In his book Talking to Strangers, Canadian writer Malcolm Gladwell delves into the psychology of our togetherness which makes us human. His particular focus is on how it is that we relate to on another in a world filled with competing information. Understanding that we come together with “different assumptions, perspectives and backgrounds” and different ways of regarding which of this information is true and which is not, we also can exhibit identifiable behaviors that have more to say about our need to uphold such binaries (between truth and lies, good and evil) than truth itself. As he suggests in an interview for the Guardian, “any element which disrupts the equilibrium between two strangers… becomes problematic.” Thus our inherent and built in need to protect against such disruptions is greater than any need to disrupt the order in search for the truth. This is simpy how human interactions function. It is, in fact, what allowed us to develop the way we have. Human interaction, key to our development, could not function otherwise. As he suggests, we are naturally driven towards “trust”, and thus when it comes to our awareness of the potentially disruptive realities in our world and in our lives its not so much about the evidence for something being true or not, it is about how much evidence, and furher which particular evidence at which particular time pushes our interactions over the line of trust into the chaos of distrust, thus requiring us to then face the truth of our reality and to respond.

Gladwell uses examples of cases of abuse and wrongdoing throughout the book to underscore how it is that this predication to trust works and how it is that certain information can push us to recognize something as a lie They are fascinating examples precisely because they can easily translate across our different experiences, be it our personal interactions with others, existing within a polarizing pandemic where allegiances to truth and accusations of lies has left us in a position of persistant chaos and division, or even war breaking out in Ukraine where we see a people caught between competing powers to the east and the west in contest over matters of truth and lies. Here is what Gladwell helps underscore- allegiances to truth (trust) and the resulting chaos of distrust in the truth is far more complex than simple right and wrong. The way out of chaos is not so much to uncover the truth- although truth is important- but to be able to once again trust. And more than this- to re-assume our unconscious trust in one another and our governing systems.

Perhaps one key part of his observation is how this necessary binary seems to lead us towards the creation of villains. Trust, as he says, “enables us” to exist together, and without it we could not exist together. Everything would deteriorate into perpetuated cycnicism of everything and all. We could not send our kids to school, we could not take our cars to mechanics, we could not drive cars made by companies, abide by instituted laws, etc without an assumed and prior trust in one another and in how the world works. “I can’t converse with you, for instance, if I subject every statement that comes out of your mouth to critical scrutiny before I accept it as true. Conversation cannot proceed without default to the truth.” The problem is that this also leaves us open to deception, and thus to protect against deception we establish these villains so as to allow our exclusive circles to feel safe enough to trust. This tendency makes it difficult to then note when the true villain needs to be addressed from within.

Here is where the complexity comes into focus. Assumed trust is neither blind nor universally applied when it comes to scientifically observable human behavior. We exist, necessarily, within exclusively formed societal bonds and assumptions that allow us to trust one another within the specific societal frameworks that we occupy. Displace us and trust gets disrupted. Insert a stranger that doesn’t appear to belong in our circle and trust gets disrupted.

Break this down even further and we find exclusively formed societal bonds in political divisions, religious divisisions, neighborhood divisions, and so on. What this reveals is how dependent our social function is on having recognizable, if not always directly defined, villains which often surface in the form of an other, something we see as disrupting the necessary order. This brings us to two central issues, or two-fold issues, when it comes to locating our predication to trust within a larger picture of patterned order and disorder. First is the human tendency to protect order and defend against disorder by way of establishing villains based on us and them paradigms. This reveals how our interactions work not according to truth but according to necessary trust, the latter being most important to uphold when it comes to functioning civilization. The problem is this necessary trust can convince us of the need to villainize the other whether this is true or not, and in doing so it can distract us from the real issues we need to attend to within our own circles.

The second part of this two-fold problem is the more serious, which is the truth that in this world sometimes distrust is necessary and upsetting the order is required in order for trust to operate. This is true when it comes to issues of oppression, power, abuse, harm. This is where it is important to locate that tipping point, the piece of information or the magic number in the amount of information needed to allow the lies (or the truth) to emerge and to challenge our trust in persons, institutions, events, ect. In these cases Gladwell points out that it is almost never the majority that achieves this tipping point, rather it is almost always a minute selection of individuals or even, in a lot of cases, an individual, that causes this tipping point to be reached.

The problem here then becomes exasperbated by our tendency towards needing villains to define our exclusive societal structures as reliable and to allow us to feel safe enough to function together within them in unconscious ways. This plays a key role in allowing us to assume trust, which is necessary for humans to function. To be clear, globalization and the age of the internet which has understandably collapsed borders and boundaries and broadened our awareness of the world hasn’t done away with our human penchant towards exlusivity. This is fundamental to the nature of being human whether we see this as a good and necessary thing or not. It has simply made it more targeted and reapplied it to the ways we live online and the ways we move through this world in the modern age. In truth we survive together in large part by securing the villains which subsequently upholds ourselves as the victims (or potential victims) whether this is true or not. This makes it that much harder to be able to address where the true victims are and to locate the source of the problem creating the oppression, which is not people but the systems and structures that govern us based on this mutual trust in one another.

To be clear there is no great answer to the problem of disorder and chaos and division, except to say more clearly where this is rooted, why it happens, and perhaps to become more aware of the inate relationship between trust and deception. Deception matters less when it is not causing harm. Trust matters less when deception is causing harm. Being attentive to where possible oppression exists and where it is causing harm is then necessary and important, even if we can’t allow this to dominate us and turn us into cynics where everything is a lie and everything is the enemy. Gladwell suggests that here is where we can perhaps take comfort in the idea that healthy functioning societies seem to exist where the majority are able to trust and where the few are free to be cynics. There is something about this equation, even if it doesn’t quite translate equitably, that allows for that tipping point to occur even if it takes a while to surface within the many predicated towards trust. It’s in societies where the cynics are oppressed and unable to be heard or where the majority live with cynicism, or even where there are too many exclusive circles holding power over one another, that the problem is that much greater.

As I was reading the book I kept thinking about how this intersects with my Christian faith, a faith that imagines a world where the diverse multitude that makes up humanity are able to exist and flourish together. A faith which does locate in its meta-narrative a real awareness of existing binaries between truth and lies. It feels like one crucial point is where trust in “God” becomes the great unifier. This trust allows us to assume that what is wrong will be made right, that truth will be revealed. Another aspect is a meta-narrative that alows us to not to see these binaries as existing in people but rather in nature itself where, in view of the biblical narrative, good and evil do exist as tangible and real agencies governing our existence. This is something that seperates the assumptions of the faith from strictly material views of the world where good and evil are not seen as agencies and where actions are essential benign and amoral functions in and of themselves. Seeing it this way through the lens of faith allows us to trust in the inherent goodness of people and creation while understanding that the potential for evil, and our participation in evil, exists as well.

A part of being faithful followers of Christ then is learning how to disinguish between that which brings order and that which sows disorder. In the Biblical narrative this is connected to two pictures- disorder caused by sin and necessary disorder which disrupts sin. The measure of this then is Christ who is the full revelation of truth and in whom we can place our trust as we move out into the world in ways that bring order to the disorder. But we also know that Christ is being revealed in ways that remind us that we don’t always see truth clearly or fully. We find Christ by calling out in our own places of trials and struggles and trusting that God is in this word and pariticpating in our struggles. We follow Christ through trust by way of locating and attending to the oppressed, the sick, the hurting in this world and being God’s presence in this world. By trusting in Christ we can assume greater trust in one another while also calling out the evil that threatens to throw our lives together into chaos. Key to Gladwell’s psychological anaylisis of the value and the problem of trust then is that order and disorder is something that happens as much in our togetherness as it does within ourselves. This is where division and disorder theatens to distract us from the real oppression that Christ is attending to and calling us to attend to on the way to the promise of new creation, new order. Here is the important point though- disorder in our lives can come as a result of sin. It can also be a result of necessary transformation. And usually this is where Christ disrupts our inner life with the truth that we need to hear precisely so that we can be Christ in the world. This is how God makes God’s presence known in this world. This is how we relearn to trust in the truth of who Christ is, who we are, and who we are living in this world together.

Watching the news this week and with everything happening in Ukraine caused me to look back on the film travels exercise I did in 2020, where I travelled the world through film researching individual film cultures, watching their films, and then reflecting on what I learned through my travels.

One of the biggest things I learned is how the state of film (and the health of its industry) in any given country often mirrors, and in many cases can determine a Country’s given struggles and successes. This is why strong policies that protect local industries matter. This is why protecting against the dominating force of imports matters (see the global reality of the American film industry for example, something that has been unfortunately heightened by the dominating force of Netflix around the world, an American enterprise that has rewritten the problem of globalization). This is why the question of a country’s ability to export film also matters. Ukraine remains a great example of these truths.

Some key points in Ukrainian film history:

• As is the common story around the world it begins with the arrival of the Lumiere Brothers, in this case at Odessa (a key point of film production going forward)
• Photographer Alfred Fedetsky becomes a key voice early on in shaping the potential of film to capture the Ukrainian story through real world footage in a way that begins to provide a unifying voice leading up to and reaching beyond the Ukrainian Revolution of 1917 where we see the emergence of a Ukrainian Republic. With the early days of soviet rule film industries were nationalized playing a key role in allowing a distinct Ukrainian identity to emerge from its slavic roots located in the steppes and centered around a fierce attachment to this protected culture (I highly recommend the book The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine by Serhii Plokhy for a more in depth look at this history)
• As history moves forward we see this identity challenged and the film industry being pulled in two different directions- The Russifying of Ukrainian films on one side and the constant threat of Western dominance and imports on the other. This makes it a challenge in terms of locating the Ukrainian story, telling the Ukrainian story, and growing the culture by way of the experience of its people. The sharp and drastic decline of the film industry mirrors some dark days reaching through the 40’s and up until the 50’s and 60’s until we see the recovery of its literary staples and classics being reworked through this public and visual artform. This represented the recovery of a language that still matters to this day.
• There are key films and key points in Ukraines history that are worth noting, but it’s not really until we get to 2014 and the recent revolution that we can speak of something significant. As one source puts it, one direct outcome of this moment was the sharp rise in Ukrainian film which goes hand in hand with the ongoing battle to protect their identity:

“More films are being made in Ukraine now than at any time in its 27-year history of independence. More government money is being allocated to keep them coming. And more than ever before, they are gaining attention at home and winning awards at top international film festivals.”

Unfortunately Ukrainian films remain notoriously difficult to access on international shores, which plays in to the relationship between the health of a culture and the health of its film industry. I still have an extremely lengthy watchlist and continue to try and gain access to its most important works. However, from my limited viewing here are some films, should you be interested, that I think are worthwhile viewing:

Winter on Fire/Olegs Choice
Two films that represent different perspectives, one capturing the real time story of Ukrainians duing the 2014 revolution and war and the other taking a camera into the Donbass region close to the Russian border to follow and explore two Russian soldiers who face a crisis of purpose as they try to make sense of why they are fighting. Both equally interesting if different types of documentaries. Olegs Choice is much more quiet and subtle while Winter on Fire is big and emotional.

Olegs Choice is available to stream for free on Kanopy in Winipeg (your library service) and for rent while Winter on Fire is available on Netflix

Everything Is Illuminated/Hutsul Girl Ksenca
Takes place in Odessa and stars Elijah Wood. Follows a Jewish man on a journey through Ukrainian soil in search for a Ukrainian woman who saved his grandfathers life during the war. Its funny and deeply entrenched in Ukrainian culture.

