REVIEW: Boys State

How have you been feeling about politics lately? Fearful? Hopeful? Angry? Energetic? How many times in the last four years have you heard some version of, “America is more divided than it has ever been”? If this very common sentiment is true, and has been for a while, then perhaps the only way to fix it is to do something different. What do we do differently, though, and whose responsibility is it to be different? It’s all too easy to assume that the next generation will bring change, but if Apple’s new documentary Boys State is a signpost of what’s to come, we may want to create a little more urgency in the here and now.

Boys State Rob

Boys State, from filmmakers Amanda McBain and Jesse Moss, won the U.S. Documentary Grand Jury Prize at the 2020 Sundance Film Festival, and documents the 2018 Texas Boys State program. Every year in every state the American Legion runs a leadership development experience for male and female high school juniors. The goal of the program is to educate young people on civic engagement and often includes perks like college credit or valuable college scholarships. The film opens highlighting some of the program’s more infamous alumni like Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney, and Rush Limbaugh. Each young person is sponsored by their local Legion and are usually the sole representative of their high school. Following the leaders of the youth of our nation, what an incredible opportunity to see what they stand for and how they will engage in the political process! The issue is, once this week at the Texas state capitol begins to unfold, it’s not that different from what we see on our national political stage.

Maybe we’ve grown accustomed to seeing the survivors of the Parkland shooting standing behind podiums or Greta Thunberg addressing the world’s leaders, but the displays at this Boys State more resembles the worst comment threads on Facebook. Are abortion and gun control the most pressing concerns on the average 17-year-old conservative Texan? The answer, from the subjects themselves, is no, but it’s what they think they’re supposed to talk about. They may not even be able to tell you why, but they definitely think it will make them successful, popular, and, more importantly, elected. One young man even goes as far to admit that he believes the exact opposite of what he said in a debate because he knows it’s what people want to hear. They’re all getting ready to enter college or the workforce. Many probably do think often about the world they’re inheriting. Some of them probably have challenging family lives rife with relational and economic obstacles. Other’s minds are filled with dreams of tricked-out pickup trucks and queries as to who among them can do the most pushups. But you ask them to talk about politics and the only place their mind can go is the 2nd Amendment.

Boys State Group

In this environment it’s hard not to notice the outliers. In the documentary, it is a young man named Steven who enters the narrative in his Beto t-shirt telling stories of his conversion to the political sphere by Bernie Sanders. Later we find out that Steven helped stage the “March For Our Lives” march in Houston. It’s not his progressivism that makes Steven different, though. He also knows in order to win the coveted highest office of Boys State Governor, he must reach across the aisle. When asked the primary role of a politician, Steven answers “public service.” He says again and again in his speeches, and during his quest to get the signatures needed to be on the ticket, that governing means he represents everyone, not just those who agree with him. The film spends a lot of time watching Steven go conversation to conversation, handshake to handshake, lunch to lunch, asking the same question, “What do you care about?” He’s not interested in changing his convictions to win, he wants to build a representative government.

The doc might look upon Steven with a tinge of partiality, but what if all of the other boys acted this way? What might be different about the platforms they produce or the races they run? The policies and campaigns end up looking all too familiar, though. There are guys who jump to impeachment at the slightest whiff of disagreement while others attempt a full-blown Texas secession just to be cool (the previous year’s Boys State voted to succeed and made headlines). There’s mudslinging, social media smear campaigns, and petty or goofy congressional resolutions.

Boys State Rene

If we are expecting the next generation to be different, then one Steven in a sea of 1,100 future politicians aren’t great odds. We may need to take some responsibility for what this next generation is absorbing. Think about someone like John Lewis who did have the burden of change thrust upon his shoulders at a young age, but he clung to his elders (though many weren’t much older) for an example. Now how many young people will vote for the first time in 2020 because they learned of his legacy as the world eulogized him? Lewis is encouraging more Americans from the grave than many who currently hold office. “My friends, let us not forget that we are involved in a serious social revolution. By and large, American politics is dominated by politicians who build their careers on immoral compromises and ally themselves with open forms of political, economic, and social exploitation,” Lewis said in front of the crowd at the March on Washington in 1963. Boys State helps us see that we simply cannot wait to see what progress the next generation will bring or how they’ll be different. We have to be different right now or they never will be.

