Love's Abiding Joy Premieres Saturday

In 2003, the made-for-television movie Love Comes Softly premiered on the Hallmark Channel. Based on best-selling author Janette Oke's first book, the film was directed by Michael Landon Jr. and undeniably has a "Little House on the Prairie-esque" feel (I guess it can be said in the area of television production: like father, like son). Due to the movie's success, it was soon followed by small screen versions of Oke's next two books in the series: Love's Enduring Promise (2004) and Love's Long Journey (2005).

This Saturday, Love's Abiding Joy, the fourth movie in the Love Comes Softly series and the first to be released on the silver screen, makes its television premiere on the Hallmark Channel. In October, FoxFaith Movies distributed it to a limited number of theaters across the U.S. and it's scheduled to be released on DVD in early January. While I didn't make it to the theater to see this film, having a husband who's an editor has it's benefits. Ted received an advance copy of the DVD release, which he promptly brought home for me to watch.

When I turned on the DVD, my expectations were low. Although Love Comes Softly moved both me and Ted to tears with it's tender tale of grief, faith, and love, Love's Enduring Promise was, to put it bluntly, barely tolerable. The script was not well crafted and the casting of January Jones as Missie left a lot to be desired. When Love's Long Journey aired in 2005, I was relieved to see Erin Cottrell (who also played Caroline Ingalls in the 2005 ABC mini-series Little House in the Prairie) replace Jones in the role. Not only was the casting better in Love's Long Journey, but the script was an improvement.

Unfortunately, when I started Love's Abiding Joy on Monday night, I only made it through 30 minutes. But not for the reasons you may assume. In the past, I've turned off movies for inappropriate content and even boredom. But before this film, I'd never turned off a film because it affected me so deeply I was unable to keep watching. That's exactly what happened with this movie.

Here's where I should warn you that this review does contain some plot spoilers.

For those unfamiliar with the plot, Love's Abiding Joy is the continued story of Willie and Missie LaHaye as the strive to keep their cattle ranch financially secure and to raise their family in the frontier of the Wild West. About thirty minutes into the film they suffer an unimaginable blow -- the death of their infant daughter, Kathy. One morning she suddenly stops breathing. While I haven't experienced the loss of a child, the memory of seeing my youngest daughter Ava stop breathing for several seconds is still fresh in my memory. Because of this, I simply couldn't handle Kathy's death in this film. Hence, my need to turn it off.

This afternoon I finished the film, although not without many tears. It's a beautiful story of a family who walks through grief -- struggling and questioning in the process -- yet manages to survive it with family and faith intact.

So, for those of you looking for a film worth watching, tune into or TiVo Love's Abiding Joy this Saturday night. Just be sure to have plenty of Kleenex on hand. If you're like me, you'll need it.

The Mommy Wars Continue

Back in July, I blogged on Linda Hirschman's argument that educated women are doing more harm to society by staying home with their children, than they're doing good. Today, Hirschman is back in the spotlight with the release of her book, Get to Work: A Manifesto for the Women of the World. Both Al Mohler and Candice Watters have tackled Hirschman's past, as well as more recent, comments.

For those of us who Hirschman is comparing to what Mohler said are the "'untouchables' of India -- a caste consigned to sweep bodily wastes and care for the bodily needs of others," her views can be infuriating. However, as I posted in a comment on the Boundless Line, at the same time I'm angered by her statements, I feel bad for her. It's sad that she, as a mother herself, so misunderstands and misses the joy that can be found in motherhood.

I love what Shannon Popkin in her article "The Significance of Dog Hair and Trash Cans" (in this month's issue of Focus on the Family magazine) wrote concerning these "menial" tasks Hirschman thinks are below educated women.

According to God's standards for achievement, the last shall be first, and being great requires learning to be a servant of all. As the Father sifts our accomplishments, He assigns the most value to serving. This tells me that an office with mahogany furniture and a personal assistant is not the only setting for great accomplishments. In fact, caring for small children in the home provides incredible opportunity for advancement. Sticky messes and smelly garbage cans aren't detours and roadblocks; they are God's highway of significance.

She goes on to say, "Pleasing the Lord wouldn't be enhanced by bringing home a paycheck or having a title before my name. I have just as many opportunities to please Him within the four walls of my family room as I would in a corner office. As I wipe a little bottom, I have the same wherewithal to gain the Lord's favor as does a top strategist for Pampers. Tying little shoes, reading picture books and making peanut butter and jelly sandwiches grant me just as much potential to hear, 'Well done, good and faithful servant' as I would if I performed brain surgery."

May stay-at-home moms under fire for this choice find encouragement.

The Mystery and Suspence of Dickens

It isn't often that my husband and I spend every night in a given week watching television. But this week we did. Each night we turned on our gas fireplace, lit a couple of candles, and fed our latest addiction: Bleak House.

In September, both Girl Talk and Danielle recommended the 2005 BBC mini-series. I immediately put it on hold at our local library. Because of its popularity, we were finally able to check it out last week. And, because it is in such demand, we were only able to keep it for a week before we had to return it for the next person in line.

Bleak House is based on the Charles Dickens' novel by the same name. The drama is a satire on the 19th century British legal system. Yet for viewers the true meat of the DVD series is not in a legal battle, but in the mystery involving Lady Deadlock and a stack of love letters.

The series pairs up a classic story with contemporary cinematography. Transitional shots are quick and darting, while a fair number of shots within scenes are partially obscured by some object in the forefront, such as a branch from a tree. This effect gives some of the scenes a feeling of voyeurism; like the audience is quietly, secretly watching the story unfold. While the style works overall, after multiple episodes, the obscuring gets a bit old.