Hutsul Girl Ksenia is a much more artsy and creative look at Ukrainian culture immeresed in its lanuage and story and mythogies. Its less accessible but offers a beautiful portrait of the Carpathian area. Everything is available to stream on Crave and for rent and Hutsul is available for free on Hoopla in Winnipeg, also your library service.

Mr Jones
Tells the little known story of Welsh journalist Gareth Jones who risked his life to expose the imposed and man made famine on the Ukrainian people. One of my favorites of its year (2019) and a powerful film about Ukrainian identity.

Available in Winnipeg to stream free through Hoopla or for rent.

Almost Holy
A documentary about a pastor who sets out to attend to Ukrainian youth in the period beginning in 2001 and ending in 2015. What makes this meaningful to me is that our son was born in 2001 and was adopted in 2015, and much of this travels through territory close to where he lived and grew up giving me a greater sense of the world that would have informed his experience.

Available to watch on Tubi for free or for rent.

Winter of the Braves (or Kruty 1918)/Alisa in Warland
Speaking of the 1917 Revolution, this tells the story of a group of university students who changed the face of that war and brought about change to the Ukrainan Republic.

Alisa in Warand also tells the story of a university student, this one a student of film looking to make sense of the role of art in the oppressive landscape that becomes the 2014 revolution.

Winter of the Braves is available to stream on Prime or for rent and Alisa is avaiable for free on Kanopy or for rent.

Lastly, because this deserves its own category altogether, is the HBO miniseries Chernobyl. I’m not really into series or tv that much these days, but this is one of the most phenomenal modern works to be made in a long while. Available on Crave.

And to add that, if you want a good complimentary viewing check out The Babushkas of Chernobyl. Its equally sad but a good contrast to the darknes of Chernobyl given that it is also very inspiring, joy filled and hopeful.

“In this world you will have trouble. But take heart I have overcome the world.”
John 16:33

So much hinges on this small verse at the end of a section commonly understood to depict Jesus’ followers as standing opposed to a world that “hates” them and persecutes them for simply believing in Jesus. To be hated is seen as proof of ones faith, a vindication of our rights to worship the one true God and a resisting of the world and all its vileness. So often this verse is used to go from us being hated by the world to us justifying our hate of the world.

Crucial to this is our defintion of the world. In fact, so much of this hinges on our misunderstanding of the word “world” and the word “overcome” within John’s Gospel, two words that find their source “in Christ”.

1. The World: “In the beginning” introduces us to the “Word”, the word that was “with God” and the word that was “God”. This Word is the same word that waas spoken in order to bring about God’s “good” creation in Genesis. This Word is the same Jesus that now is “in the world” which “God so loves”. The Word that is says was made “flesh”.

The proclamation goes,”He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him.” (1:10), which echoes the earlier statment that “the light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.” The world “not understanding”, a world that has been plunged into darkness where the Powers of Sin and Death reign, this is where we find Jesus as the “word” made flesh, a motif that plays throughout John’s Gospel and which envelopes not just the disciples but the whole world, the entire order of the cosmos.

Here is what is important for the context of John 16- the world is in fact the whole of the created order. In Johns Gospel it reflects the cosmic vision of a world that finds itself in a state of being, caught somewhere between the lies we know and the truth that needs to be revealed. This is the reason for the three fold conviction that informs the three central truths of this passage, which states that “in a little while you won’t see me” because Jesus is going to the Father, and the reason Jesus is going to the Father is in order to send the spirit to convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment. In John this is “good news”. Now note the three fold movement- sin (what is wrong with the world), righteousness (best understood with the shared word “justify” or justification, which suggests that what is wrong is being made right), judgment (victory over the spiritual Powers that rule this world). This is cosmic in scope. This is universally hopeful. This is goodness being expressed. This is what is being made right and how it is being made right.

2. Overcome: How often we encounter this passage and see it as justification of this idea that the world is against me because I am on the side of the Gospel, and how often do we make the Gospel synonymous with whatever cause it is that sets us in conflict with the world. And yet this misses completely the true force of this word that has much in common with the word “convict”, a word that also carries with it a positive conotation. The word translated “overcome” is not understood to be war like language. It is not “us versus them” language. It is not “defeating” or “vanqiushing” language. It is in fact redemptive language. It is freeing language. It is inclusive language.

It is also a word blanketed by the “I”, which invokes an image of the same Word that created this world and called it good, the same Word that came into this world in order to declare it so loved. If, as the sending of the spirit declares, Jesus is in fact God, this is not then a picture of a God who is against the world, rather it is a picture of a God who is for the world which finds itself caught between two competing identities. It is a picture of a God who is in the world desiring to bring libration from the false identity which holds us hostage and to reveal our true identity in Christ, declaring this great truth- in Jesus we can say this world is good, this world is loved, God is in this world. As the great conviction states, what is wrong is being made right because this world is no longer under the rule of the spiritual Powers which lay claim to our false idenity as prisoners, but rather we are free in Christ who has judged the world righty as the good creation. Christ has overcome, which means that Christ stands above all that is wrong, the one who is able then to declare our true identity by shining a light into the darkness and revealing the truth. The true conflict is a world under the rule of the Powers and a world under the rule of Christ, a conflict God responds to in self giving love.

How often we miss this mark in our rush to create these us versus them narratives, to declare ourselves persecuted and in necessary opposition to the world. It is in the world that we find Christ on the way to the cross, bearing the weight of our troubles as he goes ahead of us, and thus shining a light so as to make known what is true and good and right on the way. We are, then, simply asked to follow, but Christ must go first so as to model the way. As this passage suggests, these two things must go together in Christ in order to reframe our necessary conflict with what is wrong in this world that we occupy together. The true and good and right that is anchored in the verse that begins this section in John 15:16- “This is my command: Love each other”, a command that becomes clear in the self giving nature of the way of Christ which a world in darkness “hates”. This is what it means to truly stand in conflict with the “world”. If Christ is in the world and we are in Christ, to hate the world is to hate ourselves, and to hate ourselves is to hate Chirst because Christ is love. To operate in love then is to embrace our true identity by seeing the true identity of Christ who reveals to us the true identity of this world. Unfortunately the times that we live in seems to have confused this command for something else entirely. Convoys continue to protest alligning Christians with its charge to hate the world under a false premise of unity and love. Cries for freedom are expressed but in ways that seem to allign more with the allure of the tree in the garden than the way of the cross. We seem to desire the false identity rather than the truth of being in Christ, and as a result we have misplaced our conflict by placing it on this world rather than on the Powers that hold it hostage. We have rushed to tear down what we see as an oppressive Empire only to erect an oppressive Empire in its place and thus call it good, somehow believing this to set us apart from the world. And yet Christ continues to be “in the world” calling us to follow on the way, shining a light into our darkness in order to expose the lies that hold us enslaved. The real question is, are we following in the way of Christ or are we resting in the lies.

Some thoughts that came from a discussion with someone regarding what, if we could just take a step back from the highly charged division and speak honestly for a second, it is that I genuinely think, fear and wonder about coming out of this past week living and Canada and measuring the reality of the convoy. And just for the record, since this inevitably overlaps with politics, I would qualify myself as a generally leaning socially minded Canadian rather than holding any particular political allegiance. Liberal/democratic and conservative/Republican in the U.S. and Canada are all equally as corrupt as they come in my eyes, a fact we have to live with while trying to uphold democracy. One is just far better at allowing us to address real social concern in the meantime in my opinion.

I don’t fear a speculative future where perceived experimental vaccines end up leaving us with long term negative impact. I am concerned about what we do know today, which includes long term Covid effects for those even with minor symptoms, actual and potential deaths due to irresponsible behavior, and the freedom and ability to respond to things like vaccine side effects, hospital overload, taxed workers, emerging data, and economic, social and mental struggles caused by being in a pandemic, things that proper research can help us target.

I desperately fear what this pandemic is going to do when it comes to empowering those who have married it to political agendas and power on both sides, because while I believe this world is good I do also believe that such tendencies bear very real consequence in the here and now, both for matters of social concern and for matters of faith, which really should be one in the same.

I fear what happens moving forward with this perpetuated political divide in terms of creating even more resistance to good polices that can help address real, systemic problems. I fear a world where any attempts by the experts to continually guide us through this pandemic is going to be co-opted for a political cause. I fear the way I hear people using such political causes as a way to define freedom in problematic ways, and I fear this is going to undermine our ability to respond to the very real problems we encounter in this world.

I don’t fear communism. In truth, far more than fearing the so called liberal left, because I believe we have the tools to filter through the corruption on that side, I fear the power of an unchecked political right (read: fascism) which tends to blur the lines much more sharply between notions of freedom and notions of power, particularly when it comes to its full on dedication to a belief in the liberated person, something that I think gets shown to be a fallacy pretty quickly. None of us live alone, therefore none of us are truly free. There is also a reason that dangerous forms of the alt right can so easily co-opt this political side for their own purposes, and there is so much tendency towards thinking in pardigms that portion out this world in us and them terms. This is so much bigger than Covid, this is about that beast that we know, historically speaking, gaining traction here in Canada, and it is far harder to wrestle that version of the far right down because of how it utilizes power and economics in ways that oppose policies concerned with real social issues and becaus of how it utilizes the cult of the indiviual to do so.

Personally I fear a world where should I get sick my sickness will be inevitable fuel for that political side to say, see, I told you so. We were right. We are the self proclaimed prophets of this new freedom movement. This is already happening as we see governments responding to good and right data about this most recent variant, something that was in process long before the convoy, and it is already inhibiting our ability to bring us out of this pandemic in a responsible and measured manner. People are far more interested in believing a heavily entrenched and apocalyptic narrative to be true than in measured discussion about good and bad mandates. We are in for a long haul not in a fight for freedom but of incredible political divide that will outlive this pandemic.

I grieve for the Christian witness. I see so many Christians representing Ceasar rather than Christ and embracing toxic forms of Empire rather than the Kingdom of God. How we hear Christ telling Peter to put down his sword in this I have no idea, but a faith that is more interested in upholding the sort of ideals of freedom that would have run rampant in Rome while also paying allegiance to the gods of material success, personal health, the cult of the individual, power, and economic interest at the same time is what Christ came to overturn.

I’ve been thinking lately about the imagery of the river crossings in scripture, something a friend brought to mind again today. Interestingly it is this imagery that the Gospel writers use to depict Jesus’ baptism. He goes out of Egypt and through the water. I do wonder if one thing we often miss in this movement out of Egypt and towards the promised land is the importance of Sinai. As the Gospels tell Jesus’ story he ends up ascending and descending the mountain like Moses with the Beatitudes, a Sinai moment. It is here that we are meant to be shaped as the people of God and in the ways of God. The real question posed, I think, in these two parallel stories is how does this speak to the problem of Empire, which in the story of Israel is patterned after Babylon and Egypt. What we find as the people of God enter the land is they forget about Sinai and what this means. They forget about the Covenant which establishes them not as a people arrived at the promised land but as a people who arrive at the promised land “for” the sake of the world. A people called to represent a different picture rather than Empire. Thus they establish themselves immediately in the pattern and image of Empire becuase this is what such allusions to freedom, when not defined in Exodus terms, leads to. They see freedom as power and the upholding of their rights and they become more and more exclusively minded and protective of these rights rather than representing what scripture calls the “mixed multitude” who were carried out of Egypt for the sake of the world. They become image bearers of the wrong thing losing sight of their true identity.

