RSS

Author Archives: Anthony Sacramone

My Prediction for Tonight’s Oscars Is…

…in the inimitable words of Mr. T: pain. Not as in Payne, as in Descendants director Alexander Payne, but as in boredom. As in watching The Artist clean up.

The best film I saw last year was Of Gods and Men. It was released in 2010, but only hit my area early 2011. It won the Golden Succubus or Hecuba or whatever the top Cannes award is, and was France’s official nominee for Best Foreign Language Film of 2010. IT DIDN’T EVEN MAKE THE SHORT LIST OF FINAL NOMINEES LAST YEAR. It’s not eligible, of course, for anything this year. But I thought I’d mention it in case you haven’t seen it yet.

Alas, The Artist, the slightest of slight amusements that should have been a fun short before the real feature started, will win almost everything (expect at least one surprise). And this is because THE ACADEMY IS MADE UP OF CRETINS. Streep will win Best Actress—OK, in this case deservedly so. Either Clooney or Dujardin for Best Actor. Dujardin was charming, as I noted in my review, and while I didn’t see The Descendants, because I really don’t like Payne’s stuff and in any event felt like I had already seen that film, I’m sure Clooney was aces. He’s both a real movie star and a fine actor.

Expect Christopher Plummer to win Best Supporting Actor. I didn’t see Beginners, so I can’t judge whether he is worthy, but for the Academy it’s the right actor in the right part in terms of isn’t it his time? I wouldn’t rule out a counterintuitive pick, like Nick Nolte, who shouldn’t even have been nominated. It was the cliche-ridden recovering-alcoholic-dad-who-now-wants-back-in-the-life-of-his-family performance No. 6B. Or Max Von Sydow, because many of the Academy members think he’s the guy who played Obi Wan Kenobi.

Best Supporting Actress: While I didn’t see The Help, I have heard nothing but good things about the performances from people who did. But the two nominated actresses—Octavia Spencer and Jessica Chastain—may cancel themselves out, which leaves Bérénice Bejo. Did anyone see Albert Nobbs? I was tempted, because I like those period pieces, and Glenn Close hasn’t had a decent film role in ages. But, no. Neither Close nor Janet McTeer are going home with anything this year. You couldn’t pay me to see Bridesmaids.

If Dante Ferretti doesn’t win for Art Direction, I will punch an Academy member in the pancreas. But the guys who did War Horse will probably take it. They may deserve it. I couldn’t bring myself to sit through a seven-hour epic about WWI that revolves around a young soldier’s infatuation with his horsey. I have no doubt there were set pieces of awe-provoking brilliance (this is Spielberg), but I just. didn’t. care. (Actually, the Best Art Direction for 2011 was for a film NO ONE SAW: The Mill and the Cross. (OK, maybe Victor Morton saw it; but he sees films that haven’t even been shot yet.) Stanislaw Porczyk is the real winner of that category. Absolutely stunning work.

Best Cinematography: All are probably deserving, but again, they may decide to give War Horse another nibble of Oscar glory or just go the straight Artist run.

Best Original Screenplay: Don’t rule out Woody Allen for Midnight in Paris. He doesn’t deserve it, as it was a mediocre effort, a rehash of so many old themes and tropes I do not understand why audiences, and critics (of course), went all Lady Ga Ga over this thing. Again, some giggles, the usual sucker-punch jokes aimed at the Right. Adrien Brody as Salvador Dali probably deserved a Best Supporting Actor nod if they were going to press for recognition of this, Allen’s most financially successful effort.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Either the Descendants guys, because they have to give it something, or the Sorkin/Zaillian Moneyball dream team.

Have no strong opinions on Best Costume or Documentary. I usually catch up with the documentaries years after they’ve debuted, usually on Netflix. I’ve seen at least 30 in the last three years via streaming.

Music, makeup, editing, who cares who cares who cares.

Best Mixing categories — what is this, bartending night school?

Best Animated Feature: They all sound so stupid, I hope the lights go out during the presentation and they cut straight to a commercial.