The story is confusing for the first two or three episodes because there are several threads developing simultaneous and a huge cast of characters. My husband wasn't sure what was going on at first, but I told him to hang on, that the numerous storylines were puzzle pieces that would soon began to fit together. As they did, we found ourselves hooked.

As far as casting goes, it's superb. While the only actors I recognized were Gillian Anderson (known for her role on X-Files) and Carey Mulligan (from 2005 film version of Pride and Prejudice), I thought each actor in the series did a remarkable job. Some of my favorites include Anderson as Lady Deadlock, Burn Gorman as Mr. Guppy, Anna Maxwell Martin as Esther Summerson, and Hugo Spear as Sergeant George.

Each episode builds in suspense until the last two. Episodes 14 and 15 are spent wrapping up the story. Honestly, after all the mystery and suspense, I found the ending to be somewhat of a let down.

For any of you who love classics and mystery, Bleak House is a must. It's not only well produced, directed, and acted, but it's a story viewers can learn from. It's a tale that illustrates well the danger of secret sin, the law of sowing and reaping, and the powerful influence and impact a honorable woman such as Esther Summerson can have on those around her.

Emily's Balloon

As one who's always loved picture books, I get excited about our weekly trips to the library. For me, there's such delight in searching through the shelves of children's books and looking for ones that appeal to my two-year-old Olivia's current interests.

Last week we picked out books about a train, a red apple, the moon, and a mouse. All of which Olivia managed to memorize and "read" to my husband and me last night before bed.

Today, the girls and I found two books: one about cars and the other about a balloon. Both subject matters of great interest to Olivia. We've yet to read the car book, but we did read Emily's Balloon before Olivia's nap. Written and illustrated by Komako Sakai, the book was named a winner in Child magazine's 6th Annual Best Children's Book Awards. And rightly so. The charcoal-hued drawings, which feature color here and there (such as the bright yellow balloon) are absolutely charming. I'd love to frame these pictures in Olivia's room.

The story itself is simple and sweet. It beautifully captures the pleasure a young child can find in a balloon.

It is also realistic. At one point, Emily lets go of her balloon and it flies to the ceiling. The only text on the page is: "Uh-oh." Then, on the next page, the same thing happens again. This time the text is "Again?" At our house, balloons always managed to find their way to the ceiling and events play out fairly similar to what happens in the book.

Another plus is that the book helps prepare young children for the possibility that a balloon they have in the future may fly away.

The only aspect of the story that bothered me was no father was mentioned, not even at the dinner table. It was simply Emily and her mother. When reading it to Olivia, I changed some of the words, telling her that Papa, instead of Mommy, would rescue her balloon. For at our house, Papa tends to be the hero.

But despite this, it is one of my favorite picture books to date. It's simple, charming, and sure to be read many times before finding its way back home to the library.

Ants'hillvania

On a shopping trip to our local Christian bookstore a few months ago, I purchased the 20th anniversary edition of Ants'hillvania. I remember listening to this audio production when I was a kid. So buying it was partly an act of nostalgia. However, it was also an effort to start introducing Olivia to more stories on CD. I wanted to get her imagination working as well as help her improve her listening skills.

Written by Jimmy and Carol Owens with Cherry Boone O'Neill (one of Pat Boone's daughters), Ants'hillvania is a musical take on the biblical story of the prodigal son. It centers around Antony, who decides he doesn't want to be like everyone else in the ant colony. Instead, he wants to be "independ-ant." He dreams of being rich and famous. Antony asks his father for his "share of the family fortune" and strikes out on his own on the garden path. Along the way, he mets characters including Mr. Worm and Miss Millipede. In the process he discovers that he's made poor choices.

Ants'hillvania is fun in its effort to teach kids about making wise choices. But, it's also a bit cheesy in parts. Adults can only take so much of the word "ant" being used continually. There's "Ant"ony, Command"ant", independ"ant", Bry"ant," and extravag"ant" to name a few.

Overall, Olivia loves this CD. She sings along to the "Work Song" and "Independ-ant's Song" and asks to listen to the production over and over again. Although each time she listens, she does ask me to skip over the track when Antony is trapped in the spider's cave.

As a mom, I don't mind listening to it multiple times because I love musicals. If you don't care so much for this genre, Ants'hillvania may very well drive you crazy.

The Great Barbie Debate

A few days ago I found myself observing my oldest daughter play with her Fisher-Price Learning House. She rang the doorbell, changed the stations on the radio, opened and closed the door, and checked the rain gutter for itsy bitsy spiders. At one point she even used her toy screwdriver to fix all the screws on the house. Watching her I realized that she was practicing and indeed preparing for the realities of life. I was reminded of my own childhood play and one of my then favorite toys: Barbie.

Over the years a great debate has occured regarding this popular toy by Mattel. Much ado has been focused on her unrealistic body proportions and her flawless appearance. Arguments range from the damaging affects Barbie has on the self-image of impressionable little girls to Barbie being a a negative role model in the area of goals and aspirations.

As a young girl, playing with Barbie was one of my favorite pastimes. I was unaware of her unmentionable identity prior to Mattel's purchase of her rights and subsequent makeover. I simply enjoyed pretending to be grown up when I played.

For me, Barbie provided an opportunity to establish a home, create a family, and interact with a community. Each time we played Barbies, my sister and I spent much time preparing. We gathered items from around the house and set up homes for our Barbies. We took the time to match them up in marriage with a Ken doll and give them children to parent. The improportionate figure and flawless beauty wasn't the focus of our play. Instead, the time we spent playing with an unrealistic doll was used in a very realistic manner.