This is genuinely my concern with what is going on right now. The end result in the story of Israel is a community misplacing what freedom is and means, forgetting the story of Gods faithfulness, neglecting the call of Sinai, establishing a kingdom based on power, and ultimately doing destructive things and being given to the destruction around them at the hands of the next emerging Empire. The desert turns to exile. I don’t think the desert is a picture of slavery and oppression, rather it is where they are shaped against the temptation of power and Empire, something Jesus resists and ultimately rises to tear down and rebuild, beginning with the temple itself. That temple then is also us and it is, in the promises and faithfulness of God, the whole of creation. That’s what we are called to at Sinai, at the Sermon on the Mount, to participate in, is the Kingdom of God. This is the part that I worry about, especially when we know this is cyclical. Every generation ends up in exile precisely at the point that they take the form of Empire losing sight of the way of Christ and the picture of the covenant promise to make my people a people for the world. My prayer continues to be that we don’t miss the way of Christ in this which leads to the Cross.

In truth, it is not fearing some side effects 5/20 years down the road that is the problem to me- even if that did happen I would still say we did the right thing in the moment based on what we know and I would still believe helpful protocols and vaccines helped save a lot of lives that would have otherwise died. It’s fearing the very real challenges of a Christianity that has lost the ability to locate freedom in Christ working in relationship with politics and government for the sake of the world. That has very real consequence in the here and now. Imagining a world with policies that address systemic issues is going to be an even greater uphill battle.

The real problem with defintions of freedom floating around out there is that when we say “us” it includes “me”. While sometimes this is imporant, particularly as it deifnes the cries of the disenfranchised, this can also be incredibly dangerous and destructive. This says: we are the victims therefore it matters, as opposed to there are the oppressed hear their cries. And the problem is the oppression being cited by the opposition describes the same sacrifices all of us have made in order to help the oppressed. This is not oppression, and if it is then we all are facing the same thing together. There is no us and them paradigm at work here, which is why it is so difficult to locate compassion and empathy for these self proclaimed freedom fighters. Further, desiring to see “them” rather than “us” is going to take a lot of work to uncover and model in the aftermath of this pandemic, especially following the rhetoric of the convoy.

And while I genuinely believe MRNA is going to become commonplace in future treatments and medicine, a church already lagging behind these discussions is going to increasingly be unable to ensure that we keep asking the most important questions when it comes to navigating the ethics of these sorts of changes and developments. In all honesty I can’t remember the last time when I struggled so much with the words “Christian” and “Canadian”, two words that intersect with my own life, beliefs and value systems, and that genuinely breaks my heart.

These are my fears. Hope, the more important subject, requires more thought.

Movies

1. The Face of Another (Hiroshi Teshigahara, 1966))

 The story follows two essential characters- a man with a facial disfigurement who gets a mask which he wears to cover up his blemishes, and a young woman with a scar that holds in its presence the larger story of war, post war reality, and socio-political headship. Here the intimacy of the indivual story is seen through the larger context of the world that forms it. Whats powerful about this is the way the camera awakens us to matters of perspective, the one that we perceive looking in on us and making judgments of us and the one we perceive and judge looking outwards. These perspectives are shaped togther informing one another as we attempt to move out into the world and participate as we are, or as the mask suggests, perhaps as we wish to be seen.

2. Come and See (Elem Klimov, 1985)/For a Few Dollars More (Sergio Leone, 1965)

Two blindspots that are both undeniable classics and masterpieces in their respective genres. Come and See is a war film that simply needs to be experienced in order to truly appreciate. It is an inspired story of two young lost souls caught up in the unimaginable horrors of war being forced, well beyond their years, to wrestle with the tension that exists between hope and despair. For a Few Dollars More is a Western by one of the masters. There is an earthy, stated realism to this rough and tumble, back to basics genre film. The way it frames the two main characters using the shared desire to trap these outlaws “in the middle”, putting one on the inside and the other on the outside creates some wonderful tension. Every aspect of this lives, breathes and oozes genuine and well established western motifs, functioning as a veritable collage of best of scenes that dance with the rhythmic beats of it’s calm, cool narrative focus. Rich characters embody this focus enabling it to tell its story with a sense of intention and urgency.

3. High and Low (Akira Kuosawa, 1963)

A superbly written detective story that moves with the choreographed dance of its effortlessly positioned performances. The first hour alone features some expectionally written dialogue stationed as it is in a singular apartment. The high and low of the story frames the films setting as it moves through the city with the second half broadening our point of perspective with the unfolding mystery. Everything about this, from the small details of the story and the set pieces to the cinematography is richly designed and an example of genuine craft that demands your attention and likely several rewatches. Simply brilliant.

4. Mass (Fran Kranz, 2021)/A Hero (Asghar Farhadi, 2021)

Two 2021 films that finally got wide release, both of which muscled their way into my top 20 list. One of the most beautiful aspects of Mass’ conversational approach is the amount of restraint it shows with the dialogue. The premise alone carries an immense amount of weight, following one couple as they travel to meet another couple who’s son took the life of theirs. We.are introduced to these four characters as they arrive at this Church, a neutral space in which they are able to sit down together. From here the movie simply captures this conversation as it moves through awkwardness, pain, snd uncertainty in an attempt to find some kind of healing. The church provides the perfect setting for the conversation itself, and as the title suggests this process echos parts of a religious liturgy being played out in real time, one that sees the call to forgive as I have been forgiven and struggles to make this fit with what feels like an impossible space already occupied by pain, anger and grief. And yet what is clear is that where there is forgivness there is freedom. The question, or the tension being played out between these four is whether this is a freedom any of them can know, and whether they can know it together. That is the part of this film that should keep you on the edge of your seat all the way to its emotionally laden conclusion.

A Hero, a new film by Farhadi, one of the all time greats, is a true marvel of filmmaking genius, bringing together the films moral crisis and its poignant and expertly crafted reflections on family, political, and social systems. That our main character, a man given a temporary 2 day leave from prison using this time to try and convince the debtor who sent him there to extend forgivness and grace, is also formulated with such depth and detail within this larger framework is what makes Fahardi one of the all time great filmmakers of our time. A steady hand guides the narrative from its simple beginnings through the persistent and eventually inevitable unravelling of this man’s choices, beginning with a simple decision concerning the finding of a purse with gold coins, finding in this unravelling something profoundly complicated and important when it comes to the world we are forced to make these choices in. What’s fascinating about the film’s title as well is that there are no true hero’s and villains in this story, rather there are people emerging within a system that enables such balances of power to exhibit their control over the other, something that seems to demand some level of necessary manipulation.

5. The Children’s Hour (William Wyler, 1961)/Fanny and Alexander (Ingmar Bergman, 1982)/The Children Are Watching Us (Vittorio De Sica, 1944)

Three films that help uncover a story of pain and trauma by seeing it from the childs perspective. The Childrens Hour is about how the childs perspetve impacts the lives of two women who are best friends. Serious performances utilize the strength of the script to explore this complexity and embody it in a fully realized examination of two women living in this time period and navigating accusations of same sex attraction. It is the particulars of this world and this context that proves a powerful snapshot of a moment in time, and yet a moment that lingers far into the shadows of our own present day. In Bergmans Fanny and Alexander, a definite blindspot, it beckons us forward into the world of this film and invites us to linger in the shadows where we are able to experience the story from the perspective of a child. Or perhaps more poignantly from the the perspective of widened adult eyes peering backwards into the solace of those complicated childhood memories. It would seem, given that this was his final film, and a majestic one at that, that Bergmans desire was to capture the trajectory of his career, writing this story through the lingering presence of his own formative experiences and shaping that against a career of deeply expressed longing, exploration, questioning and curiousity. Where the darker edges still seem to haunt him here spiritual imagination takes over bringing to life visions of a world that is able to move effortlessly between this earthly reality and transcendent truths. The film weaves together the supernatural and the natural tightly until they cannot exist above or apart. Similar with the fluidity of the life and the dream which Bergman Directs with expert attention to the cinematic transitions. Certain key images, the puppets being a highly visible one, anchor is in a sense of belonging functioning as both comfort and fear.

In The Children Are Watching Us we are given a view from the ground up, capturing the childs perspective of the world around him immerses us in the true emotion of this experience, and the circumstances being captured become an intimate snapshot of a family unravelling as the family ideal and the reality of struggle clash in this desperate battle for this young child’s innocence. The final scene inparticuar is about as big of a gut punch as you will find, with the gradually deteriorating state of things coming to a head. It’s phenomenal filmmaking accented by some wonderful performances, and it’s the kind of film experience you won’t soon forget.

Honorable Mentions: The Haunting (Robert Wise, 1963) is a pyschological and spiritually concerned horror that examines the limits of our perspective, the challenge of faith, and the formulating power of doubt. All About Eve (joseph L. Mankiewicz, 1950) is an outstanding character study built on the stand out and largely complimentary performances of Bette Davis and Anne Baxter in the role of these two women in quiet contest each with their own interests and motivations. The script is equally wonderful as it weaves in some wonderful twists and turns. And that ending. Absolutely transfixing and haunting. Autumn Sonata (Ingmar Bergman, 1978) and Winter Light (Ingmar Bergman, 1963) are two of Bergmans most powerful internal dramas, one delving into the complexity of family relationship and the other into a startling examination of faith and doubt. Lastly, Microhabitat (Jeon Go-woon, 2017) reminiscent as it is of Frances Ha, pulls a meaningful story about being lost and finding our place in this confusing and difficult world from a largley improvisational approach.

Books

The Serpent in Samuel: A Messianic Motif by Brian Verrett and Jason DeRouchie

A must read for anyone interested in understanding how scripture works. It’s main thesis concerns the use of the serptent motif in the book of Samuel, something scholarship has noted but as of yet hasn’t offered a definitive work, but this concern intersects with how the serpent motof plays throughout scripture. It’s fascinating stuff and helps to shed a whole new light on the text, particularly where this concerns the messianic motif that stands side by side.

Delivered Out of Empire: Pivoal Moments in the Book of Exodus by Walter Brueggemann

Not unlike The Serpent in Samuel this book is paradigm shaping stuff. The way Brueggemann explores and exposits the Exodus story is intuitive, incredibly aware and deeply challenging. It transforms it from a stoy to a liturgical exercise shaped by memory and action. A must read.

Tilly and the Bookwanderers by Anna James

An imaginative teen novel about a young girl who discovers the gift of bookwandering, which brings characters and settings to life. It’s part adventure, part mystery, part family story, and a complete love letter to the art of reading. The allegories are obvious, using the reading experience to create the story, and any book lover will be able to know intuitively what it feels like for Tilly to experience the things she does as a reader. It’s what we all experience as readers, and its what makes encountering this and other stories so powerful and meaningful.

Where the Light Fell by Philip Yancey

Yancey has been on record saying this is the most imporant book he has written in terms of his own journey and experience, and the passion shows. It’s the story of his life, moving through crisis to faith to doubt to an embrace of mystery. Much of it is beautiful, some of it is chalenging and hard, and given my fondness for a lot of his writing I found the whole to be inspiring.

The Trumpet of the Swan by E.B. White

This wonderful childrens story has been on my to read list ever since I started this blog space. One of my first entries was on E.B. White, and this story about a relationship between this young boy and this swan as one that seemed necessary given how much I adore Charlottes Web. The human-animal component of course gives this a different focus and flavor, and I really loved how he blends these two worlds so naturally. Nothing about a talking swan seems out of place, and the journy between the two is able to touch on something deeply familiar to any young persons story as they look to find their voice and make sense of the word. Challenges me even as a grown man.