Best Foreign Language Film: The Separation is my bet. It may very well deserve it, and because the Academy has to take a stand on not bombing Iran.

Finally, Best Director: It should be Scorsese, Scorsese, Scorsese, but will probably be Michael Hazanavicius for The Artist, although I wouldn’t rule out a split ticket, with The Artist Best Picture and Alexander Payne or even Scorsese for Best Director.

Best Picture, as noted before: The Artist. It should be Hugo, or even Malick’s Tree of Life for all its excesses. At least it reached for the stars…

 
2 Comments

Posted by on February 26, 2012 in "Entertainment"

 

Movie Theaters I Mourn

Howard Kissel, long-time film critic for such outlets as the New York Daily News, Women’s Wear Daily, and most recently Huffpo, has passed away. I had the pleasure of an entertaining and energetic conversation with him back in the early 80s about the films of John Ford. This was at a double-bill screening at the old Carnegie Hall Cinema of Martin Scorsese’s Mean Streets and that quirky sad near-miss Scarecrow, starring Al Pacino and Gene Hackman. I believe what precipitated the conversation was Kissel’s outrage over some other critic of note comparing Star Wars with a Ford western. Kissel was agog at the analogy.

This got me to thinking about all the old great movie theaters that dotted the Manhattan map years ago. For some, the Golden Age of cinema was the 1940s: think Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, etc., etc. But for film lovers of a certain age, it was most certainly the 1970s–think Patton, The French Connection, The Godfather I&II, The Conversation, Chinatown, Taxi Driver, and all the great comedies from Mel Brooks, Woody Allen, Neil Simon. It was a time when all the old Hays Office strictures were coming undone (the last bit of dirt would be thrown on them with the advent of the NR designation), and the Film Brats — Coppola, Scorsese, Lucas, Spielberg, DePalma — burst onto screens, not to mention the work of Robert Altman, Robert Towne, Bob Rafelson, and Hal Ashby. The great Sidney Lumet did some of his best work in the 70s (Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon, Network — although an argument could be made that the 60s were his best era: Twelve Angry Men, The Pawnbroker, The Hill, The Fugitive Kind). It also gave birth to the Opening Weekend Grosses obsession and the Blockbusters that came packed with ready-made merchandising.

And if you lived in New York City, there were so many great theaters to catch not only small and foreign films but also classics, revivals, marathons: the old Regency Theatre on Broadway that featured great double bills and stained, creaky wood floors; the Thalia uptown (near Columbia U, where I saw Shoot the Piano Player for the first time); the Thalia Soho (Vittorio De Sica’s little gem Miracle in Milan!), the back-projected Theatre 80 (Bergman’s The Seventh Seal and Antonioni’s L’avventura [OY!]); the 8th Street Playhouse (Eraserhead); the Bleecker Street (too many to name) — and of course, the Carnegie Hall Cinema, located in, you guessed it, Carnegie Hall. A grand old place with live organ music on weekends that was played to silents to mimic the original experience.