According to Mary F. Longo of the University of Ohio Extension, "Children learn about the world and experience life through play." She says that "through play, children practice the roles they will play later in life." In thinking about it, I realized in her own way, Barbie helped prepare me for my role as a wife, mother, and a keeper of my home. The focus of my playtime with this doll was yet another way of turning my heart to what really mattered: family.

Does this mean I'm not concerned about the body image Barbie communicates and how it might affect my young daughters? Of course, I am. It's difficult enough to be female in our society without having to deal with dolls that paint a portrait of physical perfection. Yet, I don't believe Barbie should be dismissed solely on this criteria.

When my girls are old enough to play with Barbie, I see no problem in letting them do so (as long as their dolls of choice are modestly dressed). As I once did, perhaps they'll also enjoy preparing for a family of their own through play.

And, as they do play, there won't be a lack of guidance when it comes to beauty and how it relates to Barbie. I'll make sure that they know where true beauty lies: in a life spent loving and serving the Lord.

But for now, Barbie is a toy a few years away from making an appearance in our playroom. For now my girls seem much more interested in cars, trains, and tools.

Choosing Motherhood

As it is for most mothers, grocery shopping is one of the many things I do on a continual basis. It seems we’re always in need of some product, whether it’s milk, juice or some obscure ingredient like juniper berries.

On a recent shopping trip, which included both kids in tow, I found myself surveying magazine headlines as I waited in the checkout lane. As my gaze moved from headline to headline, I noticed a trend: Hollywood and motherhood. One cover in particular summed up the sentiments of all the headlines in a simple, yet thought-provoking phrase: "Motherhood now the hottest role in Hollywood."

Interesting. It’s not as if celebrity mothers is new news. For decades women in Hollywood have been having babies. Vivian Leigh, Lucille Ball, Audrey Hepburn, Doris Day, Mary Tyler Moore, Goldie Hawn, Demi Moore and Reese Witherspoon –- all moms. Yet, judging from magazines and entertainment news in general, suddenly pregnancy and babies are the latest trend in Tinseltown. It seems that in the last several years celebrity motherhood has recaptured the attention of our culture's gatekeepers -- the editors, producers and commentators -– in a way it hasn't since the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s first persuaded women that motherhood wasn't all it was cracked up to be.

Some celebrity moms have even put their careers on hold to care for their children. Britney Spears took a short-lived hiatus to stay at home with her son, even considering this option full-time, while actress Gwyneth Paltrow commented last Spring, "With another baby on its way, I don't think I will be doing a lot for the next year or so either. Having Apple has changed everything for me. It's changed the way I see the world — I feel like it's even changed my DNA."

Being a mother isn't a financially rewarding career choice. There's no 401k, no Christmas bonuses and no pay raises. Nor does it result in public accolades, other than a mention from the pastor on Mother's Day. There are no Academy Awards given for "Greatest Number of Diaper Changes in a Given Day" or "Best Performance in the Category of Sleep-Deprivation." It’s far from glamorous. Showers aren’t guaranteed, and all clothes have the potential to become a canvas for spit-up or better yet, peanut butter and jelly fingerprints. Plain and simple: motherhood is hard work. Yet, despite this, even women who have it all desire to gain the title "Mommy."

Realistically, for many Hollywood starlets, choosing motherhood isn’t all that sacrificial. There will be nannies for the babies, housekeepers for the home and personal trainers for the unsightly tummy bulge. Most celebrity moms won’t be trying to balance husband, baby, laundry, meals and housework. Because of their financial means, they have the ability to "have it all" – fame, a successful career and motherhood.

But, for those women such as myself, who don’t have the financial means of Hollywood’s "A-list," choosing motherhood means sacrifice. It means sleep-deprivation, little or no privacy and ultimately, dying to oneself daily. For those who don’t have to work outside the home for their family to survive financially, it also means making tough decisions. Will I pursue my career? Or will I choose to stay at home and invest my time, energy and love in my children?

Trading Briefcases for Diaper Bags

Recently ABC News reported that "54 percent of mothers with a graduate or professional degree no longer work full time." According to law professor Linda Hirshman, in a February 2006 interview on Good Morning America, this decision is a dangerous one for these women, their children and society as a whole. She adamantly attacked the decision of educated women who've opted to trade in suits, brief cases and laptops for sweat pants, diaper bags and bottles. Hirshman, a working mom herself, went as far as to say, "I think it's a mistake for these highly educated and capable women to make that choice [to stay home]. I am saying an educated, competent adult's place is in the office."

It seems that many, including Hirshman, have failed to realize that motherhood is not about women finding personal fulfillment. It's not about adding a child to an already full lifestyle and expecting nothing to change. Children aren't simply another accessory added with the intention of making oneself feel good. Motherhood is about more than simply what's best for the mother.

And, perhaps what society is witnessing in this migration of women from the workplace to the home is this: Well-known and educated women have discovered what many women have already known for centuries -- motherhood offers an indescribable fulfillment that can't be found elsewhere. Something in those who've pursued education and careers to find satisfaction has whispered, "There has to be more." And, whether we know it or not, we've found that the desire for children isn’t simply a response to a ticking biological clock. Instead, having children feeds a deep God-given longing to support, nurture and bring about life.