Honorable Mentions: How Iceland Changed the World: The Big History of a Small Island by Egill Bjarnason is a wonderful treatment of a small part of the world which played a significant role in the shaping of modern society. It’s entertaining, well written and full of interesting history. After Evangeicalism: The Path to a New Christianity by David Gushee takes on the history of evangelicalism in an honest and balanced fashion. The insights it brings on how this movement emerged and what it is is insighful and helpful, providing a way for those who come from this world to make sense of oruselves as well.

Music

Pedro the Lion- Havasu

I love the idea of marrying music to a sense of place, this being the second in a planned series of albums centering on front man David Bazan’s childhood homes. This one focuses on the city of Havasu, with the first track following his arrival, with ensuing tracks capturing a mix of resistance, reconciling and hopefulness. It’s sparse, experimental (love the way it uses the guitar to evoke that sense of the unknown and to capture a feeling of empty space), and contemplative as it moves from the space he occupies outwardly to the space he occupies inwardly.

Comeback Kid- Heavy Steps

Full disclosure (or perhaps a shameless claim to fame)- I used to play in a band with the guitarist. He’s far more established now than those days of jamming in our basement and our bedroom, so I’m fairly certtain any potential bias is a moot point, but it’s still always an exciting timetohear what they come up with. This most recent album has all the familiar grooves, grind, and melody, but, as with much material produced during a globl pandemic, the album feels both stated in its awareness of the times but also deeply optimistic. It feels designed to tackle the angst head on and if we ever needed a tonic for hard times this album wants to provide this in what is there most polished, produced, and personal album yet.

St. Paul and the Broken Bones- The Alien Coast

Diversity seems to be the name of the game here as this beloved outfit continues to challenge themselves and reach for new ideas. This album moves through different genres almost as if there were no barriers between them, uniting it through a signature vocal sound that would be impossible to miss. The album feels and sings somewhat apocalyptically, moving through the material and the spiritual on its way to capturing something of the present state of things. And yet this isn’t dire stuff, rather it champions the beauty of the creative process in a way that places the artisty as its healing work.

The Wombats- Fix Yourself, Not the World

I’m not sure I could define this bands sound, which is part of what endures me to them. It continues to land somewhere in the pop/alt rock arean, whatever that means, and increasingly their songs are finding ways to adapt to their growing arena presence while still holding on to that necesssary piece that makes them who they are. As they get bigger they seem to get more undefined. However one defines it though its pretty dang fun.

The Lumineers- Brightside

If the title is any indication this album is a big old tall glass of optimism in a well designed signature mug. it does hit some emotional points, with songs dealing with the pandemic in clever ways, but it never lingers in the sadness or the solace or the lamenting. It’s full and ready to raise that glass to brighter times using that signature sound to do it.

Podcasts

The Faculty of Horror- Episode 102, Rule Breaker: Scream

I could also cite their 2021 in review episode which recently released and is a lot of fun, but given the Scream franchise was a first time watch for me early in 2022, getting ready fot the new film, I figured I would highlight this conversation about the much loved horror satire. It manages to dig deep into the subtext with a passionate voice as our guide.

Mere Fidelity- Episode 262, A Hermeneuitic of Wisdom with Dr. J. de Waal Dryden

Inspired me to pick up the book. Drydens concern for recovering the multifaceted nature of wisdom literature as something more than just a limited genre that make up those “other” books, is inspired. Seeing wisdom as a motif that runs throughout scripture and within genres is a fascinating idea that, after listening to this podcast, makes a lot of sense.

The Bema Podcast- Episode 255, Water, Spirit, Darkness, Light

I wrote in this space about how this exposition of John 3 transformed my understanding of the Bibles most famous and well known verse. The whole series has been really good but this one was particularly riveting and challenging.

History Unplugged Podcast- Episode 616, Are Cities Humanities Greatest Invention or an Incubator of Disease, Crime, and Horrific Exploitation/Episode 618, Dragons Exist in Nearly Every Cultures Mythology as a Mirror of Their Fears. What Are Ours?

Two interesting podcasts on different elements of our history (cities and dragons). I picked up the book for the History Unplugged episode called Metropolis: A History of the City by Ben Wilson and I’m excited to dive in, and dragons always make for interesting and enjoyable discusion.

The Book Review- Episode 382, The Chinese Language Revolution

After listening to this podcast I decided to pick up the related book as well (it’s been a good month for new book discoveries). It’s called Kingdom of Characters by Jing Tsu, and it fit perfectly with my recent drive to read books on China. I’ve encountered far too much racism lately and this felt like a way to change the tone and ensure I’m thinking, reading, and speaking in a different way.

John 3:1-21

New International Version

Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

“How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”

Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

“How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.

“You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

The Bema Podcast has been working its way recently through the Gospel according to John, and this particular episode really stopped me in my tracks. For a couple of reasons. First, I recently was asked to preach at my Church where we also are working our way through the Gospel of John. While the passage has since changed, inititally my thoughts had been focused on John chapter 3 and so this particular episode was one I found intriguing. Second, it completely reformulated two key parts of this passage that I have long misunderstood and misapplied, awakening me to a whole new way of seeing, in particular, John 3:16.

The podcast’s essential thrust hinges on the question, how would the original audience and writer have understood this passage? Leading up to Chapter 3 the podcasters have been building a case for the backdrop of the Genesis story as a necessary lens, which is generally understood by most scholars from the opening chapter, although perhaps not every reader goes so far as to recognize John setting out to write a new Genesis, which I think is the most accurate view. What might be less understood is the backdrop of the Exodus story, built as it is into the 2nd and 3rd chapters. Understanding how this imagery informs one of if not the most well known verses in the Bible (John 3:16) is crucial to hearing what it has to say in terms of Jesus’ own ministry.

Not to get bogged down in t0o much of the background details- this podcast episode and the previous ones leading up to it can do that necessary work and fill in the gaps; but simpy to narrow in on this passage where we can see already in verses 1 and 2 the establising of Passover as the context for the conversation with Nicodemus with the indication of “night time” pairing with verses 20 and 21 of chapter 2. Here we get a genuine question from Nicodemus, who as a Pharisee would have been genuinely concerned for the truth as it applies to his good Jewish faith. He asks a question, or makes more of a statement about Jesus’ identity using observations from the Torah and based on what he “sees” or observes from Jesus’ ministry, signs being a key motif of both the Exodus and the Gospel of John. “Rabbi” he says, “we know you are a teacher who has come from God”, to which Jesus replies “I tell you the truth, no one can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again.” (vs 3) Again, the Bema podcsat help to flesh out the nuances behnd this conversation which otherwise sounds snarky and almost dismissive, as in “I know”, “no you don’t know anything.”

Now, I have always read this response and Nicodemus’ subsequent reaction (How can a man be born when he is old!?) as a simple matter of Nicodemus taking Jesus’ literally when Jesus is speaking of spiritual rebirth. Such a reading is largely dismissive of Nicodemus’ status as a Pharisee and, as Jesus puts it in verse 10, being “Israel’s teacher.” The Bema Podcast does an amazing job at deconstructing that reading and showing the deliberateness of the discourse as something that demonstrates real knowledge of the Law (the Law in this case being the Torah, and more importantly the Genesis-Exodus story). This is where it really transformed my own understanding. Things really get broken wide open with Jesus’ next response.

Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.

John 3:11-13

The imporant part of this response is the phrase “we testify to what we have seen”, a phrase which echos the sending of the spies in Joshua (of which there were two, paralleling with John the Bapist and Jesus, the baptizer emerging immediately in Chapter 4 following this discourse). Here we turn our gaze from the wildernness, with the Exodus lingering behind us, to the image of the promised land. Jesus is in effect saying I have been to this promised new reality and I testify to what I have seen. And just as they did with Joshua they fail to “see” and “believe” what is really going on with their present situation. And here is what is equally important about this context. From Nicodemus’ perspective, seeing Rome on one side and his Jewish faith on the other, their reality was relatively stable given their past turmoil. Exodus and Exile are realities they would gladly leave behind and do not desire to return to. For those who have returned at this moment in time they are experiencing enough peace and enought stability to not want to disrupt the status quo. They can co-exist with Rome and, generally speaking, keep the fabric of their faith intact. This person named Jesus threatens to disrupt the status quo, which certainly would have been a real concern of Nicodemus.

Thus when Jesus speaks of being born again Nicodemus would have heard the call to, quite literally, return to Egypt, to go back to where their long journey started. This would have left him dumbfounded. So the question is why does Jesus suggest this? This is where Jesus says,

“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”

John 3:14

So here is where things get really interesting and what some might find especially challenging. I encourage you to listen to the podcast and give their full analysis a fair shake because given the context this makes so much sense. I have often understood this passage to be directed at Nicodemus, and it kind of is, just not in the way I often understood. The passage, with its intentional discourse, is not about Nicodemus’ salvation, it is about what that salvation was intended for. To borrow from the Exodus imagery, its about what the people were liberated for. Nicodemus would have understood the phrase “my only son” to be a reference to the Exodus story where it is applied to Israel as a “mixed multitude” and reapplied here to Jesus as the fulfillment of Israel’s story. In this sense the rest of this passage holds a double meaning in terms of Jesus’ story and the story of Israel. The point of the snake in the wilderness being lifted up is connected to that which we have seen and experienced and thus testify to as a message of hope. Just as Moses did so do they lift up this message of hope for the world. But how does this happen? They must be first born again, meaning that they must return to the beginning of their story (the Exodus) in order to know what the Exodus was for. They were not liberated so that they can simply get to the promised land, they were ilberated in order to be brought to Sinai. It is at Sinai that we find the covenant being established, where the point of being an established people testifying to God’s liberating work is fleshed out as a community “for the world”. This is where the shaping and transformative work can occur so that the “land” we are establised in can operate not in the language of Empire but in the new creation language of the Kingdom of God, “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:16-17). This is what the story of Jesus, formed as it is in Genesis-Exodus language, is ultimately about, and it is what Israel’s story and our story is also all about.

Now, here’s the challenge, and it requires modern readers conditioned to reading this one way to be willing to read it as a Pharisee like Nicodemus would have in his time and context. What if we were to take this reading of the text and apply it to the following verses as both speaking of Jesus and israel tangentally? How does this help accentuate the double meaning inherent in the discourse? More importantly, how does it challenge us as Christians towards a life that bears witness to being “born again” for the sake of the world? How might revisiting our own “exodus” story, be it collectively or personally, empower our Christian witness as one which can say “we have seen” the new creation reality and bring good news of hope and renewal in the here and now? How might it inspire greater awareness and participation as being the hands and feet of jesus, the ones tasked with taking the good news that saves into a hurting and oppressed world in practical and tangible ways? Perhaps this might unsettle the status quo, push back on that narrative that says Jesus saved me, I’m going to heaven, case closed, a mindset that makes it easy to then set ourselves apart as good while labeling the rest as evil. What if the verdict that follows here is directed towards us not “for” our salvation but to say something about our salvation, describing what Sinai desires to do in our own lives as it call us to live as a transformed people. We read it as the work of Jesus, God’s only son, and then we read it as the work of Israel also stated to be God’s only son, and then we apply it to our own witness.

