“Isn’t there anyone who knows what Christmas is all about?”

[Note:  This post was originally published here on December 9, 2007.  It was reprised last year.  And due to the significant traffic it receives all year-long, but especially this time of year, it is being republished again this year, with some updates to reflect the current date.  ABC will broadcast A Charlie Brown Christmas tonight at 7 pm CST.]

Tomorrow is the 44th anniversary of the release of the animated classic A Charlie Brown Christmas.  On December 9, 1965, CBS took a big chance on a Christmas program that they had some serious reservations about.  Coca-Cola was the sponsor of the show.  A Charlie Brown Christmas broke with many of the rules of production and programming of the day.  It had no laugh track and for the character voices, rather than using adults pretending to be children, they actually used children.  Perhaps most unusual was the use of  Scripture to explain the meaning of Christmas.  The director of the program approached Charles Schultz, the creator of Peanuts and A Charlie Brown Christmas, to talk him out of quoting the Bible.  Schultz reportedly said “If we don’t do it, who will?”

Here is a clip from A Charlie Brown Christmas.  For me, this is the most memorable part of the whole program.

 

Did you watch the clip?  Did you notice something unusual?  Yeah, Scripture was quoted, it was Luke 2: 8-14, from the King James Version.  But there was something else.  Did you catch it?  Probably not, because it is very subtle.

Linus Van Pelt (did you know his last name is Van Pelt?) is known in the Peanuts comic strip for his security blanket.  He always has it, and in spite of the grief he gets from his sister Lucy, he is committed to that blanket.  The need for something like a blanket for security speaks more about a person’s insecurities, than about the security that an object (like a blanket) can provide.  Even the most confident among us have some amount of insecurity in our lives.  And those insecurities keep us off-balance and on-edge.

There is something instructive for us in Linus’ reciting of Luke 2: 8-14.  As Linus comes to Luke 2: 10, he says  “And the angel said unto them.  Fear not: for, behold, I bring you tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.”  Here is what you probably did not notice in the clip.  As soon as Linus says “Fear not“, he drops his security blanket.  Or thought of another way he lets go of his insecurities!  We can do the same thing.  In Christ, fear is replaced by love (1 John 4: 18).  Uncertainty is replaced by hope which is firm and secure (Heb 6: 19). 

At the end of Linus’ recitation, he quotes Luke 2: 14 and says “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”  In my Greek dictionary, the word that is translated into English as “peace” is described like this:

a state of untroubled, undisturbed well-being brought about by God’s mercy granting deliverance and freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as a result of sin.

The bottom line of the Christmas story is the very incarnation of God’s mercy.  The embodiment of God’s grace for mankind.  Jesus left the glory of heaven to bring to all who believe, deliverance and freedom from all the distresses that are experienced as a result of sin.  Jesus offers us the opportunity to exchange our sins and our insecurities for His peace.  As we anticipate the celebration of the Lord’s birth, my encouragement to you is to let go of  your insecurities and cling to the peace of Christ.

Sadly, Linus picks up his blanket again at the end of his recitation of Scripture and so his insecurities.  But he is just a cartoon character.  We can choose to deal with our insecurities differently.  Because we are the REAL DEAL, invited to experience REAL PEACE, offered by a REAL GOD.

Peace!

Whose better? Colt or Jarrod. Add this to the discussion.

This morning, I read through some childish bantering between what was apparently a Texas Longhorn fan and a Texas Aggie fan.  The discussion was over which team possessed the better quarterback.  The site was facebook.  The discussion lead no where, basically.  The rivalry between these two schools is so intense, that objectivity was the victim in the conversation thread.

This article from SI.com from almost two months ago, adds some light, if for no other reason, it adds some statistical facts to the discussion as well as some off the field personal texture to Jarrod Johnson, who  is with out question lesser known to the general public than Colt McCoy, who has been on the national for two or three years.

If you don’t see this movie, well there’s no hope for you.

I knew that would get your attention.

Two months ago, I wrote a post, the subject of which was the then-upcoming movie titled The Blind Side.  Well, the movie is now out and showing in theaters nationwide.

I will save you the time of reading another blog on top of my earlier one  (that included two official trailers and an ESPN special feature on the real-life family that is the subject of the movie) and simply say YOU SHOULD SEE THIS MOVIE!

Surprised and not surprised

On tonight’s (Monday night) episode of the Late Show, David Letterman, as expected, had a bit more to say about the revelations of his moral failure that he revealed last Thursday.  “Strange” is about the kindest thing I can say about it.