Growing up, I always imagined myself pursuing a career first. Marriage and children were a goal to be obtained later. However, all of that changed when I met my husband while in graduate school. We married within a year of meeting and I was pregnant before our first anniversary.

Just a few months after finishing a master’s degree in film and television producing, I gave birth to our oldest daughter. While part of me felt like I was giving up a dream in not pursuing what I’d studied, I made the decision to stay at home with her. Honestly, there are times when I wonder what could've been if I'd pursued a career at this point in my life, but these thoughts are fleeting. I know that the young lives of my children are for but a season, and I want to be there for every moment of that season.

I don’t believe the interest that media are taking in Hollywood mothers, as well as the growing number of educated women leaving their full-time careers to stay home, is simply a fading trend. Instead, it speaks loudly that motherhood is a worthy calling to pursue. It reminds us that lasting fulfillment isn’t found in movies that will someday be obscure or irrelevant, in gold statues cluttering up a shelf or in the applause of fans. And it’s not found in corner offices, business trips or high power positions. Instead, it's in the unconditional love expressed in an infant’s smile. It's in the sweet utterance of the name, "Mommy." It’s in a joy that can be found in denying oneself to embrace the gift and the calling of motherhood.

For more on the Linda Hirshman interview, check out what Girl Talk and Al Mohler had to say about it back in February.

The Art of Selling Modesty

The Short of It

The book Sexy Girls: How Hot is Too Hot?:

1. Shows that while the principles included in the book are good, they can’t be put into practice, even by the book’s publisher. This models for the reader that it is enough just to concur with the themes presented in the book, that it’s not necessary to change our behavior. (See James 1:23-24.)

2. It can put a “stumbling block” in the way of unsuspecting guys who happen to see this book on Amazon or at the Christian bookstore. (See Matt. 18:6.)

3. It sets a dangerous precedent for book publishers: If it’s shown that using a “sexy girl” on the cover of a book boosts sales and nobody in the Christian community challenges that book’s cover, then it paves the way for other book publishers to adopt similar techniques to sell their materials.

The Long of It

In the matter of 24 hours, eight reviews were added to Amazon on a book that had previously received little attention on the site. Sure, there'd been a few reviews previously posted, but nothing like what ensued during this seemingly small time period.

Nothing short of controversy could spur on such an onslaught of comments. In this case it was a couple reviews questioning the appropriateness of the book's cover. A Christian book written by a Christian author and published by a Christian book publisher, it features the torso of a woman dressed in a tube top. And, while part of the book's title, placed in a black box, covers her exposed mid-drift, the picture does well to accentuate her well defined shoulders and hint at her cleavage, while making sure part of this headless, faceless woman's stomach peeks out at us. The book, Sexy Girls: How Hot Is Too Hot?, was written by best-selling author Hayley DiMarco and published by Hungry Planet. The goal of the work: To teach teenage girls the importance of modesty.

What's clear from the Amazon debate is that Christian audiences are split over the appropriateness of this book's cover image. Some have no qualms with picture. Others, such as me, my husband, several family members, and friends, are concerned about the impact of such a visual image. Still others have concerns over its appropriateness, yet have embraced the work despite this due to its inner message. In an email I received from a large Christian bookstore chain in response to my concerns, I was told this:

I reviewed this book for our buyer before it was published and ame to the same conclusion that you did. In fact, I will quote rom the first paragraph of my review: "The content of this book is fine and is very much needed. I only wish the title and cover at were different. I'm sure that's done for the purpose of getting teenage girls to pick it up and read it, but the suggestive cover art and title actually do what the author is trying to get the female reader not to do."

There is some consensus that if the girl on the cover were dressed appropriately, those for whom the book is written wouldn't pick it up to look through it or buy and read it. So even though I agree with your assessment of the cover art, we believe that it is so important to get the message of the book to girls who are tempted to dress like this that we are carrying it in our stores.

In an email two of my female friends received in response to their concerns over the cover's appropriateness, the publisher had this to say:

Regarding the cover, let's see if we can replicate the issue of "using sex" to sell books but, this time, let's replace the topic of modesty with one that might have less static for you: men that are unfaithful. If we at Hungry Planet were ever to do a book on this topic, we would never use a cover of a man not cheating on his wife. "The Glory of a Faithful Husband" for example would not be an effective title nor would an accompanying cover depicting a man snuggling up to his wife on the couch with a bowl of popcorn watching a movie for a book on infidelity. We package books that attempt to address people's immediate or looming problems. Instead of the "glory" title, we would deem the titles, "Cheating Husbands" or "How Men Destroy Their Marriages" much more effective along with a cover that depicts a man slipping into a hotel room with a strange woman (biblical term). Now, when using this alternate topic and example, I can't imagine a reasonable person expressing grave concern that the cover I've described is endorsing infidelity. Rather, we'd be using effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or "aha!" moment. No one would have a problem with using a picture of infidelity to "sell a book" on the topic of infidelity.

The other thing to remember about "Sexy Girls" is it is written for a female audience. If we were using sex to sell this book, we would have a hunky Abercrombie & Fitch guy on the cover to use sex to sell. So in both these cases, those that are initially objecting to the cover are not looking at it in context. Instead, the concerns being raised from a few Christian men are from knee-jerk reactions to the imagery which just proves Hayley DiMarco's main point in the book that men are visual creatures.

Hmmm. For those of us who are concerned with the cover's appropriateness, let's examine the publisher's argument point by point to see if it holds up.