This might be a challenge to read these following words in that way, placing ourselves in the category of God’s child in the context of these verses, but try it and see what comes from it. It just might be the words we need to hear in this present moment. The liberating words of being called Gods collective children who have been liberated as God’s image bearers and through whom the witness of the new creation can be made known to a hurting world:

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

John 3:16-21

It has been a while since I’ve read anything from Water Breuggemann, a celebrated scholar and theologian specializing in Old Testament texts. An interview awakened me to his new book Delivered Out of Empire: Pivotal Moments in the Book of Exodus and it is truly paradigm shifting inthe way it breaks open the Exodus story and offers fresh reflection and insight when it comes to how to read the story well from within our present context. As Christians it is often easy to forget just how central the Exodus story is to our understanding of the Gospel, and the Exodus narrative plays through all of scripture as a forming motif.

There are a few particularly memorable moments fromt the book that stood out for me, beginning with his sharp articulation of the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Here is an excerpt from one of the chapters discussing this relationship

“The company that left Egypt must have included “all sorts and conditions of men”1 and women who had been shackled both by their own economic necessity and by the aggressive economic requirements of the empire. The nicety of identity could not prevail amid the haste of such a rush to freedom. The phrase that is translated “mixed multitude” conjures a disordered or confused array of folk without ethnic or linguistic identity. That phrase, moreover, suggests a large host of them, so that we witness the contest between the ordered, no doubt limited army of Pharaoh and the mass of ill-identified people who rush to freedom, even while the army pursues them. The contrast attests to the sociological reality that the lower one descends on the socioeconomic scale, the less there is identifiable genealogy or pedigree that can be offered. While that mixed company may have had a variety of known and valid identifications, they are not the kind of identifications that are known or valued from above. (Thus the community might remember the names Puah and Shiphrah [1:15], but those names are surely not known by the company of Pharaoh). It may be for that reason that the anticipation of a newly ordered community provided at the very outset a great equalizer: “There shall be one law for the native and for the alien who resides among you” (Exodus 12:49). That remarkable and radical provision runs directly and immediately roughshod over what must have been, in Egypt, a hierarchy of values and access. Such social differentiations could not be afforded in the company of the escapees and would not be countenanced in their future. The accent is on commonality that precludes such differentiation. In what follows in the exodus narrative, it is all of them—all ex-slaves, all departing, all going into wilderness, all entered into a new future with no social distinctions. The issues are economic. They are ex-slaves. But because YHWH intervenes, the matter is theological, this God against the gods of Egypt (12:12). Thus economics is joined to theology. That theo-economic eruption can have no patience with social differentiation. This new future will focus otherwise.

As long as “Israel” was a refugee people on the outside looking in, such commonality could prevail. As soon as Israel was settled into a relative security and affluence, however, social differentiation began to appear. The juxtaposition of “Israelite” and “mixed multitude” disappeared, and Israel took on all the trappings of an identifiable people with a heritage, a land claim, a genealogy, and a pedigree. Former slaves became owners, possessors, and administrators—and such social functions mandate credentials. Those credentials in Israel took the form of holiness rules and purity guidelines, so that religious merit went easily along with economic clout. Thus over time, there was a push to specialness that eventuated in being a “holy people” distinct from all other peoples, belonging solely to YHWH. Thus in Exodus 19:5–6 the specialness is stated at Sinai as the ex-slaves become “my treasured possession,” “a priestly kingdom,” “a holy nation.” That special status, however, is not yet cast as ethnic identity but is based simply on obeying YHWH’s voice—that is, the voice of Torah—and keeping the covenant. But the notion of “holy nation” over time triggered a zeal for purity, a practice of ritual cleanness, and a claim of holiness that was not defined as a relation with YHWH but as a substantive essence that came to be expressed in ethnic categories. This perspective came to regard being “mixed” (as in Exodus 12:38) as a dangerous and offensive violation of holiness. Thus in 1 Kings 8:53 the intent of the future of Israel is to be “separated” from “among all the peoples of the earth.” Centuries later, amid the Persian Empire, when the community was reconstituted after the exile, the formation and sustenance of the community required discipline of an intentional kind: Then those of Israelite descent separated themselves from all foreigners, and stood and confessed their sins and the iniquities of their ancestors. (Nehemiah 9:2) When the people heard the law, they separated from Israel all those of foreign descent. (13:3)

Thus one may trace the articulation of Israel all the way from “mixed multitude” to “holy seed,” all the way from ready inclusiveness that was not preoccupied with matters of holiness to an exclusion based on bloodlines. We may surmise, moreover, that the more the memory of slavery emancipation remained palpable, the more the inclusion could be embraced. Conversely, the more remote the memory of slavery and emancipation became, the tighter the lines might be drawn on holiness. We must not, however, imagine that the stream from “mixed multitude” to “holy seed” was a linear or unilateral development from early inclusion to later exclusion. Rather the tension and debate about inclusion or exclusion must have been alive and contested in every phase of Israel’s history as a question about the constitution of Israel by the relational reality of covenant or an “essentialist” view of God’s people as substantively identifiable. The question must, perforce, be left contested and unresolved. But Exodus 12:38 attests that at the very outset the reality of YHWH’s emancipatory impulse was the defining mark of Israel then codified into Torah.

The more the Torah is kept in proximity to the emancipatory narrative of the exodus, the more fully is the notion of “mixed multitude” definitional for Israel. The tension between the inclusiveness of “mixed multitude” and the exclusiveness of “holy seed” remained unresolved in ancient Israel and in emerging Judaism. That same tension, moreover, spilled over into the Christian tradition as well”

Another point of perspecive that I found thought provoking and even potentially controversial is his insight on the peoples relationship to Yahweh within the story. As he suggests, it is the cries of the people that elicits a response from Yahweh whom up until this point has been absent from the story. He sees these cries as having actual agency to set the story in play, going so far as to suggest that Yahweh responds and is changed by these cries, moved towards compassion. As he writes,

“It is no wonder that such an assertion changes everything in the narrative. Pain brought to voice in public speech so that it is heard out loud promptly rearranges all power realities that are thought to be settled. The cry changes circumstance for the slaves, for the shut-down slaves have been displaced by voiced possibility. The cry changes matters for Pharaoh, because now the reductionisms of manageable technology and administrable labor have been altered by the fresh insistence that the slaves are not mere statistics but are named historical agents. But most of all, the cry changes YHWH. It is astonishing that for two full chapters at the beginning of the book of Exodus, chapters filled with abuse and violence, YHWH has not yet made a narrative appearance. The cry changes that. The cry is not addressed to YHWH—or to anyone else. It is a cry addressed to no one—and to anyone who would listen. But it “rose up to God.” The cry not addressed to YHWH arrived there anyway. It arrived there because YHWH, the God of the narrative, is like a magnet for the cries of the abused.

YHWH, for whatever reason, has not until now taken any initiative. The initiative, rather, has been taken by the Israelites who have found their voice. It is the cry that begins the narrative of rescue and salvation. We are free to imagine that if Pharaoh had been able to sustain his imposed silence, there would have been no exodus narrative. That imposed silence, however, cannot finally refuse or resist the insistence of human bodies that refuse to bear pain in silence. Such voiced pain will finally break the force of Pharaoh. The Bible that follows from this cry is, among other things, a collage of episodes in which the cry sounds and a response is evoked:”

He also goes on to describe this in relationship to the idea of blessings and curses.

“In all such uses blessing is a top-down act—from God or from God’s human agents—because those who occupy the top have resources for life to share. This top-down commonsense perspective transfers into ordinary life in which power people—political leaders, bankers, celebrities, sports stars—give the appearance of having more life force and a capacity to bestow that life force on those who have less of it. All of this was operative in Pharaoh’s Egypt. Pharaoh had all the power, all the wealth, all the food, all the prestige, all the effective apparatus of priests and “magicians.” Pharaoh had a monopoly on life force, enough to bless all those who lived in conformity with his enterprise. From Pharaoh, moreover, it is easy enough to generalize that the political-economic pyramid of social power in every society assumes a top-down flow of blessing that is shared by those “below” according to their conformity. Except, of course, that there is a countertheme of blessing moving up from below. Such a notion is profoundly counterintuitive, for it is easy enough to think that those below have no such capacity. That countertheme is repeatedly expressed in Psalms in the formula “bless the Lord”:

Perhaps not too much should be made of such a familiar formula. And yet the formula, for all of its familiarity, is astonishing. It suggests that adherents to YHWH, the ones who have received life from YHWH, can respond by the bestowal of life force upon YHWH. This is an articulation of a dialogical transaction with God that does not assume God’s all-sufficiency; rather, God can have added to God’s own life by the act of the psalmist or of Israel, or of “all flesh.” The phrase “bless the Lord” may mean nothing more than “praise.” But the rhetoric itself suggests more than that, even concerning God’s own life.”

Lastly, one deeply affecting point of perspective flows from his observations on Miriams song, a song that is then given context in Moses’ song.

“Slaves do not sing and dance much, except for an occasional respite allowed by coercive masters. For the most part they work and work, making bricks and meeting production schedules. But ex-slaves are a different matter. When they are emancipated from work, brick making, and production schedules, they may sing and dance…

“Miriam and the other women sing and dance (Exodus 15:20–21). They “went out” with tambourines. The verb is an exodus word. They “went out” from Egypt. They “went out” of bondage. They “went out” of silence. They found with their tambourines a voice of freedom. Miriam found words and summoned the other women to sing. They sang “to the LORD.” Now they use their boisterous voices to name the name of YHWH. They had been all this time getting to “know the LORD.” Now they know! They know that YHWH is allied with them. They know that YHWH comes with active, partisan verbs. They sing the most succinct victory song.”

I have long been fascinated with Miriam’s song for a few reasons. First, it is recognized as the oldest text within the Hebrew Bible. Second, it finds its recontextualizing in the song of Moses as a way of applying it directly to the story of Israel, which only emphasizes the powerful realization of the woman’s voice informing it’s original context. Not unlike women being the first witnesses to the Gospel story here they stand expressing the earliest witness to Yahweh in a culture where they would not have had a voice.

What caught my attention though with its reference here is how Brueggemann weaves this into a simple truth about how emancipation and restoration works. In outlining the Exodus story he locates important threads. One of those is the nature of the voice. It is the “cries” of the people which is initially heard and which compels response. As Yahweh emancipates the “mixed multitude”, who’s commonality emerges from their enslavement, the fear that the experience in leaving Egypt elicits leads to the call to “fear not” by being silent, allowing the liberation to speak for itself. What follows then with Miriam’s song is a breaking of the silence through the call to then “fear the Lord” and the ushering in of a new reality.

This underscores this basic truth about emancipation in the first quote above- a time for genuine singing and dancing comes with liberation. We cannot pretend that the cries would stop or the silence be commanded until the promise of liberation is observed and celebrated and declared.

A second thread Brueggemann explores Is how the Exodus story reads in line with the creation and the flood narrative. The symbolism is stark and clear, right up to the collapsing of the waters of chaos once separated to reflect right order. One important feature of these narratives is locating the imagery of the righteous one patterned in Noah, Abraham (who’s story functions as a replay of the Garden narrative in line with Noah) and Moses. The intention here is clear when set within the creation narrative- as the story replays it is bringing to light the question of hope in a world patterned after Empire (symbolized through Babylon imagery as it is with Egypt, as it is with a freed and eventually exiled Israel). This hope, expressed as it is through the language of the righteous one, is replayed through the story of Jesus as the full embodiment of this story of Israel, defined as it is by the mixed multiple and framed through the story of enslavement and promised emancipation. This stands in contrast to the language of Empire. This is where the true twist in the plotline comes, one which we can see was the point of the story all along- in Christ as the righteous one we all become the righteous one, not in moral terms- that is the great misconception of a term which has been co-opted by a moralizing Gospel- but in its functional sense. That is, a people called to make right what is wrong in this world as image bearers.

