When my wife and I saw a trailer for Jesus Camp in a theater, my wife's immediate comment was, "That's scary." Indeed it was. Jesus Camp is a look at a Pentecostal camp for kids where they not only go just for fun, but also to be trained as soldiers in the culture wars.

The film takes us to Becky Fischer's Kids on Fire Camp in North Dakota where the children do all the things most kids do at camp, but also study Bible, worship and go through intense instruction (some might call it brainwashing) in living a Christian life.

Whether or not there really is a culture war going on could be debated, but those involved with these children, the ministers and the parents, certainly believe they are in the middle of such a war, and they are counting on these children to be part of the solution of all that they see as wrong in America.

Although it focuses on a portion of the evangelical community, it is really more of a political film than a religious film. It is more concerned with the political implications of what is happening than the religious implications. And what we see is right-wing politics that have been baptized to give them a Christian flavor.

The film opens on a political note, listening to talk radio around the time that Sandra Day O'Connor resigned from the Supreme Court. That taste of politics never really leaves the film, which includes scenes such as the children reaching out to bless a cardboard cutout of President Bush and families taking part in vigils outside the Supreme Court building. Also included is a more progressive voice, lawyer and Air America commentator Mike Papantonio, who sounds a note of warning in the film about the religious right and eventually has an on air dialogue with Fischer. But Papantonio is left in the shadows throughout the film -- never really becoming a voice to be heard.

Even though I characterize it as primarily a political film, it is set in a religious world. Much of this world will be alien to many viewers. It is not just Evangelical; it is specifically Pentecostal. It involves scenes of praying in tongues and of worshippers (including children) in the throes of Pentecostal fervor. For many this may be a voyeuristic look at what they may think is a strange religious experience. The film is much more valuable than that.

The key question of the film is to what extent is this an accurate portrayal of what is going on in the struggle to define our nation and culture. Certainly the film focuses on a very narrow element of Evangelicalism. One of the criticisms from some Evangelical critics is that it implies that all Evangelicals are of the same mindset. There is some validity to that criticism. Evangelicals are a fairly diverse group.

But although this may be an extreme within Evangelicalism, it is in no way isolated from the rest of Evangelicalism. They are firmly part of the religious right that has sought to wield power in American politics the last several years. They are convinced that their politics and their religion are essentially tied together.

Whether it is a narrow element or not, it is in many ways representative of the broader religious right. It focuses on the same issues. It may be a bit more intense in its approach, but only as a matter of degree.

There is much to criticize in way the children are being taught -- the uncritical view of creationism, the glorification of martyrdom, the intense messages that bring them to tears -- it must be noted that it is all done out of a basis of faith -- believing that these children are the hope of turning the world around and bringing the world to Christ. Within the worldview of these families and churches, all of this is not only appropriate, but required as Christians.

These children are already taking part in what they see as a war for God's glory. They know that the enemy is all around them, and it looks a lot like us. That's what is scary.

Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles

The last two films from Zhang Yimou (House of Flying Daggers and Hero) were epic stories set in romanticized history and filled with lavish visuals and effects. Both films are delights of storytelling and cinematography, as is his new film, Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles, but in a different way.

Riding Alone is a much more personal story, set in present day Japan and China. It is the story of Takata, an aging fisherman, who is called to Tokyo because his estranged son, Ken-ichi, is seriously ill. When he gets there, however, the son refuses to see him. Takata's daughter-in-law keeps trying to work out some reconciliation. She gives Takata a video Ken-ichi has made of Chinese folk opera. In the tape, Ken-ichi expresses a desire to return to film leading opera performer Li Jiamin perform the folk opera Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles, a tale of General Guan Yu who became the personification of loyalty for Chinese because he made a long arduous journey to help a friend. Takata decides to go to China to film this for his dying son.

It is not an easy task. The first problem is that he doesn't speak Chinese, so everything needs to be through interpreters (some of whom are not very skilled). He is in a land where he knows no one and can speak with no one. When he gets to Li's village, it is discovered that Li has been arrested and sentenced to three years in jail. Even this doesn't dissuade Takata. He goes through the bureaucracy to get permission to film Li at the prison. But once there, Li is unable to perform because of depression over a son he has never met. Soon Takata is traveling to an even more distant village to bring the boy, Yang Yang, to his father.