In usual Letterman style, he attempted to make light of the situation, making himself the punchline of his jokes, and object of his one-liners.  But in what came as a real surprise,…he framed the entire matter in the context of HIMSELF being the victim of a crime, specifically as the target of felonious extortion.  In a purely technical sense, he IS the victim of a crime, but frankly that is not the real storyline in this whole sordid ”affair”, pardon the expression.

What also came as a surprise was an apology that he made to the current female employees of the Late Show, who had been hounded over the weekend by the media, and others, seeking to find out if any of them were among the ones who had been involved sexually with Letterman.  What was implicit in this apology and clarification is that the affairs were in the past and that none of the women currently employed by Letterman are among those that he had sexual contact with.  He apologized for leaving the matter unclear last week, and for subjecting his female staff to the intrusion over the weekend.  What he did NOT apologize for though was his shameful conduct with the female employees that had apparently worked at the Late Show before the current staff.

He also was very clear that his wife Regina Lasko has been deeply hurt by the revelations, and he admitted that he had a lot of work to do to patch up that relationship.

What came as no surprise whatsoever…Letterman did not take ANY personal responsibility for the root cause of this whole matter.  That said, I feel certain that this story is not over by a long shot.

A Few Thoughts on Letterman

Late last week David Letterman made an on-air announcement that he had engaged in sexual relationships with women he works with on the Late Show with David Letterman.  A short video clip (out of a much longer televised discussion) can be seen below.  The remarks that Letterman made just prior to those shown in this clip related to how he had been contacted by someone who knew of some unseemly things about Letterman, had proof to that effect, and wanted to be compensated $2 million to remain silent.  If he did not receive payment, the extorsionist planned on going public with a book and/or screenplay.  The extortionist, it turns out, is (was) a producer for the CBS News program 48 Hours Mystery.  This clip gets to the heart of the subject about which Letterman was being blackmailed, and contains his admission to the facts.

[Note:  Disregard the invitation in the video to click on another website address.   It takes you nowhere.]

Apart from this whole situation being very sad on many levels, especially for Letterman’s wife, young son Harry, and his ”Mom” (who is occasionally featured on the show),  it barked out several observations for me.

1. Confession without contrition is just conversation.  I’ll grant you that he conceded to the allegations brought up by the extortionist, but what Letterman has done so far, is just one step removed from denial.  That is not to trivialize what he has done thus far.  A confession, on the level he has done it, is really rather remarkable given that he has publicists and others who could have acted as his spokesperson admitting to the matter, “with no further comment.”  But Letterman, in an extraordinarily matter-of-fact manner, confesses to a number of very serious lapses, not the least of which are the betrayal of his wife, and likely a breach of a number of state or federal laws relating to sexual misconduct in the work place.  And for as much as I have been able to research, I have found nothing in the way of apologies or expression of regret.  Maybe it’s out there, but I have not been able to find it.  And at such time as there is some sort of apology, one might be justified in assuming that it may be grounded in regret over having been exposed, rather than for his moral failure and gross misconduct.  Any apology will likely be qualified with something to the effect of “if I have hurt or offended anyone I am deeply sorry.”  But we’ll see.  I hope that I stand to be corrected and there really is a changed heart that comes out of this for Letterman.
2. Surprisingly, Letterman’s audience laughs at and applauds the confession that he has had sex with women who he works with at the show.  I’ll concede that it may well have been difficult for the live audience to know with certainty if this was a part of some larger comedic bit, or if it was a serious discussion.  Nevertheless, I have to ask, is it actually funny, or praiseworthy when someone admits to adultery and  fornication?  I might have prefered to hear a few gasps, groans, or sighs when he acknowledged his misdeeds, but that certainly was not the case, as you can hear in the clip.  And it did not seem like uncomfortable laughter, but more like what you would expect from his audience when there is pure comedy taking place.  I’ll grant you that the audience at the taping of a Letterman show is hardly a cross section of America, and certainly does not represent those who hold more conservative, or faith influenced values, but really, is this audience’s reaction one they would like to defend?
3. Much has been made lately about the lack of journalistic professionalism and objectivity within the mainstream media.  How much less confidence do we, or should we have when a highly placed producer of a CBS News Division program is the alleged extortionist in this case?

Letterman is scheduled to return to his studio this afternoon for the taping of tonight’s show.  Irrespective of how or if he chooses to address the matter tonight, it is a virtual certainty that his viewer numbers will be high as people tune in to see how this train wreck continues.

Update:  Was interested to see this article from the press (albeit the “conservative” daily) in NYC.