From this emerges a third thread, which is the partnering theme of Exodus and Exile. This becomes the framework through which we approach the difficult already-not yet paradigm of the Gospel story, something which has fueled so much of our modern theological discourse in response. How is it that we make sense of a context that is both liberated and yet is not. We spiritualize the exodus story, we individualize it in soteriological terms, we diminish it by catapulting it into the future as a future promise rather than a historical reality. In truth, it is through the pattern of participation in liberation theology that we arrive at the idea of the exodus story as a liturgical practice. As this story is shared with young and old through the generations it speaks the truth of the story by turning our ears to hear the cries of the enslaved and looking to recognize the sounds of the song as a sign that liberation has in fact arrived. Where we hear the cries we become compelled to act. Where we hear the song we become compelled to hope.

Sadly what often happens when we divorce our theologies from this story is we erase the commonality of the mixed multitude, we redefine it in terms of the individual (read: total depravity), and we get suspicious of the cries and the constant calls towards needed liberation imagining this to be disruptive and antithetical to the true Gospel. It cannot be about them because it must be about us, and the easiest way to uphold this is to spiritualize our enslavement so that there is no us and them. This misses entirely what was common to the mixed multitude, and what makes this even more ironic is that it creates exclusive theologies that are all about upholding an us and them mentality. We undermine the cries, we expect and demand silence where enslavement persists, and then we move to celebration even as things remain the same, neglecting the fact that those celebrations are our own voices, not the songs of the mixed multitude.

What the Exodus story calls us to is the expectation that we are each called to bear witness to possible liberation by working to see it actualized in the here and now. By hearing the cries we empower those cries to be exchanged for silence through the enabling of the enslaved and the oppressed to move through the parted waters and into a new reality. This is how we participate in the new creation together now. This is how we anticipate a vision of what is to come.

As Brueggemann puts it,

“This remarkable legacy of the kingship of YHWH—rule, reign, governance—is, to be sure, awkward because of the masculine, paternal tone of the rhetoric that is reflective of hierarchy. That problematic is not to be ignored, yet perhaps the greater affront is that the lyric speaks of genuine transformation of the power that pertains in the world. Such rhetoric is inherently subversive and often has proved to be too much for the church. We have two characteristic strategies for evading such dangerous utterance. On the one hand, we readily make the claim eschatological and so push it outside of and beyond social reality. Nobody committed to the status quo worries too much about end-time transformation, as long as we are left alone for now. On the other hand, we may reduce the historical claim to privatized spirituality, so that there is no public face to the claim. Both of these propensities are visible in the hymns of the church used at Christmas and Easter. Either way, the danger of Moses’ utterance is toned down.

But of course, the Song of Moses and the women with tambourines will have none of that. It is for us always a question of how we will reperform the text, whether with tambourines in solidarity or in safer ways that leave us mostly still in bondage with brick quotas. The song of Moses invites us to tell a different story of the world, one that begins in cries (Exodus 2:23–24) but that culminates in wondrous exultation, a wonder voiced in song but deeply felt in our bodies and in the body politic.”

This is a really interesting concept that potentially gets bogged down by the weight of a few uncertain parts. I found that it’s far more interesting to ponder after the fact than to experience in the moment, and this is due to the fact that there isn’t a whole lot of mystery or even necessary set up to the premise. We know that this group of people who find themselves standing in a circle have been submitted to a game by unseen aliens, so this isn’t about figuring out what’s going on. This is worth noting because it becomes easy to anticipate that this film is building up to some big reveal or development in the plot, and easy to be left a little bit wanting when the film most aasuredly does not. It is literally all about the game itself where each of these people are given a vote and each round, determined by a timeclock, (seemingly) demands a vote, with the person who gets the most votes being the one to die. Last one standing is the survivor.

This, however, is where the game itself gets interesting. Looking back on the film and thinking about how the game unfolded is an opportunity to see how the circle is essentially a microcosm of a developing society. It looks at how it is that we form these societes by forming majorities and creating minorities. It also looks at how it is that we formulate governing systems, social norms and moral expectations. The way it plays this out round by round proves a very interesting way of examining the building blocks of a given society, which are arguably universal in nature.

In examining this the film is also of course also about human nature. The circle presents this nature as a necessary cycle, one which repeats itself in any different direction with, perhaps, slightly different results from game to game but always with the same rules and the same motivations in play. There inevitably must be hierarchies and majorities and minorites, and these social systems demand some level of survival and competition in order to exist. This is the uncomfortable truth the film desires to communicate and wrestle with, demonstrating that even the most idealistic versions of society demonstrate the same truths about our reality when pared back to their most basic, instinctual drive. Morals after all are simple and basic constructs that allow a society to survive, but only where they coexist with the greater instinctual drive of one’s or a groups thriving. Life cannot function without winners and losers and the game is designed so that once you whittle the system down to its most basic form this becomes immediately clear and undeniable.

What this does of course is beg the question of how it is that we judge something to be good or bad, one of the defining elements of the social constructs that emerges within the game. We do so in order to define insiders and outsiders, to distinguish who we are in relationship to another, and to some degree there is benefit to operating by that which we determine to be good on a functional level. But within a discussion of the natural order goodness must be defined by that which is beneficial, and as the game suggests this is a fluid and always evolving definition within the rules of the game. It is true then to suugest that we are naturally wired towards certain responses that we, as a developing society, can determine to be good, but goodness itself does not actually exist outside of its necessary function, which is to form this society according to insiders and outsiders so that it can survive and thrive. This is why this becomes so pertinant a question within the game. When they are forced to choose who must die, on what basis to they justfy a person’s perceived and inherent goodness to be more beneficial and necessary to society than the other? This is why we create both good and bad so as to define insiders and outsiders, and as the game shows this shifts constantly depending on a mix of need and desire. As the game unfolds we see the definition of goodness evolving not as a static moral but within the moral construct necessary to organize these microcosms of society. Remember, morals are simple societal constructs that emerge from the necessary organizing structure. They must be agreed upon and their only true measure is what is most beneficial. And whats important to remember and what the game underscores is that what is most beneficial to the group will never be most beneficial for the whole. It can’t be when we are speaking about the survival of a species.

We of course don’t like to think about human nature in this way. We don’t like to think about the world we live in as operating in this fashion. In fact, it would seem that human nature is designed to see our groups as functioning by a higher order and principle. This is a survival mechanism and it requires us to base our lives on the illusions that free us to see that we are participating in this world in a meaningful way even though it is in reality a game with necessary winners and losers. Despite the one character who insists that there are no winners (perhaps the true existential crisis) we live with the unconscious conviction that there are. This is, it would appear, what makes life worth living.

Of course with winners there must be losers, and this is what often disrupts the system. This is especially the case when it comes to minorities binding togther to defeat a majority in power, which is what we see in the organizing principle of the game. These constantly shifting allegiances in response to being in the minority, to being on the losing side. This of course results in shifting notions of what it means to win, something that the resulting chaos which forms from this clash of winners and losers encourages, but this is also challenged by the fact that this is in fact a game that needs leaders and followers. Knowing this inspires certain parts of our nature, our brains, to kick in regardless of these moral systems in play, similar to what happens when we realize how it is that life actually works. Our illusions, be it belief in God, belief in certain moral actions as good in and of themselves, belief in family systems, belief in a greater cause, are in fact shaky foundations precisely because we know them to be illusions. We intuitively know them to be this even as our brains are wired to convince us otherwise. Thus circumstance has a way of unsettling these things within our consciousness when we find we aren’t on the right side of the game, which can be described as whatever allows us to feel like we are worthwhile (as one player suggests), like we are necessary or useful or needed in this existence. This is why when we aren’t on the right side we tend to fight (or give up) and resist (or concede). The ones on the bottom are needed to keep the balance of order and give the ones on top meaning. And round and round it goes, all resting on this simple truth that we are designed to think of this in the moment as more than just a game. In truth we are all part of a system, we are all formed by these systems, we are all easily manipulative and manipulable creatures, we are all predictable and highly irrational. And we all live in a world that is built to remind us that we are on the top or on the bottom, that we are the winners or the losers, even if those defintions shift with circumstance and our response. We could not live without such structures. And being winners or losers can be descrihed as simply as whatever a successful life looks like, be it through things within our control or outside of our control.

A confession here. My assessment of the Circle game is something I believe to be true in one sense. As a person of faith I do believe we also have this inherent intuition that even though this is how life works and what life is there is a way to imagine a world and a life that looks differently, one that is not given to the rules of this game. Of course many critics of faith might contend that such a notion is little more than wishful idealism that brings comfort in the moment, and might wonder whether such a world could even be described as living at all. What would be the meaning of the game if not motivated by winners and losers? Others will contend faith is unecessary because we can achieve this same reality through our own means without God. I would contend that such persons are thinking too narrow and remain far too dependent on the illusion to appeal to the larger rational argument. Critics of faith do so by upholding their own illusions about this world and about their place in it. If you are on the bottom what informs our drive to resist? The conviction of our idealism. And what is this idealism? Is it a world where there are no winners and losers? Is it a world where there is no suffering and death and competition?That begs the question of what a world with no suffering would look like or perhaps what suffering in fact is. Such a world can only exist where there are no winners and losers.

What then informs our drive from the bottom is our conviction in an illusionary concept that can never actually be achieved, or which critics of faith might argue should not be achieved. We are better off attending for reality and rationalism, which is what? An awareness of what life really is (a game) and an awareness of how our natures work (survival), because this can enable us a greater chance to be successful by whatever measure a successful life or society looks like. An appeal to rationalism as the graeter good simply means the aiding of this success.

Here is the thing. Such success still demands insiders and outsiders. Rationalism must appeal to this truth. In an increasingly global world we must still operate according to nationalistic prinicpals for the system to work, as we have throighout human history, and if, from the vantage point of our present circumstance and chaos, we decide to believe in some ideal where we do not function according to these principles rationalism and reason forces us to accept that this is merely an illusion, not reality. It is a way of convincing oursleves that we are working towards something, with the irony being that such a world might satisfy the desires on the bottom but would never satisfy the desires of those on the top. This is why the great experiment of American western liberalism remains a falsehood, an illusonary concept that only works as an organizing principle that ensures there will always be people on the top and the bottom. It appears as though it hinges on progress, but only in certain defintions of success not in inherent principle. What this form of society underscores is that such an organizing principle can only exist within necessary hierarchies. The idea that each person is a truly liberated one is of course the grand illusion upon which this construct is based, which of course cannot and will never correlate to reality. In truth it is designed to reward the winners and feed the illusion that we are liberated and in control and that we are on the winning side of this game.

Socialism on the other hand believes that success is dependent on meeting base level needs. What it struggles to answer though is what happens when this reality is achieved. It cannot define what living means when base level needs are met. Socialism makes sense for those on that bottom. Some might say it’s designed to reward the losers, which of course they would claim goes against the very rules and nature of the game. Yet it cannot attend for how our base line natures operate when we are then given the pieces necessary to enter the game. At best it can appeal to a certain kind of happiness that comes from maintaining the status quo, but this is only one form of happiness and a very limited version of it at that, and it does not attend for the true base of our natures when the opportunity to participate in the game presents itself. Take someone from this space and put them in the game and as the circle underscores we are suddenly forced to participate according to the rules precisely because it triggers that nature that responds to the need for necessary hierarchies.