Add to these such theaters as the Sutton on 57th (Blade Runner); the Baronet/Coronet on Third Ave. (where I took my mother to see 84 Charing Cross Road, a film she fell in love with — in fact, the first picture my wife took on our first trip to London was of me standing on the spot where that bookshop once stood, knowing my mom would get the biggest kick out of it); the Manhattan Twin (never a great theatre, kind of icky with paper-thin walls, but convenient for me because it was on 59th Street, a block away from the bus that took me from Steinway Street in Astoria into Midtown — I saw George C. Scott’s execrable The Savage Is Loose there; I believe Scott actually rented that theater for a good six months or a year just to keep it playing somewhere); the tiny but elegant D.W. Griffith (where I took my sister to see the PG-version of Saturday Night Fever; I drove her crazy because every time we came to a scene that had been cut for objectionable material, I made scissor fingers); the 50th Street Guild, with a popcorn machine right behind the mezzanine seats (the last film I saw there was, I believe, Russia House – or maybe Beauty and the Beast); the New Yorker on the UWS (saw The Seven Percent Solution and Nickelodeon there, both with my dad); the Plaza (Fame, Le Bal, and Dirty Dancing); the Crown Gotham, which was right around the corner from the Sutton and down the block from the Baronet/Coronet and the 55th Street Playhouse, which was a weird space for a theater because it seemed to blend seamlessly into a bank (Penthouse‘s Bob Guccione rented out the Crown Gotham for a time to play his porno with pretensions Caligula, “starring” Peter O’Toole, Malcolm Mcdowell, Helen Mirren, and several of Guccione’s no-doubt mistresses); the 34th Street (where I saw both TItanic and Starship Troopers, though not on the same day — although that would make for a helluva mashup); the 34th Street East, which was a block away, natch, where I was forced to see the hideous First Wives Club and the almost as bad Everybody Says I Love You; the 68th Street Playhouse, which had a great balcony and was a sure bet for short-time foreign films (I saw Glenda Jackson in Stevie there on my 21st birthday don’t ask me why); the Loews Astor Plaza, where I saw Star Wars for the very first time — HUGE single-screen venue; the Beekman, where I stood online for I don’t know how long to see Hannah and Her sisters; the Art Greenwich (John Patrick Shanley’s Five Corners); and the Symphony, where I saw the glorious Wings of Desire sitting one row behind Dustin Hoffman.

Every last one of these theaters is gone, replaced by ludicrously expensive luxury apartment towers or high-end retailers.* And these are just theaters I frequented regularly; I’m sure there are more I’m leaving out — like one on 72nd Street, where I saw a screening of Big Trouble in Little China, also with my dad — and screens on Broadway and the upper Upper West Side, like the Olympia and the Edison. And don’t get me started about Queens! In fact, my first brush with death relates to a movie theater in Queens. It was on Friday, June 14, 1974. I had just graduated from elementary school and had a little money in my pocket and I was on my way to see The Lords of Flatbush at the great operatic Triboro Theater on Steinway Street — when what did I see in pathetic plastic on the gargantuan marquee? “Closed.” I will never forget that moment for the rest of my life. CLOSED? That massive edifice with chandeliers the size of Jupiter’s moons? CLOSED? That magnificent balcony you could hide in for days? CLOSED? Who could possibly have the authority to close such a place? Was this Nixon’s doing? It had been a fixture in Astoria since the 1930s! Surely it was a landmark! a tourist attraction! a monument to man’s creative capacities and gift for wonder! Surely it would outlive us all! http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/1542

Which is what made leaving New York so much easier.

The possible exception may be Theatre 80, which I know had closed for a time. I’m not sure if this is the same theater reopened or a different theater that took over the name: http://www.theatre80.net/home

 
4 Comments

Posted by on February 25, 2012 in R.I.P.

 

10 Questions for the Republican Presidential Candidates

1. How many of you don’t like to pop bubble wrap?

2. If you were a tree, which former Golden Girls star would you like to chop you down?

3. How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck was dead set against a nice linoleum from Lowes?

4. If President Obama were in the room tonight and you could ask him only one question, how many of you would ask him how much he weighs?

5. Are you glad Michele Bachmann is no longer in the race because it narrows the field or because you were losing focus when fantasizing about her lady parts? (Mr. Gingrich, you first.)

6. If you ever said hi to a black person, would he or she say hi back? (Mr. Paul, you first.)

7. If the 22 members of the Arab League simultaneously attacked Israel on Yom Kippur, with the aid of Russia and Turkey, and Israel defeated them all soundly, occupying territories that were home to military bases, how many of you would complain to the UN about the ZIonist plot to slow worldwide broadband speeds? (Mr. Paul, you first.)

8. If you had a choice between bombing Iran, bombing Syria, and eating oreo cream pie off the belly of a Sports Illustrated swimsuit model Mr. Gingrich you first.

9. If Satan were in the room tonight and you could ask him one question, how many of you would ask him why he doesn’t get his pitchforks made in China, where unit prices would be cheaper? (Mr. Romney, you first.)