Habakkuk: This country is going down the tubes

When you read Habakkuk, you’d almost think he’s talking about the 2016 election. He’s very dissatisfied with the state of his country (Israel) and is complaining that everything is a mess. The land is full of violence and conflict and it feels like no one remembers how to do what’s right anymore. Habakkuk is fed up with his country; he’s angry and ready for God to change things. If you’re growing increasingly angry and anxious watching this election cycle unfold, then this book might be for you.

election

This prophet is unusual literarily in that Habakkuk does not directly address the people. The book is a dialogue between him and God and almost reads like a personal journal. The prophet is upset at Judah’s (the southern kingdom of Israel) moral and spiritual failures and is complaining that God has done nothing to stop them. He then does not particularly like God’s answer that He will judge Judah using Babylon, also a wicked nation. Habakkuk at first thinks this seems contradictory or foolish. How could an even more evil nation be used as God’s instrument to discipline his wicked nation? (Each political side is probably asking that when they think about the possibility of the opposing candidate winning the presidential election. How could God possibly use them, they’re the worst?!?!?) Ultimately he is reassured that God will judge all wickedness and none will escape unpunished, both in his own nation and in Babylon.

 

Habakkuk is likely a contemporary of Zephaniah and Jeremiah but the dating is somewhat vague. He’s probably not writing after the reign of Josiah so he is still before the Babylonian invasion. He’s on the final countdown for Israel, the time to repent is slipping away. Similar to Zephaniah, the people have been on a spiritual rollercoaster of rebellion and reform and Habakkuk is fed up with their current rampant rebellion. He’s tired of the flip-flopping and wants some justice (also feel familiar?) The format of the book is a pattern: the prophet complains twice, listens to God twice, and prays once. He ends with submission to God’s wisdom and trust in God to act righteously even if it comes in a form that Habakkuk did not expect.

withered_tree_large

For additional context and insights, watch The Bible Project’s short overview. Take 10-15 minutes to read the 3 chapters, then consider:

  • Why do some people repent for a time, often under particular leadership, but then return to their old ways?
  • How do you relate to Habakkuk in feeling upset and angry over the sins of our culture?
  • Where do you also feel tempted to tell God how He should intervene?
  • How have you seen God act in unexpected ways in the past? How might that give you the same response as Habakkuk in trusting that God’s timing and approach will be perfect?
  • When you follow election coverage, how might Habakkuk’s prayer give you peace and calm?

3:17 Though the fig tree does not bud
    and there are no grapes on the vines,
though the olive crop fails
    and the fields produce no food,
though there are no sheep in the pen
    and no cattle in the stalls,
18 yet I will rejoice in the Lord,
    I will be joyful in God my Savior.

Other Minor Prophets study guides (in chronological order):

Nahum: When The Man is keeping you down

Haggai: Life in the Ruins

Joel: The Bible’s horror poetry

Should we stop sharing that “Newsroom” clip?

“Can you say why America is the greatest country in the world?”

Have you seen that video? It was probably shared with a comment like “The most honest piece of television EVER!!!” or “MUST WATCH!!! So true!” As I write, this clip from the HBO show The Newsroom, from the top three versions of it on YouTube, has 13 million views. Odds are, you’ve seen it. Especially since, even though the show has ended its run and the clip is now four years old, it keeps getting shared and shared and shared. This probably happens because it taps into something very real.