First, we're told, "We package books that attempt to address people's immediate or looming problems. Instead of the 'glory' title, we would deem the titles, 'Cheating Husbands' or 'How Men Destroy Their Marriages' much more effective along with a cover that depicts a man slipping into a hotel room with a strange woman." In today's society modesty and unfaithfulness are indeed "looming problems." However, so is pornography. If we're to follow the publisher's logic, then would a pornographic picture on the front of a book addressing the problems of pornography be appropriate because in the publisher's words, it would "be using effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or 'aha!' moment"? Should we sell such a book in our Christian bookstores?

The question also needs to be raised whether using less "obvious" imagery on the front of books such as Lisa Bevere's Kissed the Girls and Made Them Cry or Joshua Harris' Sex Is Not the Problem, Lust Is has hindered their messages of sexual purity from being communicated, not to mention reduced their book sales.

Second, we're reminded that Sexy Girls is targeted to the female audience. Okay, so the writer and the publisher are targeting teenage girls. Therefore, they've determined that the cover is appropriate. Yet, I'm left to wonder this: Are teenage girls the only ones who lay eyes on the cover? Or, has this cover which is unashamedly displayed in Christian bookstores across the U.S. suddenly made these stores an unsafe haven for men? Will men now need to walk through what used to be a safe place on guard against the sexual immodesty of this cover? Because, after all, as DiMarco tells teen girls on page 32 of this book:

All men are attracted by different parts of your body that you may or may not have exposed. They aren't all sex-crazed--well, maybe they are, but it's natural to some extent. I mean, they have these things called hormones, which do somewhat color how guys see the world, and by that I mean your body. So whether you are targeting them or not, they are looking.

So, although DiMarco and her publishers are not targeting this book to guys, I bet you that guys are looking and, because they are as DiMarco says "visual creatures" who "are turned on by what they see" (p. 33), this book has the ability to tempt a man to lust.

Third, we're told that, "If we were using sex to sell this book, we would have a hunky Abercrombie & Fitch guy on the cover to use sex to sell." The publishers are asking us to believe that female sexuality is not something used to sell products to females. I beg to differ.

As a former television and film graduate student, I was taught that in film there's a technique of focusing on part of the woman, rather than the woman as a whole. This is referred to by feminist film scholar Laura Mulvey as "the gaze"; a technique that put renowned filmmakers such as Alfred Hitcock under fire for his continued use of it. Defined as the camera's eye being that of the male viewpoint, shots are targeted to portray the woman as less than human; instead as an object made up of parts.

We see this technique employed today in television commercials, not to simply sell products to men, but instead to sell products to women. Victoria's Secret may show the woman as a whole, however the emphasis is on the woman's body, specifically the stomach, breasts, and thighs. Additionally, many commercials for beauty products such as lotion and body wash incorporate shots of women's legs, bare backs, and hints at their chests. These television advertisements rarely show the woman as a whole individual without also emphasizing her parts as means of displaying her sexuality. In the secular community it is recognized as an attempt to use sexuality to grab the viewer's attention and sell a particular product; in both of these examples products that were created for and are marketed to women.

Fourth, the publisher writes, "So in both these cases, those that are initially objecting to the cover are not looking at it in context. Instead, the concerns being raised from a few Christian men are from knee-jerk reactions to the imagery which just proves Hayley DiMarco's main point in the book that men are visual creatures."

One, I read the book, cover to cover. Two, I'm not sure why my female friends who wrote the publisher, as well as myself, fit into the category of "a few Christian men." We are women who are raising our concerns. The inclusion of this statement from the publisher shows that they are ignoring the concerns from women and failing to acknowledge that it's not simply men who have a problem with this cover.

In conclusion, it's clear from the publisher's email that they recognize this cover displays immodesty. In admitting that they're using what they term "effective imagery to convey the nature of the problem in one quick visual, or 'aha!' moment," they're admitting that they know the picture portrays sexual immodesty. Let's look at what DiMarco has to say about those who recognize the power of sexual immodesty, yet to choose to use it anyway:

We can't mess around with the spirits and the hearts of those around us. It just isn't holy, and it most certainly isn't safe. Jesus makes it pretty clear that to do so carries a terrible price. He says 'woe' to those who are the stumbling block.Woe! Not a thing to play around with. Before you read this, you had the excuse of ignorance. You don't have to worry about being in deep spiritual trouble, because you didn't know what you were doing, and God judges your heart and motives. But now that you do get it, the rules have changed. Now you are esponsible for how you dress... You can no longer make yourself a stumbling block to the men in your path. If you do, woe to you! (p. 95)

From the content of this book it's clear that the author and the publisher are well aware of the impact sexual immodesty has on men in general. Yet, they justify their cover choice, failing to admit that by using this cover and placing it in Christian bookstores, sending it to male editors for promotion, encouraging male youth pastors to give it to the girls in their churches, they've put a stumbling block in the paths of these men. In this case, the means should not justify the ends.

It's not my intention to see the content of this message not reach teen girls. Instead my motivation in writing this and other commentary on the book is to see it not reach audiences with its current cover. The author and publisher need to be held accountable for going against the very message they claim to promote.

Review of Getting Serious About Getting Married

Author Debbie Maken closes her controversial book, Getting Serious About Getting Married: Rethinking the Gift of Singleness with "If you have read this far, I assume your reaction will either be 'hate it' or 'love it.' No one walks away from my material lukewarm." For the most part this seems to be true. Boundless writer Candice Z. Watters praised the book (albeit not without pointing out a few flaws), while Christianity Today's Camerin Courtney didn't care for Maken's message. However, apparently I'm one of the few and far between who closed Maken's book still standing on the fence between love and hate. I loved portions of it, while at the same time felt that Maken was a bit extreme in the communication of her message. I knew that if I'd read this book as a single, I would've put it down encouraged in some respects, yet frustrated and depressed in others.

