Monday, September 29, 2008

Tolerance Essay by Hannah (age 13)

Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it.” This means hatred makes life absolutely depressing and gloomy but love makes it happy and joyful. There was a time when if you were black you had to use different facilities than white people. Also when Hitler did not tolerate Jews he actually hated them and thought they were wrong, even though it was their opinion of their religion. There are still times today when people are not tolerated, for example when people get bullied for their religion, skin color or the way they act.


In the past, black people had to use different restrooms, water fountains and schools than white people. It was just not fair at all. Black people could not help their skin color, but still they were discriminated against. Many white people would not tolerate black people sharing things with them. Although this has changed now, back then it was a terrible and depressing time for America. Martin Luther King Jr. stepped up and made his speech on equal rights, so that people began to notice that all people are the same no matter what their skin color is. They are all humans. Now the government says that we should tolerate all people because they have equal rights.


Another dark time in the world was when Hitler did not tolerate the Jews for their religion. Instead, he made them go to the camps and eventually they were going to be thrown into gas chambers. This is just plain wrong, for it was their personal religion. We should not discriminate based on religion. Hitler’s hatred killed a lot of people and it didn’t help him to become a better person. Eventually Hitler died. Now regulations in Germany and many places in the world say that you cannot discriminate against someone for their religion. This makes the world a happier place. However, in some places people may not discriminate against Jews, but they may do it to people of other religions.


Even though there have been many improvements, some people have still found a way to discriminate against people who are not like them. For example, some people in schools these days bully against their fellow classmates for their religion, skin color or the way they act, such as if they are mentally ill or have a disability. This problem can be solved if people get in trouble for bullying or realize we are all equal because we are all humans.


As you can see from what has happened in the past and from what’s happening right now, change can happen easily enough. If people realize that hatred or intolerance makes life depressing and gloomy, but love or tolerance makes it happy and joyful, then people won’t be discriminated against or bullied. This will make life better for all people.

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Mission

I watched "The Mission" this past weekend with my sons. Hadn't seen it in a long time. I’d remembered the one theme of individual redemption, but had forgotten the parallel one – corporate sin.


In “The Mission” the struggle between organizational self-preservation clashes with the organization's chief missional objective. Which Neihbur was it who wrote that it is even easier to sin corporately than it is to sin individually? Certainly we are seeing this truth verified in the current Wall Street meltdown as honest and upright men (mostly) rob and destroy the resources of countless others.


The movie itself is hauntingly, painfully beautiful in every way, not the least its plot and character development. Just as the story appears to reach a climactic conclusion with the first theme, the drama starts anew. But far from bifurcated, the movie subtly weaves these two themes of corporate and individual struggles with sin and righteousness from beginning to end.


The Cardinal's dilemma is presented right from the start and the ongoing challenge of full redemption lies unsolved till the last. Is it even then resolved? I believe it is. Echoing the Apostle Paul's words that we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, the characters each wrestle with redemption's implications to the end of the movie and their own lives.


As to the Cardinal's dilemma or should we say, society's dilemma, the drama is the individual's redemption struggle writ large. How do we, the Community of the Redeemed, live out our faith in this present world? At the least it can be said, the task is never easy, the choices never quite so unambiguous as we desire.


The movie's underlying theme seems to be how far, in the end, are we to trust God. Am I really to risk earth bound pragmatic hopes for eternal truths? What do I do when faithfulness and justice fight to the death? Is it better to sacrifice the individual for the sake of the greater good? Is it ever acceptable to gamble small cultures for future options in much larger world conflicts?


When given the supposed choice between doing justly and rightly now and doing justly and rightly later, what are we to do? Life’s quandaries are far more often duels between competing “goods” than between good and bad. As much as we prefer the David and Goliath scenario of obvious good versus obvious evil, we are rarely granted such clear-cut options.


What we mere mortals can never predict, can never control is outcome, consequence. The effects of our actions, good or bad, are never fully predictable. At least in earth-bound conclusions. We want our world neat and orderly. We want the right to prevail, the wrong to fail. Instead we live in a quirky universe of fuzzy math and unlimited possibilities.


At the last, we can only do what is right and just now and trust God (assuming we believe there is a God) with the results. If what I do and my brother does appear, even in our best efforts, to clash, I can only trust that God is big enough to handle both of us. Redemption is trusting God for the salvation of me, my brother and everyone else.


Like a parable, the movie ends ambiguously. We, the viewers, are left to decide who has done right. It does feel like expediency has won over values. The Mission of the Church has morphed into the Cardinal’s Compromise to save the institution. The mission has been forfeited so that the organization might carry on that mission.


I wonder if there are times when, given such a choice, it is better to risk the institution than the mission. Let God be the keeper of our own future, be it corporate or individual.


As to the other theme, I have rarely seen as effective a cinematic portrayal of the process and profound depth of redemption. Two thoughts come to mind. One, redemption is played out in community. Are sins ever completely individual or even just between me and my Maker? Thus resolution is never solitary either. In the movie, it is only when the mercenary is proactively set free by those he has harmed – and before the whole community – that he is truly freed of his burden.


Two, true freedom comes by facing our failings, not by avoiding them. We do ourselves and others no blessed service when we simply break off relationships that have been damaged. Facing the problems fair and square and working through the mess to resolution is the only path to freedom. To avoid is to withhold, to rob ourselves and others of the gift of hope.


If a good movie is one that has you chewing on it days and weeks later, then this one is a 5-star gem.


HNK

Monday, September 22, 2008

Hi and welcome to the K6 Review. We'll be posting reviews on books, movies, music, art, whatever else comes to mind, including commentary on life as we see it. Who are we? We are the Kenyon 6 -- Hannah (age 13), Hope (age 15), Stephen (age 18), Robert (age 20), and parents Kim and Howard. We've lived nearly the past two decades in China, which means as kids we've grown up over there. Now we live in the American Northwest.

You may or may not agree with our posts, but we do hope whatever we write causes you to think! You are always welcome to comment.

All our entries are posted by our Dad (HNK). Whoever writes a particular post will sign his or her name. So if you make a comment, sign yours.

Keep watching this space!

The K6