Politics are emotional and we are in a season in our country where politics, in its current form, have the center stage. It’s an election year and might be the most televised presidential election we have ever had. How many debates have we had during the primary process? I’ve lost count. What’s intriguing is that this viral clip seems to speak to both sides. Conservatives look at the current state of our country and ring out loud the mic drop moment of this video, that America is not currently the greatest country in the world. Liberals are attracted to this video that was featured in a television program with a rigorous liberal bias that was actually speaking out of frustrations with the current trends in conservative politics. It’s a video for everyone.

Newsroom 1

The problem with this particular clip, however, is that the core message of it isn’t featured in the scene itself. This clip, by itself, is out of the context of the first season of the show which ends revisiting this moment and finishing the thought this clip begins. By itself this clip is angry, intellectual, and, actually, pretty dismissive. It is the perfect social media mic drop. The clip bashes viewers over the head with well thought-out, well-researched rhetoric and is now used to put people in their place.

All this is said not to take a side on political issues, but, instead, is to recognize what the phenomena of this clip says about how we use social media. There is something incredibly satisfying in having the last word, of saying something so smart that no one can answer it. There is something gratifying about verbally putting someone in their place. Trust me, when I come face to face with some of my mortal enemies like Hulk Hogan who beat my hero Macho Man Randy Savage at Wrestlemania V, Vontaze Burfict of the Cincinnati Bengals, or Joel Schumacher the ruiner of the 90’s Batman franchise, I would love nothing more than to give them a piece of my mind! But by treating social media this way are we taking a tool designed to bring us together and using it as a weapon to tear us apart?

Newsroom 4

Unfortunately, using content out of context to drop a mic on someone is not new to the world of Christianity. Words have power and, perhaps, no words have more power than scripture. Taken out of context scripture can do all kinds of things. It can pretty much prove any point you want to prove or correct anyone you think is wrong. We see it on protest signs telling families at military funerals that they’re going to hell. We see it in any of the shows in Shondaland as gracious permission to be whoever you want to be doing anything you want to do. In his “Gospel in Life” series, Tim Keller defines these two extremes as legalism (everything is bad) and license (everything is okay). Keller goes on to define a third option.

The third option, somewhere between legalism and license, is the gospel. The gospel isn’t a tool to make a point, it is the point. True, the gospel is convicting. Also true, the gospel is gracious. However, neither is the whole story. How can we exist somewhere in the middle? How can we create gospel-centered space in our online social communities? It starts with an invitation.

Newsroom 5

Social media mic drops are the opposite of inviting. With the mic on the floor, conversation…community is dead. But, like we talked about a few paragraphs ago, mic drops are fun! It is way more fun to drop a piece of knowledge and assume the online world will click like or retweet affirming that you are the most brilliant thinker of our time and communicate to you that their lives have been changed just for knowing you. Does that ever happen?

If our online conversations fail to be inviting it becomes difficult to do anything but fight. One mic drop leads to another and another, feelings get hurt in a medium without verbal and non-verbal cues, and frustration with our friends and the medium sets in. But if we see all of our communication as an invitation, our conversations can change. Think about the way that Jesus communicated.

First of all, Jesus often communicated points, revealed peoples’ hearts, and created deep community by asking questions. Even trapped between a political rock and hard place when presented with a conundrum about taxes, Jesus’s first response was a question (Mark 12:15). Jesus often invites others to evaluate the heart behind their beliefs. Any modern day Don Draper out there will tell you the first step in successful communication campaigns is research, asking questions. How would your online community change if it was filled with more wonder? Wonder what brings someone to their beliefs. Wonder where others’ hearts are.

Newsroom 3

Jesus didn’t only ask questions. He also answered, but, when he did, his answers were inviting. In that encounter about taxes, his final response was, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” The Pharisees thought they gave Jesus two options…affirm paying taxes, siding with the government alienating his followers…deny paying taxes, siding with his rebels becoming a criminal. Affirm the government’s sinful behavior or convict the behavior of his followers. There is always a third way and in his response Jesus is inviting the Pharisees to examine what in their lives belongs to God. It is an invitation to know God and God’s sovereignty on a deeper level.