Let's start with what I loved. One, the message that marriage is God-ordained and something to be sought after is much needed in a society such as ours, where many seem reluctant to embrace responsibility. Additionally, it's good to remind women that fertility does begin to decrease with age. However, as I read the book I was concerned with what seemed to be an idolization of marriage. Yes, marriage is wonderful. I would much rather be married to my husband than be single. There are no and's, if's, or but's about that. However, I went into marriage knowing that I was marrying a sinner; that marriage would fill some of my needs, but that it wasn't the end all and be all. It didn't guarantee consistent, unwavering happiness. I understand that Maken is exalting marriage to such a high place because that's what her book is selling: marriage. However, I'm concerned that if women read this book without balanced teaching as I had pre-marriage, that they will enter it with unrealistic expectations.

Without a doubt, my favorite part of the book was part 3. In it Maken gives women practical ways to get serious about getting married. She encourages "saying no to the dating game," "enlisting agency," and "inspiring men to biblical manhood."

As someone who courtship worked well for, I eagerly embraced her chapter on saying no to dating. She's not saying that women shouldn't go out on a date with a guy to see if there's potential. Instead, she's pointing to a new way of approaching and defining dating, as something not casual, but as a step toward seeking marriage. The questions Maken equips women with are great. She encourages readers, before the end of a second date, to "ask his intentions and motives," "ask about his history," "be honest" about their desire for marriage, "to set limits," and to "just say no" to future dates if there isn't the potential or desire for marriage on one or both parts. Her point is that after three months the couple should know if the relationship is headed toward marriage. While this may seem too fast for some, it's what happened for me and my husband. We were engaged within four months of starting our courtship, but determined prior to that (at about three months) we wanted to marry one another.

The chapter on enlisting agency, which is a bit of a puzzling term, points to asking those you respect and trust, such as parents, to help you find a suitable mate. Maken argues this point well. A big part of her argument is having accountability, which forces the man to only pursue if serious.

Maken also hits a home run with her chapter on how to encourage biblical male leadership. Had this chapter not been included, it may have left readers frustrated with her earlier discussion of lack of male leadership being the cause of prolonged singleness. Women may have closed the book asking, "Okay, so that's the problem, but you didn't tell me how to help solve it."

Now, here's what I didn't so much care for, in addition to it fostering unrealistic expectations in marriage ...

Maken's main point is that prolonged singleness is wrong. However, I think that women who are still in their 20's, are pursuing marriage, but haven't gotten married yet could find this book depressing when they shouldn't. Not only that, but feel pressure to just go out and get married without also being sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit. When I met my husband, I didn't know at first that we'd end up together. I did take the steps of responding to his interest. I wasn't sitting around waiting for a sign before saying, "Yes, let's explore this." However, I wouldn't have married him if I hadn't felt a clear direction from the Lord that, yes, this was who He wanted me to marry. I think this book is lacking the balance of, "What does God have to say about me marrying this particular person." It's seems to stop at: Find a Christian man. Get married.

Additionally, I'm concerned about the emotional state Maken encourages. She tells readers, "It's okay to feel miserable about not being married." She points to people feeling miserable in the Bible as evidence that it's okay for us to practice this also. While I agree with her statement that we should be free to express our feelings honestly to the Lord, I think that Maken misses finding joy in the journey. It's almost as if she's encouraging generations of single women to not simply be motivated toward to marriage (which is a good thing), but to walk around unhappy, depressed, and miserable while they seek it. I think that Carolyn Mahaney in her book Feminine Appeal offers a more balanced view of emotions. She writes:

As Christians, our lives are to be characterized by joy. C.S. Lewis once said: "It is a Christian duty, as you know, for every to be as happy as he can." We can fulfill this "duty" to be happy by refusing to yield to sinful feelings. Like Hannah, we too can know true joy in the midst of trying circumstances, if we submit our hearts to God's truth."

As noted in this quote, Mahaney uses Hannah as an example of someone who responded to unwanted circumstances -- not being able to conceive when a child was desperately wanted -- with bitterness, anger, and despair. Mahaney says she was corrected for her bitterness by Elkanah. She writes, "Hannah responded to Elkanah's correction. She poured out her soul to the Lord (v. 15). Then Hannah 'went her way and ate, and her face was no longer sad' (v. 18)." Maken, while she does warn against bitterness, writes that we should feel justified in "sometimes feel[ing] sad, angry, and even bitter." She writes, "to act otherwise when we feel these things is to live a lie." She misses that fact that simply because people experience certain emotions in the Bible doesn't mean that there isn't sin behind how they are acting in the midst of less than ideal circumstances. She misses exactly what Mahaney points out -- that "we too can know true joy in the midst of trying circumstances."

In the end, Getting Serious About Getting Married, is worth reading. Maken makes some excellent points. However, readers should take some of what she says with a grain of salt, realizing that she is being extreme (or so, I found her as such) on some items because that's often how writers are taught to sell an argument -- with extremes.

To Dream

Whenever the girls and I spend time with my family, I look forward to catching up on movies I may have missed at the theater. During this trip, I had the opportunity to watch The Greatest Game Ever Played and Dreamer, two films that focus on pursuing a dream in the face of fear, ridicule, and all odds. However, that’s not all the two movies have in common. Both stories also look at reconciliation between fathers and their children.