Note to Hannity: Get some fresh material, and while you’re at it get real.

It is a fact that I probably align with Sean Hannity on most matters relating to politics, the economy and social issues.  That said, I have just about had my fill of listening to him on the radio or watching him on TV.  And I actually don’t do either very often.

Among the reasons why I have reached this point is because he rarely says anything new.  Whenever I listen to or watch him he is railing on the very same subjects that he did during the presidential primaries over a year ago.  And he incessantly brings up the same well worn arguments about why he dislikes and distrusts Barack Hussein Obama.  I honestly feel like if I do not listen to or watch Hannity for a couple of weeks and then catch one of this programs, that I will not have missed a single thing.  In so many ways, it is like the Bill Murray movie Ground Hog Day.

Now, like a dog with a bone, Hannity is absolutely obsessed with the fact that B.H.O. is going to Denmark to lobby for the 2016 Olympic Summer Games to be held in Chicago.  Apparently, Hannity would prefer that Obama stay at home and tend to, and I assume resolve, such matters as unemployment, finalizing a military strategy for Afghanistan and leading the process of crafting a health care reform compromise that the president rhetorically claims to want.  The reality is that Obama will be on this “mission” to Denmark for just a matter of hours.  But evidently Hannity feels like these few hours away from the Oval Office are sufficiently distracting so as to really put a dent in the president’s ability to manage the problems facing the country.  And this line of reasoning also presupposes that the president cannot be attending to these matters while travelling.  

Using reductio ad absurdum (reduction to the absurd) applied to Hannity’s contention, I suppose that we should be attempting to keep track of the hours that Obama sleeps, or grooms, or exercises, or eats, all with the expectation that he cut back on each of these, so as to devote more attention to ”other pressing matters” as Hannity refers to them.  During his television show this evening, Hannity tried to get his guests to bite on this trip to Denmark, but even the conservative, a role played tonight by Dana Perino, former Press Secretary to President Bush, would not take the bait.  Good for her.

Marking my calendar – 11/20/2009

A true story. 

Compelling?  What, are you kidding? 

Convicting?  Oh, yeah!

Two Official Trailers, and then the real family.

HT:  JT

Classy &…not so much

What a contrast in styles we have in these three headline-grabbing examples over this past weekend by our cultural icons in sports and entertainment.

First, on Saturday a profanity laced outburst takes place in a stadium holding thousands, during a live television broadcast, with an audience of perhaps millions.  Her tyrade and subsequent point loss, that lead to match loss, paved the way for the eventual winner of the Women’s Championship of the U.S. Open, and may well cost her a bundle of money in penalties and forfeiture of prize winnings.

Read more about it HERE.

And then on Sunday night there was this.  Maintaining his reputation for being outrageous in conduct and utterly mindless in comment, this knuckleheads’ ridiculous behavior got him literally thrown out theater where the awards were being presented and even has his fellow celebrities calling him a variety of unflattering names.

Read about it HERE.

But then, there was this…

A gesture that was not at all required on her part, but demonstrating a graciousness that stands in stark contrast to the misdeeds of the other two.  Well done Beyonce!

Read about it HERE.

You know, we really should just give credit where credit is due.

The organization known as Sociologists for Women in Society, is a group advocating a feminist agenda, according to their own website.  I have not scoured their entire site, but I suspect (in complete fairness) that scattered around within their various initiatives, there may be a few things that are helpful to women’s causes in a very general sense.  And to the extent that is true, I applaud their efforts.

However, some of the topics they deal with in their journal “Gender & Society,” are informative (to me, at least) as to what is probably their larger motivation with respect to the feminist movement.  From their website in support of the journal, I found the following:

“Just some of the relevant, timely, and important topics covered in recent issues include:  Queer Parenting, Sexuality, and Transgenderism.”

With this in mind, it comes as no particular surprise when I read that research published by the Sociologists for Women in Society ”blames” Disney and other producers of G-Rated films for creating what they call “heteronormativity.”  Isn’t that a great word?  Researchers who are affiliated with the University of Michigan studied the highest-grossing children’s films during the period 1990-2005.  From these films, they conclude that:

Children’s films “construct heterosexuality” through “depictions of hetero-romantic love as exceptional, powerful, transformative, and magical,” and “depictions of interactions between gendered bodies in which the sexiness of feminine characters is subjected to the gaze of masculine characters.”

“Characters in love are surrounded by music, flowers, candles, magic, fire, balloons, fancy dresses, dim lights, dancing and elaborate dinners.” ”Fireflies, butterflies, sunsets, wind and the beauty and power of nature often provide the setting for – and a link to the naturalness of hetero-romantic love.”