Similar to socialism is liberation efforts. We can always liberate from, which is part of the human drive from the bottom and can be beneficial to societal structures as a whole. But the question of what we are liberating to is much harder to answer, because that’s when we are thrown right back into the game.

So where does faith fit into the picture? I think faith underscores that this is the truth of our reality and that if faith is an illusion all of life then is. Faith underscores that for as much as our nature resists the kind of idealism that imagines we might actually be freed from the circle, from the cycle, we also need this idealism to drive us forward. The question then is if we know this intuitively, that we desire to be freed from the trappings of the game, and that at the same time our nature bind us to the game, by what means do we locate this idealism as not merely an illusion but as a possible and given truth, a tenable and desired outcome of our efforts. A way to break the cycle. This is where I find faith to be compelling. It breaks into the game and imagines the rules differently. It breaks into the game and offers us a spiritual imagination, a way to image a different outcome. It breaks into the game and challenges our idealism. It breaks into the game and gives suffering and death a redemptive course.

And here’s the thing. The Circle recognizes that on some level this requires humility and sacrifice, the two possibilities that history shows to be antithetical to the game, the true disrupters. But it doesn’t employ these things as simply a way to reposition us back into the circle. That is the problem of our social systems no matter how moral we see our more progressive societies. If our only measure is less violent societies then in some respects we can see examples of this having been achieved (and in other respects having utterly failed). Many popular thinkers and philosophers use this to show that we as humans have changed the game on our own. That is a grand fallacy though, an illusion. It’s simply set up the pieces to play again with the only true possibility being that suffering is measured differently. Same rules, different context.

The real question is how do we actually imagine a world where we change the game? Where the rules are different? Where our human intuiton of what this game called life must be (necessary competition and progess in order to be successful) meets with our intuition that we desire to be freed from the cycles? That, in my mind, requires something revelatory. Something that breaks into the patterns and demonstrates a different way of being in this world. It also requires something that is able afford us a vision of such an idealistic aim (life without the game) while also demonstrating how such a reality is in fact a greater life than we know now. The freedom to see in such idealism the hoped for living without the struggle, without the competition, without the heiarchies, without the suffering, without the death. This I think informs our deepest longings. It allows us to see death and suffering as the true enemy rather than oursleves, and to see our societal structures and systems based on power as the enemies truest expression. It allows us to see this and declare this to be true while also declaring a different reality to be true as well, the one afforded to us by faith in one who has and is breaking into the game, one who actually has the power to say that death and suffering can be redemptive possibilities. This is how the enemy is defeated. It is the only way it can be defeated. It is the only way way the circular cycle can be broken. Otherwise the death that we see as meaning something remains merely an illusion. That can be enough for the winners, but only if we adhere to the illusions and neglect the reality of the game, which our nature allows us to do It will never be enough to satisfy the game and imagine a world without losers though.

This is the true irony of progress and of the game designed to feed this progress by our nature. Death and suffering become our primary measure, and that measure is based on achieving longer lives and more properous living for the insiders, the winners within the illusion that the ones at the top can then change the reality for the ones at the bottom, the vision many employ as ethical reasoning for a balanced system. What fails to be attended for is that the necessary balance flows both ways, towards our idealism and against it. We convince ourselves that we live in a more enlightened age, a more properous age, a more ehtical age simply on the basis that we are less violent and more inclusive. Dig underneath these organizing principles though and they quickly emerge as power systems, simply with different ways of locating suffering, winners and losers, and success. The game is the same and death remains the great leveler. There is no magic number by which we can say a life lived has been a meaningful one, merely our current frame of reference noted by longer life spans and the question of whether or not we are on the winning side (according to the above definition). The game doesn’t end, it simply resets the pieces for our modern age with the primary question being still, how do we defeat death, because death is the one thing that renders the game meaningless precisely because it renders us all equal. As the Circle reminds is though, even if we find a way to defeat death itself on our own terms, the game doesn’t end. It continues by the same rules reminding us of what it took to defeat it in the first place and of who benefits from being on the winning side of such an endeavor.

This is why death, which in its broadest sense is simply a definition of our true reality which encompasses struggle and suffering and loss and decay, lies at the core of faith as the great enemy. This is why faith demands a player from the outside in order to defeat it. This is why humilty and sacrifice, ingrained as they are in the universal stories of humanity as we inspire to imagine the nature of the gods, are so necessary. It is also why forgivness becomes the key to all of this and the most scandalous part of that revelatory message. Locate forgivness and you find the truest expression of faith and the answer to the problem of the game.

The real question that remains then sounds silly but is so vital- are we actually brave enough to imagine that idealistic future becoming a reality? Are we actually brave enough to imagine a reality without death and suffering? This sounds silly, but what the Circle reminds me of is that this question remains the single greatest obstacle to embracing faith precisely because, as it turns out, we like the game too much.

It’s the first Friday of the new year which means the first official releases of 2021, beginning with the female led action film from Simon Kingerg, The 355 out today.

As the pandemic goes so does the constantly evoloving slate of movie releases. Production delays, films getting bumped from their release schedule as theatre attendence continues to inspire more questions and concerns, the constant push and pull of streaming and experimental/unpredictable release patterns that continue to make personal investment a frustrating game of cat and mouse. As it was last year and the year before, attempting to weigh in on potential releases remains a roll of the die.

That said, at least a portion of 2021 saw a glutten- argubly too much if you ask me, which I say as someone who frequented the theater sometimes up to 3 times a week and still couldn’t keep up- of releases as studios started to pile their titles in on top of one of another after theaters re-opened. I have been basking in the glory of it all to say the least, as I don’t anticipate this lasting. Things will slow down, and the systems probematic addiction to box office numbers continues to turn every headline into a controversy and a matter of concern. The disruption of the pandemic which arguably perpetuated and fast tracked a problem that already existed continues to have a grip on the industry and the uncertain economics of theater and streaming continues to occupy the minds of studios, creatives, theaters and services. How they figure this mess out is a story yet to be told, with the only real certainty being that things will look different moving forward and, for the time being, will remain inconsistent.

As it stands though there remains much to anticipate and to wonder about in the coming year, beginning of course with the usual onslaught of entries into the superhero genre, including new D.C. entries with Batman, Flash and Aquaman 2, the second entry in the Spiderverse, and of course a return to Wakanda, Waititi’s return to the world of Thor, and a delving into the multiverse with Doctor Strange. Along with the quintessential holdovers from 2021 awaiting wide release- Drive My Car, Benediction, Cyrano, Flee, Worst Person in the World, A Hero, and Belle– Here are some of the titles that I am most excited about:

1. Peter Pan & Wendy (David Lowry)

I consider Lowry to be one of the best Directors working today, and given my affection for his adaptation of Pete’s Dragon his return to the realm of cherished childrens stories has me very excited. Sure, this story has been done many times before, not least of which was the recent Wendy by Benh Zeitlin (Beasts of the Southern Wild), one of my favorite films of that year. That doesn’t bother me. With someone like Lowry re-imagining this classic for our modern day this has all of the potential to formulate into a bonafide modern classic.

2. The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent (Tom Gormcan)

In case you missed it this is where Nicholas Cage plays Nicholas Cage. Yep, you heard that right. If that isn’t enough to blow ones mind the fact that this appears to be telling the story of Cage attempting to live up to his own legendary status makes this the film I always knew I needed but never knew how to express. No need for words because we now have the film. Give it to me now.

3. Showing Up (Kelly Reichardt)

From the mind who brought us the brilliantly subversive and challenging indie First Cow comes a story about the relationship between art, articstic creation, and life. The synopsis contains shadows of The Truth, the captivating and intellecually centered drama by master Hirokazu Kore-eda, and given Reichardts eye for detail and penchant for context I find myself hopeful for a similarly thought provoking exercise.

4. Lightyear (Angus MacLane)

In my review for Toy Story 4 I referred to it as the ending to the story I never knew I needed but in some ways always knew I wanted. I unabashedly have noted it as my favorite of the series and I loved how it took some of the lingering questions of Toy Story 3 and formulated it into such a grand vision of hope and resloution. Early shots of this film appear not only to anchor it in a stunning sense of realism, but Lightyears backstory appears to be represented as a genuine character study. Given the humanity on display in Toy Story 4 this is a film that I remain as curious about as I am excited for.

5. Nope (Jordan Peele)

I’m actually not quite as high on Get Out as some others, but Peele’s Us is a film that continues to grow and evolve in my imagination the more I see it and ponder it. So much so that I consider it one of the greatest horror films ever made. Very little is known about Nope but Peele’s name and his track record for fusing horor with hard hitting social commentary has this one high up on my most anticipated list

6. The Killers of the Flowers Moon (Martin Scorsese)

I was public enough with my less than favorable response to Scorsese’s The Irishman, a film that I felt gave in to the trappings of the bloated budget and its unnecessary run time, both of which I felt betrayed real problems in the editing department. I felt like Scorsese put himself in to the story to a degree that made it feel self absorbed. The film represents a misstep in what has otherwise been a stellar career for someone who is undeniably one of the all time greats. What is curious to me about this next venture, which releases exclusively to Apple TV+, is not just the fact that once again we might not get to experience one of the true cinematic artists honing his craft for the big screen (I’m hoping Apple takes a more open approach than Netflix), but that once again the story surrounding this one is his stubborn allegiance to a bloated budget, something that feels all the more aware when you consider how sparse the source material is. I’ll be honest, I’m actually not the biggest fan of the source material either. It is a compelling and important story but told with too narrowed a focus. However, in Scorsese I continue to trust, and I imagine that his approach to this story is going to see him digging in deep and breaking open the historical context. If he can manage that and perhaps contain some of that budget by investing it in the practical set piece, this could formulate into a true historical epic.

7. Everything Everywhere All at Once (Daniel Scheinert, Daniel Kwan)

Sure, 2022 has Doctor Strange breaking open the multiverse for the MCU, but not to be undersold is this slightly less visible sci-fi hopeful about an aging Chinese immigrant who gets swept up into the infinite possibilities of the multiverse as she finds herself trying to save the world. Starring Michelle Yeoh this one definitely has my interest.

8. Asteroid City (Wes Anderson)

When we throw Ari Aster and Olivia Wilde in the mix it would seem all of the big name directors are in the game in 2022. The story behind the latest film by Wes Anderson is both that it represents the second of three films in three years and that this film was made and finished before the release of the French Dispatch, one of my favorites from 2021. It also reflects another opportunity to see him in theaters before he heads to Netflix in 2023. I know I will be there ready to celebrate his unique narrative style and soaking in his sharp eye for finding wonder in the quirky and unusual spaces of this world.

9.Strange World (Don Hall, Qui Nguyen)

With the release of Raya and the Last Dragon and Encanto this past year Disney is proving that their original fare can still shine well beyond the Pixar label. The premise, which includes an adventure into uncharted territory, a family of explorers, and fantastical creatures, feels like it has all the makings of a success story. This is a strange new world I’m excited to visit.

10. Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore (David Yates)

Sure, I could have easily thrown Jurassic World: Dominion into the mix here. Call it a cautionary move given how much I enjoyed Fallen Kingdom and how much it got slammed. Even Trevorrows return after getting pulled from the series remains a question mark as his turn with The Book of Henry, another film I loved that got desperately slammed, seems to have this next in the series set up to succumb to some already well entrenched cynicism. To avoid all of that I figured I would give some love to an equally maligned franchise. I continue to quietly embrace the Fantastic Beasts series even as I remain shocked we are getting more. They’ve weathered the storm of naysayers, and for my money the previous entry, even with some serious issues on the editing front, represented some of the most exciting visuals and some of the most intriguing filmmaking of that year. I’m hopeful, even with all of the hoopla surrounding Depp, that this will return to the magic of the first while retaining the expansive visual flourish of the second.