Since it first opened at theaters last fall, I’ve wanted to see The Greatest Game Ever Played. It’s the story of Francis Ouimet, the son of a common immigrant worker. He is far from a gentlemen’s heir and constantly reminded of this by those above him in the social ladder, as well as by his father. However, his social standing does little to discourage Francis from pursuing his dream: to play golf.

A caddy, Francis is offered the opportunity to play as an amateur in a golf tournament. While he has the encouragement and support of his mother, his father is dead set against Francis wasting his time in the chasing of his dreams. He wants Francis to accept that he is the son of a common worker and not try to fit into the world of gentlemen. At one point father and son strike a bargain. If Francis qualifies in the golf tournament, then and only then can he continue to play golf. If he doesn’t qualify, he must give up his dream forever and accept a common job. Francis’ pursuit of what his mother calls a “God-given gift he’s putting a voice to” creates a rift between father and son that, by the film’s ending, is reconciled.

Dreamer is the story of Cale Crane, her father Ben, and her grandfather, who they call “Pop.” Fired from his job for refusing to let them put an injured racehorse, Sonyador (a.k.a. "Dreamer") down in front of his young daughter, Ben finds himself unemployed and nursing a thoroughbred back to health. His goal of breeding Sonyador and selling the colt ends in disappointment when they learn that Sonyador is infertile. Yet, Cale never loses hope. In Sonyador she still sees a champion, despite the horse's once broken leg. Daily, she tells Sonyador how she sees her, reciting,
You are a great champion. When you ran, the ground shook, the sky opened and mere mortals parted. Part of the way to victory, where you'll meet me in the winner's circle, where I'll put a blanket of flowers on your back.

It isn't long before Sonyador rises to the occasion. As a result of a little girl's refusal to stop believing Pop and Ben are reconciled. And the ties between Ben and Cale are strengthened as never before.

Both films are examples of what filmmaking should be. The Greatest Game Ever Played and Dreamer are about the story. Pure, undefiled story. These movies don’t clutter themselves with profanity, with sex, with violence. They are simple, yet at the same time these stories contain a depth that many times is lacking in films.

At the center of both films is the biblical truth that “for as he thinks in his heart, so is he” (Proverbs 23:7), or as pop psychology would call it, “the self-fulfilling prophecy.” Both Francis and Cale succeed because they have they don’t allow discouragement and ridicule to influence how they view themselves, or in Cale’s case how she views Sonyador. These movies provide a powerful message for us as viewers. In them we are encouraged to pursue the dreams God has placed in our hearts. And as we do, to never take our eyes off of how God sees us.

I'm looking forward to adding both of these movies to our film collection.

Playtime Devotions

This morning I picked up a book called Playtime Devotions: Sharing Bible Moments with Your Baby or Toddler written by Christine Harder Tangvald and illustrated by Tamara Schmitz. I haven't had an opportunity to use it yet with Olivia and Ava, but am excited to have a resource that combines games and songs with teaching little ones about the Lord.
Published by Heritage Builders, a ministry of Focus on the Family, the book contains 30 devotions as well as extra rhymes and games. Each devotion includes:

• Key Thought
• Bible Verse
• Rhyme, Game, or Song
• Prayer to Say

Key Thoughts include "God is Love," "God Listens and Cares," "I Obey Mommy and Daddy," and "Church Is a Happy Place." Familiar games and songs are paired with new words that teach little ones Biblical truths. The only drawback I can see from looking over the book is that it relies too heavily on using patty-cake; it's eight out of the nine games.

The Movie Vault: Mystery, Hitchcock Style

It's the perfect murder. Or so he thinks.

Retired tennis pro, Tony Wendice (Ray Millard) has taken the time to plan every detail of his wife's murder. He's recruited the killer, stashed away the money to pay his hit man, even timed the phone call down to the exact minute. The phone call that will signal his hired hand to carry out the evil deed. Yet, there's just one thing he didn't account for. One thing that will send all of his planning, all of his plotting, all of his scheming spiraling out of control. That one thing being: she fought back. And, as a result, it's the man he's hired, not his wife, that ends up dead.

In my opinion, Dial M for Murder is one of Alfred Hitchcock, the master of mystery's, best. Set entirely in an apartment, this film gets its strength from story. There are no great locations, no daring stunts, and no low flying crop dusters (sorry, there's no Cary Grant either). Based on a play, it's lack of bells and whistles is far from missed. It is brillantly written, wonderfully directed, and is Grace Kelly in all her splendor.

Released in 1954, it is a must see for any mystery lover. Few movies in this genre compare, or can compete, with Dial M for Murder in all its simplicity and complexity rolled into one.

Review of Behold the Lamb of God

In Psalm 79:8-9, the psalmist cries out,

Oh, do not remember former inquities against us!
Let Your tender mercies come speedily to meet us,
For we have been brought very low.
Help us, O God of our salvation, For the glory of Your name;
And deliver us, and provide atonement for our sins,For Your name's sake!

Atonement. Regardless of time, location, and race, men and women have been seeking atonement. Seeking to make right what they have wronged. Whether they realize it or not, seeking to satisfy the wrath of an angry God. In his article From Kali to Christ, Nathan Zacharias describes visiting the Kali temple located in Kolkata, India, "one of the remaining sites to still perform animal sacrifices." It is here that he witnessed an animal sacrifice -- an Indian family's attempt to pacify an angry god. Whether it is a family in modern day Kolkata performing animal sacrifices, a people group in ancient Hawaii providing human offerings to their volcanic goddess, "civilized" members of society trying to make amends with their good deeds, or the Israelites crying out, "Deliver us!", we all have the same thing in common: the need for atonement.

