The latest installment in the long tradition of modern adaptations of Charles' Dickens' A Christmas Carol is the movie Spirited starring Will Farrell and Ryan Reynolds. Unfortunately it's only available on Apple+, but since I had to buy a new computer to have a dedicated machine for podcasting and video production, I got a free 3 month trial to Apple+, and we watched Spirited.
I wasn't ready for a couple things, but once I got into the vibe of it, I really liked it. First of all, it's a musical. If you don't like musicals, it's hard to get past that, I suppose, but I do like (good) musicals. I came up in the theatre, and I probably like musicals as much as any straight guy can. In fact, I have this fantasy that this is what heaven is like - everyone is constantly breaking into song, and we all just know the words and dance steps. So Spirited played right into that fantasy for me, and as far as musicals go, it is very good - great songwriting, great lyrics, everything you want in a musical. The songs are not just a break from the story, the lyrics really move the story along and tell you something about the characters. I thought the songwriter(s) nailed it - just enough of an homage to great musical theatre to feel good, but also not so much of an homage that it's not a new musical on its own - it really is, and it stands up. In fact, it was staged, blocked, and choreographed very much like it was on stage, and I wouldn't be surprised if it IS on stage somewhere in New York or London (of course that would ruin it, but that's an argument for another day).
Second, it's not just an adaptation of A Christmas Carol, like Scrooged with Bill Murray. It kind of takes it to the next level in several ways, which you just have to see, but it overtly admits up front that it's an adaptation of the classic, and then doubles down on that.
Now, as you would expect from Hollywood - God is nowhere to be found, even though there are scenes in the heavenly/angelic realm, and - quite disappointingly - there's an element of reincarnation. There is just the slightest hint that anyone who is truly unredeemable might be damned, but they don't say for sure, and the don't say anything about heaven. But, okay, like I said, what else would we expect from mainstream Hollywood? It's not so bad that you can't get past it.
Overall, if you don't hate musicals, and you have Apple+ - and especially if you feel the need to see every adaptation of A Christmas Carol (as I do), then you gotta see it. I wasn't sure when it started, but by the time it ended, I was all in. So I recommended it, as far as I can recommend a secularized version of the classic. (FYI, the best version remains the one with the Muppets.)
Have a blessed second Sunday of Advent!
Here's a short (about a minute) video I took going around the Holy Column in the church of Santa Prassede. This is the column that Jesus was tied to when he was scourged by Pontius Pilate. They don't always have the barrier down, so you usually don't get to see it from all the way around. I wanted to get video of the whole thing all the way around because I ran across a note in an ancient document that said that those who made a pilgrimage (at that time to the Holy Land, since it was still in Jerusalem) could visit the Holy Column, and could see marks left from the hands of Jesus where he gripped it as he was being whipped. I assume that this is pious legend, but I figured since the column has that dark & light marble, maybe there's a place where the dark parts look like hands. I did not see it, but if you do, let me know!
I mentioned in The Journey that I wrote a song based on Isaiah 2, which is one of my favorite OT passages:
In days to come, the mountain of the Lord’s house
shall be established as the highest mountain, and raised above the hills.
All nations shall stream toward it. Many peoples shall come and say:
“Come, let us go up to the Lord’s mountain, to the house of the God of Jacob, That he may instruct us in his ways, and we may walk in his paths.” For from Zion shall go forth instruction, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He shall judge between the nations, and set terms for many peoples.
They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; One nation shall not raise the sword against another, nor shall they train for war again. House of Jacob, come, let us walk in the light of the Lord!
I hope you like the song!
Here is our next set of texts - as we get into John chapter 6, we first encounter Jesus feeding the multitudes - in this case 5,000 families!
Now, as you know, there is also an account o Jesus feeding 4,000, and so you may also know that some scholars might speculate that these are just different versions of the same story that circulated and were handed down orally, until they were written down. Even the fact that both stories occur in the same gospel would not stop that kind of speculation. So I thought the first question I would have to ask was whether the Church fathers thought this was one event or two - BUT (and you see where this is going) I forgot that Jesus himself makes reference to two separate events (in Matthew 16 and in Mark 8) so there is no question for the Church fathers - these are two separate events. So it seems that Jesus performed this sign (miracle) of the feeding of the multitudes on two occasions. It's not just one event told two different ways, and it's also ...
My voice was still recovering from a bad cold, so not sounding my best, but this was a great conversation about pilgrimage, for the Jubilee year - more of this coming in other interviews! (FYI, I think I was the third of three guests that day, so you will have to fast forward to find me)
It seems that one way or another we need to talk about different kinds, or different levels of heresy. What I have been calling heresy vs. heterodoxy, others call heresy on fundamental doctrines vs. heresy on less fundamental doctrines. In other words, Heresy with a capital H (over fundamental doctrines like the Trinity and christology) are the kinds of heresies that move one outside the boundaries of what Christianity is, and that's because the very definition of Christianity is defined according to these fundamental doctrines. To refuse to sign the Creed at the Council of Nicaea in 325, or the Council of Constantinople in 381 - and indeed to reject any of the contents of the Creed today - means that a person is NOT a Christian.
So are the non-chalcedonians, such as the miaphysites (including St. Gregory of Narek, and today's Coptic Christians) - are they heretics? Well, like it is with a lot of things, that depends on your definition of heresy. If you include in your definition of ...
