Still Life

<

"Georges Braque developed his painting skills while working for his father, a house decorator. He moved to Paris in 1900 to study where he was drawn to the work of the Fauve artists, including Matisse, Derain and Dufy, as well as the late landscapes of Cézanne. Meeting Picasso marked a huge turning point in Braque's development and together they evolved as leaders of Cubism. After a brief interlude in which he was called up to fight in the First World War, Braque's style developed in the direction he was to follow for the rest of his life. In establishing the principle that a work of art should be autonomous and not merely imitate nature, Cubism redefined art in the twentieth century. Braque's large compositions incorporated the Cubist aim of representing the world as seen from a number of different viewpoints. He wanted to convey a feeling of being able to move around within the painting. The still life subject remained his chief preoccupation from 1927 to 1955."
- From "The A-Z of Art: The World's Greatest and Most Popular Artists and Their Works," by Nicola Hodge and Libby Anson

Planting Flags

Dave, I think you made good sense at the end of the service today when you explained why you don't "plant flags." I agree with your reasons for not doing so- it's important to keep the "main thing" the "main thing." It's also a freeing and refreshing thing for people to be given the freedom to think as they want to think. God can certainly correct anyone's thinking if and when he chooses to do so.

On the way home, Emily and I had a nice discussion about this. I'm glad that she and Chris are getting exposed to your point-of-view along these lines. I think in the past (at other places) they've sensed that someone was trying to take away their freedom to think as they wished- not a good thing.

John Stott, Not Jerry Falwell

The following is from a NY Times editorial from last November. I don't care for the use of terms such as "bozos" and "blowhards" and the crass sarcasm (would the Times editorial staff allow such language to describe anyone else but conservative Christians?). But, the editorial makes some good points.
-----------
Tim Russert is a great journalist, but he made a mistake last weekend. He included Jerry Falwell and Al Sharpton in a discussion on religion and public life. Inviting these two bozos onto "Meet the Press" to discuss that issue is like inviting Britney Spears and Larry Flynt to discuss D. H. Lawrence. Naturally, they got into a demeaning food fight that would have lowered the intellectual discourse of your average nursery school.

This is why so many people are so misinformed about evangelical Christians. There is a world of difference between real-life people of faith and the made-for-TV, Elmer Gantry-style blowhards who are selected to represent them. Falwell and Pat Robertson are held up as spokesmen for evangelicals, which is ridiculous. Meanwhile people like John Stott, who are actually important, get ignored.

( Click here to read all of the editorial.)

The Thin Artillery of the Rationalist

Looking back in 1935 to his long friendship with Greeves, Lewis summed up their relationship and what he owed to the friend who always remained steadfast to the Christian faith however much he bombarded him with the 'thin artillery' of the rationalist. 'He remains victor in that debate. It is I who have come round. The thing is symbolical of much in our joint history. He was not a clever boy, he was even a dull boy; I was a scholar. He had no 'ideas.' I bubbled over with them. It might seem that I had much to give him and that he had nothing to give me. But this is not the truth. I could give concepts, logic, facts, arguments, but he had feelings to offer, feelings which most mysteriously- for he was always very inarticulate- he taught me to share. Hence, in our commerce, I dealt in superficies, but he in solids. I learned charity from him but failed, for all my efforts, to teach him arrogance in return.

From C.S. Lewis A Biography.

Providence with Emily

Today was a sunny and cold Saturday. Since it was one of the few Saturdays that Emily didn't have to work, she and I spent the afternoon driving to Providence and visiting the museum at the Rhode Island School of Design. It's a large museum and they have a lot of interesting things. One gallery was all modern works by American Jewish artists to commemorate the 350th anniversary of Jewish people living in America. It included Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko and Roy Lichtenstein.

Friday

Today was Uncle Sam's day. I stayed home and spent the day doing taxes. Glad that's over for another year.

Why Do We Do What We Do, Anyway?

If someone asked you why you go to church on Sundays, what would you say? Of the things we "do" on Sunday mornings, which ones are taught by the Bible?...which are customs or traditions? If these questions interest you, check out this from Steve in Atlanta.

Sunday

This morning at church we heard the sad news that a boy, aged 11, had died. He had been valiantly fighting a serious illness since November and the whole family has been through much. Once again, it was a reminder of how blessed we all are and our complaints and gripes about little irritations are so foolish.

After church I took Chris and Emily to see the UConn women's hockey team beat Providence College (3-2) for the second time in two days. PC is (was) ranked 10th in the nation, so these were big wins for the Huskies. It was a sunny day and the ride to and from was nice.

Supper was homemade pizza with a Woody Allen movie.

Dinner With Friends

This evening we went to Manchester for dinner. Some old friends invited us and several other couples over. It was a relaxed and fun evening. The conversation was interesting and everyone was very comfortable to "be with." Each couple was different from the others, but there were clear threads that connected us with similar experiences- either through family life, child-rearing, our faith, work experiences, travel, etc.

(For some reason I thought we were supposed to arrive at five, but I guess we were early, with the others arriving between 5:30 and 5:45. Nevertheless, we were welcomed graciously and our faux pas was politely overlooked.)

Why Did This Surprise Me?

A long time ago I stopped reading articles in the newspapers and news magazines that have anything to do with Christians or Christianity. It used to be that when I saw something like that, I'd be glad to see it. But after I read it I would almost always find that the information was way off. After being disappointed time and time again I decided to not read them anymore. Or, if I did read, I'd not let myself get my hopes up- kind of expected the article to be off base.

I think the bottom line is that people who aren't believers just don't understand those of us who are. But if you think about it, it makes perfect sense that it should be so. Isn't it what we should expect?

If we truly have been given the gift of faith by the Lord- wouldn't we expect those who have not received the gift to misunderstand us and our faith? If the fear of the Lord is in fact the beginning of wisdom, why should we expect those who don't fear him to have the wisdom to understand him or us? If the things of God are foolishness to the world around us- if the message of the cross is foolishness and offensive to those who don't believe- if spiritual truth is spiritually discerned, why should we expect others to "get it?"

So, the next time I read something in the secular media that portrays believers as misguided or misinformed, I'll try to remember to rejoice- because by God's grace I have the ability to understand something that the person who wrote the article doesn't- not to my glory, but to God's glory.

W., Etc.

My posting dated Feb. 1 (Bush to Abolish Government) is of course satrical and, to me, funny. I happen to like him and I think the U.S. is much better-off with him as president, especially compared to his recent opponent- just my thoughts for what they're worth. (If you disagree, that's ok; we're still friends....)

That said, I don't see things in the way that many brothers and sisters seem to see things nowadays. It is not the Republican party that will usher in the Kingdom of God because we dare not put our hopes in any manmade institution. And, if you think of the U. S. as a Christian Nation, check out this out.

Biblically speaking, there can be no "Christian nations;" the term is an oxymoron.

Lots and lots of sincere, intelligent brothers and sisters will disagree strongly with me, and that's ok, too; we can still be friends....

Another Late-Breaking News Item...

Bush to Abolish Government
Washington DC

In what is believed to be the most ambitious second-term agenda in recent presidential history, George W. Bush announced yesterday he plans to abolish the federal government "in its entirety" by the end of 2005.