Honorable Mention: Death on the Nile (Kenneth Branagh)

Throw this with Avatar 2 and Top Gun: Maverick into the “I’ll believe it when I see it released” pile. With Branagh’s lovely love letter to Ireland placing high on my list in 2021 and with his ability to turn Murder on the Orient Express into such a lovely, atmospheric mystery, this return to the mystery genre with its rich cast and contained setting has remained eagerly anticipated. The one saving grace of such a long delay is that it has resisted getting sold off to streaming. This is a film I desperately need (okay, maybe want is the better word) on the big screen.

For those interested I walked through my most important reads in 2021 in this space over the last 10 days. They included the following:

10. The Nolan Variations: The Movies, Mysteries, and Marvels of Christopher Nolan by Tom Shone

9. Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don’t Know by Adam Grant

8. The Free World: Art and Thought in the Cold Warby Louis Menand

7. In Pursuit of Disobedient Women: A Memoir of Love, Rebellion, and Family Far Away by Dionne Searcey

6. Dominion: How the Chrsitian Revolution Remade the World by Tom Holland

5. 21 Lessons For The 21st Century by Yuval Noah Harari

4. The Mysteries of Cinema: Movies and Imagination by Peter Conrad

3. Work: A Deep History From the Stone Age to the Age of Robots by James Suzman

2. Irrationality: A History of the Dark Side of Reason by Justin E.H. Smith

1. History and Eschatology: Jesus and the Promise of Natural Theology by N.T. Wright

Having put together that list i also felt compelled to make a ditinction between my most important reads and my favorite reads. There would certainly be overlap, but I figured I would give some space to some additional picks with an emphasis on my “favorite” non-fiction reads in 2021.

My year started with Age of Anger: A History of the Present by Pankaj Mishra which was quickly followed by Survival of the Friendliest: Understanding Our Origins and Rediscovering Our Common Humanity by Brian Hare and Vanessa Woods. Mishras’ hard hitting critique of modernism and its promise to lead us to a kind of liberating global identity underscores the sort of societal and political forms that have led to a new kind of anger, one as rooted in the past as it is expressive of the present. Which is what makes Hare and Wood’s book such an interesting complimentary read. If, as they suggest, it is our penchant for “friendliness” that explains the sudden explosion of humanity, cast as it is, ironically, against the subsequent and necessary extinction of other human-like species, then friendliness has a really difficult time attending for attempts to mine from modernism a greater ethic of a largely undefined definition of love in a global age. This reflects the authors own difficulty in reading the data that we have into a better (read sanitized) narrative of where they believe we should be heading according to the evolutionary story. For as good as the book is, its appeal against the primary problem of dehumanization, and as Misha suggest the necessary creation of binaries and polarties as necessary for progress, and progress is itself the measure of the good, then we are stuck unabe to attend for the correlation of natural and cultural evolution at the same time. As these books underscore, these are hardly seperable when attending towards a sensible reading of history leading us towards a bit of a conundrum. Where that conundrum leads us is a different question, but acknowledging this problem is the first step in reconciling anger and friendliness as mutual parts of the same story.

I read some outstanding memoirs, biographies and autobiographies in 2021, and two that stand out is Jim Henson; The Biography by Brian Jay Jones and the lovely Kindness and Wonder: Why Mister Rogers Matters Now More Than Ever by Gavin Edwards, two films that dig deep into personas who occupied this untenable space between childhood wonder and the potential cynicism of their adult experiences, leading to two of the most affectionate and compelling stortytellers and voices of recent history. Along these same lines, its also worth mentioning Enchanted Hunters:The Power of Stories in Childhood by Maria Tatar, which presents the fascinating thesis that storytelling finds its truest exprsession at this intersection between child and adult perspectives, something made most readily visible in the stories that adutls and children read together, and likewise the stories that we read as children and revisit as adults. Something emerges from this intersection that can teach us about precisely how it is that we are shaped and formed by stories and the power of the imagination.

Other autobiographies/memoirs that I thought were really entertaining were The Storyteller: Tales of Life and Music by Dave Grohl, Broken Horses: A Memoir by Brandi Carlile, and Will by Will Smith. All three are deeply spitual works in their own unique way, telling of how it is that art intersects with matters of faith and the spirit. Grohl’s descriptive of the auditorium as his cathedral and music as his worship, Carliles deeply compelling testimony and witness of reconciling God from within the LBGTQ+ community, and Smiths own reconciling of a life of success with a life of spiritual formation certainly kept me engaged and invested.

Given how opportunity for travel has been disrupted by the pandemic, travelling the world through books has been something of a necessary tonic for the weary. Northland: A 4,000 Mile Journey Along Americas Forgotten Border by Porter Fox was a fun romp through one of the worlds longest borders. Given how it navigates both Canada and U.S., which as a Canadian left me a bit wanting in terms of how much time it spends necessarily north of the often undefined border while giving very little attention to the Canadian side of the story, the history itself becomes especially robust when it uncovers the mutuality of this space. In a different way At Home in the World: Reflections on Belonging While Wandering the Globe by Tsh Oxenreide follows the personal story of Oxnreide as she finds heailng for her own struggle with mental illness in broadening her sense of the world. I know not everyone was a fan of how she keep this journey internalized desiring less of her story and more of the stories that surround her, but for what the book desired to be it resonated with some of my own struggles longings. Perehaps traversing this line between self and other was captured more astutely in World Travel by Anthony Bourdain, a book that recognizes how food shapes our travels, our togetherness and our exploration. That this becomes a stepping stone into his ownlife as a chef is part fo the books power.

For the pure thrill of exporation, City Squares: Eighteen Writers on the Spirit and Significance of Squares around the World and For the Love of Europe: Musings on 45 Years of Travel by Rick Steves were two excellent reads for growing my cultural awareness and experiencing the world in a practical and enlivened sense through the experiences of the stories. On a more unique train of thought, The Socrates Express: In Search of Life Lessons From Dead Philosophers by Eric Weiner is both a fascinating romp through the places and spaces that make up this world through the development of philosophy. It provides a great summary of the history of philosophy by loacating it in its time and place.

I can also speak of the spiritual journey. Jesus: A Pilgrimage by James Martin was an amazing pick for the Lenten period as it follows the story of Jesus through the footsteps of his life and ministry with a unique eye given to the land, the history and the culture as it would have been and as we experience it today. A Rhythm of Prayer: A Collection of Meditations for Renewal by Sarah Bessey and Lent For Everyone by N.T. Wright were both devotions that helped shape my journey through similar periods with intention.

Also shaping that spiritual journey on a larger level was Invasion of the Dead: Preaching Resurrection by Brian K. Blount, a book that presents a revelatory look at how it is we see understand death and life fom a more ancient vantage point, seeing in the Gospel certain assumptions about what it means to be truly alive and dead. In a similarly perspective shaping way This Hallelujah Banquet: How the End of What We Were Reveals Who We Can Be by Eugene Peterson, based on a series of sermons he gave early in his pastoring days and formulated by his life long interest in the subject of Revelation, really helped me to see both this present reality and our future hope in a fresh way. Same with the invigorating The Death of the Messiah and the Birth of the New Covenant: A (Not So) New Model of the Atonement by Mchael J. Gorman, which does the same with the subject of Christs death and resurrection by forming it against covenant theology.

On a slightly shared by different spiritually concerned front, The Good News of the Return of the King; The Gospel in Middle Earth by Michael T. Jahosky and J.R.R. Tolkiens The Sanctifying Myth: Understanding Middle Earth by Bradley J. Birzer are two reads that tapped into a curious cultural phenomenon, which is the tendency for society to demonize Lewis while wholly embracing LOTR even though they wrote from similar points of perspective and shaped their stories from a shared worldview. Both books help to underscore how to read LOTR and Tolkien at large appropriately rather than recontextualizing the story out of its contextualized intention. Bringing to light the idea of the true myth that makes sense of all the worlds story was deeply ingrained in Tolkien and his passionate desire for these stories.

When it came to history I was especially captivated by Wasteland: The Great War and the Origins of Modern Horror by W.Scott Poole, which is a must read for any fans of horror. It helps to underscore how it is our modern landscape remains deeply formed by the Great War and how horror continues to operate as a universal language that attempts to make sense of this shaping through its questions, fears and hopes. It is quite brilliant as it calls out our dangerous neglect of this historical event through consecutive generations, as is Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin by Timothy Snyder, a book that dares to call out the ways we have narrowed the defining event of the second world war to a very small point of what is in fact a much larger and more encompassing history. Of special interest to me was how this played into the history of the middle lands, the blood lands, of Ukraine. It makes sense of how they find themselves where they are today and helps to reshape our undersanding of the second world war as a gradual and unfolding movement between powers east and west. Speaking of East and West, I love the ocean. If I could live anywhere it would be not in the mountains but on the waterfront. Something about the wide open space and its sense of comfort and danger draws me in. Atlantic: Great Sea Battles, Heroic Discoveries, Titanic Storms and A Vast Ocean of a Million Stories by Simon Winchester is a book that tells the captivating story of the Atlantic Ocean from its creation to its imagined future with an eye turned towards its symbolic positioning between east and west as it functions as the point of barrier and connction for humanities westward movement. I found it thrilling if a little long.

Equally interested in the complexities of a historical event was the ridiculously entertaining The Last Duel: A True Story of Crime, Scandal, and Trial by Combat in Medieval France by Eric Jager, a book that helps us to embrace the nuances of a significant historical event we likely hadn’t heard of (the last duel of this kind used to determine justice) while also pulling from this an interest in our own context when it comes to the ongoing challenge women face in being heard. In an equally fascinating look at the nuances of histor, This is the Voice by John Colapinto takes a look at the broader history of humanities development by suggesting that the reason we exploded on the scene the way we did is because of our unique ability to connect sound to the nuances of tonal and physical expression. There are plenty of theories out there, many contained in similarly minded books as a propos “narrative” This one I found really captivating, especially where the author presents the data but also leaves room for mystery. That’s rare in books like these.

The Queens of Animation: The Untold Story of the Women Who Transfmed the World of Disney and Made Cinematic History by Nathalia Holt, The Lady From the Black Lagoon: Hollywood Monsters and the Lost Legacy of Milicent Patrick by Mallory O’Meara, and The Monster She Wrote: The Women Who Pionered Horror and Speculative Fiction by Lisa Kroger are a wonderful mix of history, biography, cultural interest (in horror and animation) and social concern.

Lastly, three books inspired me towards goodness and hope like few others this year- This Beautiful Truth: How God’s Goodness Breaks Into Our Darkness by Sarah Clarkson, He Saw That It Was Good: How Your Creative Life Can Change a Broken World by Sho Baraka and Art and Faith: A Theology of Making by Makoto Fujimura. The first is a challenging call to think differently about the darkness by allowing goodess to inform it and allowing the illumination to call us into a more fully formed picture of this world as one where beauty can be declared as truth. The second locates the same sentiment within the call to partipcate in the creative process of bringing this beauty to light and life. Taking an even deeper dive into this same process of being and creatiing as witness to the beauty the third book breaks open precisely how it is that our creativity captures the power of the creative act in a world where both beauty and the darkness coexit.