I'm a firm believer that Christmas music shouldn't be reserved strictly for the holiday season. And, this morning in March, I found myself listening to what has become one of my favorite Christmas albums -- Andrew Peterson's 2004 release Behold the Lamb of God.

The project took Peterson, a singer and songwriter reminiscent of Rich Mullins, five years to complete. It was truly a "labor of love." An album that, as he told Christianbook.com, he wanted to approach "from the tradition of the old bards who traveled from town to town telling stories with their music and recording history that way. I thought it would be really neat to make a record that did that, one that was lyrical in its content, and whose songs followed the progression of the Christmas story through the Old and New Testaments. " In doing so, Peterson beautifully captures the need for atonement. The need for, as Psalm 79 addresses, mercy and deliverance. In the song Deliver Us, he sings:

Our sins they are more numerous than all the lambs we slay/These shackles they were made with our own hands/Our toil is our atonement and our freedom yours to give/So Yahweh, break your silence if you can/Deliver us, deliver us/Oh Yahweh, hear our cry/And gather us beneath your wings tonight

While the song Passover Us cries:

So the years went by and the people they whined and they wandered/And only sacrifice atoned for the sins of the land/So you see the priest he placed upon the holy altar/The body of a spotless lamb/And he prayed, "Lord, let your judgment Passover us/Lord, let your love hover near/Don't let your sweet mercy/Passover us/Let this blood cover over us here"

Yet, he doesn't stop there. On the remainder of the album, he goes on to paint a lyrical masterpiece of God's response to the cries of His people: Jesus. The once and forever atonement for our sins.

So sing out with joy/For the brave little boy who was God/And made Himself nothing/Well He gave up His pride/And He came here to die like a man

By far, my favorite song on the album is Labor of Love. Of the track, Peterson told Christianbook.com, "I try not to write songs that have already been written. So, in this case, the song 'Labor of Love' is about Mary, but not the peaceful Mary we see in nativity sets holding Baby Jesus. I have three kids, and I was there when my wife gave birth to each of them. Now, if my wife had given birth in a barn, in the dark, in the middle of the night, there is no way she would have looked as nice as Mary looked in these scenes. Childbirth is violent and painful, and so the first line of this song is 'It was not a silent night/There was blood on the ground.' I think there’s significance in the fact that God chose to come into the world that way –- bathed in blood and pain." Jill Phillips provides the vocal on this song. A song that never ceases to bring me to tears.

God's gift of atonement. A "brave little boy," as Peterson calls Him, sent to sacrifice Himself for the sins of the world. Let us now, not only at Christmas, celebrate "the maker of the moon ... the Author of the faith," Jesus, the baby born to save us all.

All lyrics included on this post written by Andrew Peterson

The Movie Vault: A Classic Chick Flick

Ah, Anabel Sims, a classic chick flick heroine. A character to be admired by women and feared by men. Admired for her go get 'em (or should I say "go get him") spirit and unwavering persistence. And feared for her "go get him" spirit and unwavering persistence. Yes, that's right, when watching Every Girl Should Be Married, the 1948 film starring Cary Grant as Dr. Madison Brown and Betsy Drake as Anabel Sims, most women can't help but giggle in delight at the same story elements that make men shudder. But, it wouldn't be a good chick flick if men really enjoyed the film, now would it?

By today's standards, the most fitting description for Anabel would probably be "stalker." But, not by 1940's standards. No, instead she's merely a very determined woman set on catching the man she knows she's meant to marry. At one point in the film she states, "Do you know something about being a girl? You can just never give up. You have take every single little defeat and twist it around and around until it turns into a great big victory."

But, for those of you who don't buy that and prefer to think of her as a stalker, then at least think of her as a harmless one. After all, it's not like she's sitting outside Dr. Brown's window, watching his every move. Although ... she does manage to find out his shirt size, where he eats dinner each night of the week, what his favorite menu items are there, and just about everything else about him. How's she obtain this information? Why it's simple, through his tailor, the head waiter at his favorite restaurant, his barber, his secretary, and just about everyone else he comes in contact with on a regular basis. Her explanation, "Well I haven't done a single thing that isn't legitimate for a girl." And, she is quite the resourceful woman. Now, who can't admire that?

This movie does contradict the belief that a man should be the one to pursue while the woman the one to respond. Anabel is certainly the pursuer in this film, at one point explaining her actions with, "Well, I know its dreadful. But this is the kind of thing that men force us to do." Dr. Brown, on the other hand, goes from being initially passive and disinterested to down right avoidant. Yet, for every woman that's ever encountered a passive man, this film is welcome therapy.

One of my favorite scenes in the movie is Anabel's visit to Dr. Brown's office. She has already spotted him in her favorite coffee shop and the chase is on. Not knowing that he's a pediatrician, she makes an appointment for herself. Dr. Brown thinks she has a little one at home. Needless to say, the conversation that follows is hilarious line after line of misunderstanding.

Variety magazine's November 10, 1948 issue called the film "one of those rare comic delicacies that are always in good season at the box office," while the New York Times' December 24, 1948 edition described Betsy Drake as "display[ing] a refreshingly natural comic spirit in this fanciful girl-gets-boy lark" while also showing "a surprisingly perseverance in pursuing the dictates of the plot." Every Girl Should Be Married is one of those films I love watching again and again. So much so, that it's set on "keep until I delete" on my TiVo, ready to be enjoyed at a moment's notice.