10. If you were to lose the nomination, who here would immediately set fire to a hobo?

10A. Who here thinks if he wins the nomination, he goes straight to heaven to genuflect before 72 virgins? (Mr. Santorum but you saw that coming.)

 

A Strange Review: The Artist

Great jumping dust bunnies! The way critics have fawned over this film, you’d think it had been a collaboration between Charlie Chaplin and F.W. Murnau only recently discovered in a vault somewhere, lovingly restored by Martin Scorsese and paired with an animated short courtesy of Pixar.

What a mildly amusing trifle—emphasis on mildly and trifle. A black-and-white* silent film that is an homage to silent films, with a retro aspect ratio to boot. Got it. A silent movie star (Jean Dujardin) in 1929 Hollywoodland finds his career in tatters with the advent of sound. A young former costar (Berenice Bejo) with whom he had enjoyed a serious flirtation goes with the technological flow and becomes a bigger-than-life screen goddess with her first talkie. Think seriously dumbed-down versions of A Star Is Born meets Singin’ in the Rain meets Sunset Boulevard meets about a half hour too long. (Seriously: This film would have been much more impressive if it had taken half the time to tell the same story.)

Never before have I seen a film so desperately in need of some comic relief—even though most of this melodrama is intended to be comical. How this overlong exercise in nostalgia could have used a Harpo Marx skitting across the frame, stealing a scene or two. There’s a giggle here and there, mostly because of a preternaturally charismatic doggie, but otherwise there’s neither wit nor originality to either the story or its illustration. Director Michel Hazanavicius composes his shots with all the visual elan of a series of court sketches. Yes, there’s the odd canted angle and playing with camera height in a couple of scenes, but otherwise his compositions make Jim Jarmusch look like Sergei Eisenstein.

The only saving graces are the performances by its two stars. Dujardin brings a Latin panache to his disaffected leading man, a second-rate Valentino kicking against the goads, who fears sound like some fear death (for a reason that becomes all too obvious in the film’s one genuinely charming moment, really a punchline). Bejo is a delight — light on her feet, with a winsome smile and airy appeal. Imagine a magical mix of Lena Horne, Irene Cara, Myrna Loy, and Thandie Newton. And yes, there’s Uggi, the almost-human pup. Normally, I resist cute pets in films like Hal 2000 resisted opening the pod-bay doors. But the dog comes close to achieving the kind of comic scene-stealing this film craved.

If the Academy is in a sentimental mood regarding Old Cinema, please please let them reward Hugo. As for you, my dear readers, if you want a taste of real silent genius, yes, there’s Eisenstein. And Sherlock Jr. And King Vidor’s The Crowd. If you want a really entertaining modern take on the silent film with a Latin twist, try Ettore Scola’s Le Bal. And there’s always Mel Brooks’ Silent Movie, with its manic energy and emphatic “No!” uttered by none other than Marcel Marceau.

As for The Artist, I wouldn’t go so far as to say, “Just say no.” It’s not a bad film by any means. At it’s best, it’s a one-off oddity, a distraction from the MI:4s. At it’s worst, it’s look-at-your-watch time. I certainly can’t imagine sitting through it again. I’m rather surprised I sat through it once.

*Actually, this is a study in gray. It’s impossible to reproduce the same texture of black-and-white films of, say, the noir era. Film stock and processing are simply not the same.

 
4 Comments

Posted by on February 4, 2012 in A Strange Review

 

He Would Have Been 80 Today

He was born in a province of southern Italy that gets so much snow, one of its biggest winter tourist attractions is its ski resorts.

His most profound childhood memories were of a German soldier waving a bayonet in his mother’s face, dead Allied soldiers, severe hunger, and children from his town losing limbs to scattered grenades.

When old enough he tried to emigrate to Australia, but a grudge against his family led someone to report, falsely, to the Australian authorities that he was a member of the Communist Party, and his visa was denied.

He turned to America, and booked steerage on an ocean liner, but at the last minute, fearing more sabotage, he canceled his ticket and took a plane, though he hated to fly.