All through the story, Takata is welcomed by strangers: translators, bureaucrats, even a whole village. At the same time, Takata is trying to do good for others. He is trying to bring what he thinks will be a special treat to his son. He also tries to bring reconciliation to Li and his son. That reconciliation may serve as a surrogate for the reconciliation he wishes he could have with his own son.

While not as sweeping as Zhang's recent films, it is just as epic when seen as a personal odyssey. Just as Gen.Guan traveled alone, so too does Takata travel in a type of solitude. And his travels are all built not around himself, but around trying to do something for others - strangers - the son he doesn't know, the singer he has only just met, and a young boy he doesn't know.

Visually, the story is also much more personal. Although there are still great landscapes, albeit more severe than the Hidden Daggers and Hero, the real visual gems are seen in Takata's, face. Takakura Ken, who plays Takata, masterfully shows us the stoicism of the character even as he shows his brokenness.

While I'm sure the film isn't meant to be read from a Christian theological standpoint, it is certainly easy to do since the film deals so plainly with the idea of reconciliation. Takata is a father who yearns to be reconciled with his son, even when the son rejects his attempts. Takata also recognizes the need of Li and Yang Yang to begin the relationship they both need, even if Yang Yang is not ready for that relationship yet.

The desire to be reconciled is a key characteristic of God's relationship to humankind. Even before we are ready to reach out to God, God reaches out to us. God is willing to go to great lengths to achieve that reconciliation, and God never gives up.

The film also underscores our being bound to those around us. Even the strangers we meet in our journeys are those with whom we can establish relationships that feed one another in ways that we can never be fed by ourselves. In a scene in the Stone Village, where Takata has gone to find Yang Yang, the village is having a banquet honoring this stranger who has come to him. The camera pans along the table running the length of the street. It just keeps going and going – a never ending table to welcome a stranger.

Because it touches on universal human issues, Riding Alone for Thousands of Miles is a richly spiritual film. We should always be looking for ways of being reconciled in our lives - with family, with strangers, and, most certainly, with God.

Top 100 Spiritually Significant Films

Arts and Faith is an online discussion about, well, arts and faith. Much of the discussion focuses on film. In 2004, the group developed a list of 100 Spiritually Significant Films, which it has recently revised. Any such list will inevitably lead to debates about what is or is not included, but I offer this list up, not as perfect, but as well rounded and certainly worthy of your consideration when you’re looking for something to watch.

The list has now been revised twice. (You can still see the 2004 version and last year’s version.) There have been changes worth noting each year. For example, in 2004, there were four Peter Weir films included (Fearless, The Truman Shows, Witness, and The Year of Living Dangerously). Weir is completely absent from the 2005 list, but reappears this year with Fearless and The Year of Living Dangerously. Each year a few films drop off and some films come on for the first time or reappear after dropping off in an earlier year. This probably reflects many things: the changing participants in Arts and Faith, discovery of new films (often people see films because they have made the list and we figure it’s worth watching), and changes in our understandings of spiritual issues.

The list has more foreign films than most people are used to seeing listed. Of the top ten films listed, only one (The Miracle Maker) is an English language film. Most people will have not only not seen most of these films, they likely haven’t heard of a good number of them. One of the reasons for the list is to encourage people of faith and people seeking spiritual enlightenment to see films that can aid in their spiritual journeys.

The group has intentionally left the definition of “spiritually significant� fairly ambiguous. Each person will have his or her own spiritual journey, but there are likely enough similarities in those journeys that well made films can speak to each of us. Some will be more important or “significant� to some than to others. Not all of the films listed strike me as especially spiritual, but because the list is so broad, there are many films here that I find very meaningful.

Here are a few of my thoughts on this year’s changes:

• I’m happy that Weir is back on the list, although I’m not sure Fearless and The Year of Living Dangerously would be my top picks from among his works. Still, these are both worthy films for the list.
• The two films I’m happiest to see be added the list are After Life, a Japanese film about a way station we stop at between death and the next plane of existence where we have to pick one memory from our life to take with us into eternity; and Places in the Heart, a story of perseverance and hope that builds to a great ending.
• I’m not sure how the list got by without having Fiddler on the Roof before, but it’s finally there.
• Films dropping off the list that I’ll miss the most: The Shawshank Redemption and 2001: A Space Odyssey.
  

I hope the list inspires you to watch some of these excellent films and let them speak to you.