So what is the invitation in that Newsroom clip? Well it doesn’t come in the clip with 13 million views. It comes in one of the final scenes of season one. The question is asked again, by the same young woman, but the answer changes. What if we stopped dropping mics on each other, but instead invited others into our lives? What would it look like to create space where they also want to invite you into theirs? What if social media was more about people than it is about points? Let’s all keep our mics in hand, ready to contribute, ready to invite, ready to pass it rather than drop it. What makes America the greatest country in the world? You do.

Anything but Conventional

I was on an emotional rollercoaster. This weekend the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh elected a new bishop at a Special Convention and I was front and center. It has been nearly 20 years since we have needed to hold an election, and we’d never done it as an Anglican Diocese. Our motto since we first found out five months ago that we would be holding the election was, “Prayer, not politics. Discernment, not a search.” Our goal was not to make this about angling and popularity, but to keep God’s wisdom and guidance at the forefront each step of the way. And incredibly, that’s what actually happened.

Friday night before statements and Q&A from the six nominees we prayed over them and asked the Lord to give us open minds and hearts, to relinquish preconceived notions or opinions and to hear from the Spirit as they each spoke. Each of them did a wonderful job. It takes a great deal of vulnerability to consider being a leader. You and your family have to commit much thought and prayer to that potential transition, and you have to make yourself open to other people in sharing about your experiences and vision for the future. You put yourself on the line in a unique and public way that takes courage and a willingness to make yourself available to Christ’s leading. I was so impressed by the way that each of the nominees opened themselves up to the Diocese and to the Spirit’s movement. It was evident that it was motivated by a desire to serve the Body of Christ, not self-promotion.

13084062_883989112262_558501083_n

 

Saturday morning before the Special Convention officially convened, we celebrated Communion together. It wasn’t just a formality because that’s what Anglicans are supposed to do, it was beginning the day with putting Christ on the throne. It was receiving Christ’s body and blood and as we all were reminded that we are One with Christ, seeking to be one with each other. I found myself praying as the whole Convention was taking Communion, “Jesus make us one Body in Your Body. Make us one as you and the Father are One.”

Then we cast the first round of ballots, and it was inconclusive. A strong consensus was not emerging right away. And so we continued in prayer, and worship through song, and reading scripture in between each round of ballots. We engaged in this process for several hours and for several ballots. At one point we paused all together to spend time in prayer over rising violence in the Horn of Africa and for church leaders in the region. Each time a ballot would come back split, people did not get angry or start berating each other to get on board with their personal choice. There was an incredible spirit of openness and sensitivity to the Spirit in the room. It was truly the Body of Christ seeking the Lord together, being willing to make a huge decision based on the Lord’s leading.

13072208_883989237012_227751407_o

 

Multiple candidates withdrew as the balloting continued. Each time this occurred, they were received with a standing ovation. There was no sense that they had failed or were incapable. Their withdrawals were deeply selfless and marked by a desire to respond to God’s will and to prevent confusion or conflict. And the standing ovations were expressions of sincere gratitude for their time and investment, an affirmation that their role mattered greatly in getting closer to discerning the person God was calling. This was one of the most moving aspects of the election for me. Watching highly capable and gifted men choose to humbly serve the Church with their willingness to lead, and their willingness to hear from God that this was not the leadership role for them at this time. Each of them made decisions based on what was best for God’s people in Pittsburgh, not based on their own striving or ambition.

When the consensus was reached it was wonderfully clear that this was the person God was calling to be bishop. As all of us participated with the Spirit throughout the process, Christ honored our openness with clarity around His chosen servant. While the long day was emotionally draining, I had a deep assurance that this was the Lord’s choosing and we were in step with God’s will. It was one of the more profound experiences I have shared with the Body of Christ. A process marked by prayer and comprehensive discernment, civility, listening, and a consideration for the good of all. I am thankful to serve with people who seek the Lord so diligently. I was part of something beautiful and I was changed.