Really, the naturalness of hetero-romantic love.  Imagine that.  Romantic love between members of the opposite sex.  I wonder who originally thought THAT up?  I would have never guessed that it was the people at Disney?

They continue: 

“Both ordinary and exceptional constructions of heterosexuality work to normalize its status because it becomes difficult to imagine anything other than this form of social relationship or anyone outside of these bonds.”

“These films provide powerful portraits of a multifaceted and pervasive heterosexuality that likely facilitates the reproduction of heteronormativity.”

On some level, this research suggests that the naturalness, or normative quality of heterosexuality is something that has been creatio ex nehilo (created out of nothing) by the imaginations of the creators and producers of these family films.  Furthermore, it almost appears that absent these films, there would be no natural or normal opposite-sex attraction that is rooted deep in the souls of the young people who watch the films.  Apart from the influence of these films, would sexual orientation just be some sort of free-for-all?

 I know it would be perhaps too much to ask, but rather than “blaming” Disney and others, the researchers should go to the source of sexuality and find out what the original, natural, and normative design was.  That is where the credit is due.  No blame is necessary.  Granted, the model was later corrupted by sin, but it remains the original, natural and normative model nonetheless.  As a hint to the researchers from the University of Michigan, it can be found in Genesis 1: 26 through Genesis 2: 25.  (That’s in the front of the Bible, by the way.)

As an aside, I wonder how much of OUR money was used through federal grants to conduct this crazy research?

HT: Tim Challies

Misplaced hope and confidence

With the death of two celebrities yesterday, it has been interesting to hear PR statements being released by other famous public figures, expressing their condolences, usually including some spiritual references for Farrah Fawcett and Michael Jackson as they pass from this life to the next.  The comments and hopeful confidences that these folks express are understandable given the public struggle with cancer that Fawcett waged over the last couple of years and the world-wide attention given to the last 20 or so years of Jackson’s stunningly troubled and freakish life.

But what is striking to me is the apparent hope-against-hope, or perhaps better said, misplaced confidence that people have for both of these departed souls.  With the acknowledged risk of sounding cruel or piously cynical, I ask a serious and heartfelt question…was there anything about the content of  these two people’s lives that would lend support for a hope or confidence that they are now experiencing paradise in the presence of the One True God, as opposed to an eternal continuation of their tortured existences?  Is it possible that anything significant might have been missing?

I’ll grant you that I was not a fan or follower of either of these people at any point in my life.  Yes, I watched Charlie’s Angels and if memory serves me correctly, I think one of those posters of her wearing that red bathing suit was in my possession at some point in time.  And yes, I was familiar with Michael Jackson both when he was a young black man, and through his metamorphosis into whatever it was that he became in the last several years of his life, including apparently a pedophile.  Nevertheless, because I did not follow these two very closely, it is entirely possible that I missed some significant announcement about both of them having experienced the life-changing, justifying and regenerating power of God’s grace.  However, if that is the case, my lack of having heard about it in life, is now matched by the silence about it in their deaths.

What I do know is that Fawcett and her long time ”partner” Ryan O’Neal, effectively thumbed their noses at God with respect to their cohabiting relationship, which produced their troubled son, Redmond.  And even though it was reported that O’Neal wanted to marry Fawcett at the end, no such covenant was ever made.  Therefore, it is perhaps not unreasonable to assume that repentance for their decades long immoral relationship also never came.  And, while news reports indicate that she received “last rites” on the evening before her death, I do not hold to the belief that that alone, apart from a personal confession of Jesus Christ as savior, is sufficient to escape eternal punishment.  (I say this with respectful apologies to my Roman Catholic friends, who may believe otherwise.)

As for Jackson, I understand that his family was identified with the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who deny the deity of Jesus Christ.  Not a good thing!  Even if Jacko denounced that counterfeit religion, I am not aware of any confession that he may have made to a belief in Jesus Christ as the son of God along with repentance for the bizarre and perverted choices he made over the course of his lifetime.

I will be the first to acknowledge that our sovereign God may have intervened in these two people’s lives in some miraculous way near the time of their deaths.  But there is no possible way for us to know with any degree of certainty if that happened or not.  So, for those who want to think “happy thoughts”, that might be a hope upon which one might place more energy than the alternative, which is the secular view that with death, all of this life’s struggles and battles are over, with nothing but peace and tranquility awaiting on the other side.  Those outcomes await only those who possess the unshakable assurance of eternal life through Jesus Christ, and Him alone. 

And I am sure about that!