Although he had wanted to be a lawyer, the war and the Italian government’s dilatory response to rebuilding the worst war-torn parts of the South left him with a fifth-grade education. After work in construction, he taught himself the intricacies of locksmithing such that we was called to repair the night depositories, safe-depository boxes, and time locks in banks throughout New York State.

One of his more memorable jobs was servicing the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in Downtown Manhattan. He traveled what seemed like a mile underground to a vault whose door was so thick it was impossible to move manually. He disassembled and repaired the time lock so it would once again open and close on schedule and automatically.

He left the Catholicism of his early years for the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod so he could receive the sacraments with his family. Read the rest of this entry »

 
20 Comments

Posted by on February 3, 2012 in R.I.P.

 

Razing the Temple of Atheism before It’s Built

Atheist Alain de Botton wants to build a Temple of Atheism in London:

The philosopher and writer Alain de Botton is proposing to build a 46-metre (151ft) tower to celebrate a “new atheism” as an antidote to what he describes as Professor Richard Dawkins’s “aggressive” and “destructive” approach to non-belief.

Rather than attack religion, De Botton said he wants to borrow the idea of awe-inspiring buildings that give people a better sense of perspective on life.

“Normally a temple is to Jesus, Mary or Buddha, but you can build a temple to anything that’s positive and good,” he said. “That could mean a temple to love, friendship, calm or perspective. Because of Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens atheism has become known as a destructive force. But there are lots of people who don’t believe but aren’t aggressive towards religions.”

But the aforementioned meanie Richard Dawkins is playing spoilsport:

“Atheists don’t need temples,” the author of The God Delusion said. “I think there are better things to spend this kind of money on. If you are going to spend money on atheism you could improve secular education and build non-religious schools which teach rational, sceptical critical thinking.”

Oh, poo. I say it should be built. Think of all the fun stuff that would be constituent elements of such an unholy space: the Altar of Eugenics, the Statue of the Goddess Reason, instructions on how to celebrate the Feast of Brutus, organized pilgrimages to The 104th, the Enver Hoxha Library of Burned Books, and Mao Zedong “Great Leap Forward” sack races for the kids!

It would be made entirely of smoked glass, with no foundation or floor plan. Negotiating the space would be an act of sheer will and chance, and only the smartest and strongest will make it through the entire structure, although even they will be left with a nagging feeling that it was all ultimately futile and for no good purpose.

A waste of money? I think not. Before something can be wasted, it must have some endogenous purpose, no?

 

Do You Have a Religion?

Sociologist Peter Berger (A Rumor of Angels, The Heretical Imperative) provided this insight in a 2006 lecture on “Lutheran Identity in America”:

This spirit [of Lutheran freedom] should above all give one a certain distance from one’s cultural context and thus protection against becoming captive to it. But in the current American situation, it seems to me that the two central ideas of Lutheranism could provide guidance . . . both for a critique of the current situation and for a constructive stance.

1. A conviction that salvation occurs sola fide and the much-maligned doctrine of the Two Kingdoms, which of course rests on the distinction of law and gospel. Those are two core Lutheran ideas, and I think they are tremendously important if there is to be a Lutheran identity and Lutheran witness in this socio-cultural context, and political context. Now in this perspective, I think, all . . . sectors of the current cultural and religious scene can be subsumed under the category of works righteousness, as a violation of the anthropological understanding that the Christian as simul justus et peccator. How so?

Well . . . against the tepid moralism and the utilitarian psychologism of mainline Protestantism, the Lutheran witness would  reiterate the core of the gospel, which is not a new law, however tolerant or relaxed, but the triumphant breaking in of redemption into the world. The gospel does not provide a new moral code or a therapeutic spirituality. . . .

[I]n Arabic, the same word din (deen) applies both to religion and to law . . . so if an Arab asks you, “What is your religion?” in fact he is asking, “What is your law?” And I think the Christian answer is, “I don’t have a law.” This is not what the gospel is. The gospel does not provide a new law or a therapeutic spirituality of some sort. Rather it testifies to a cosmic transformation inaugurated by the Resurrection of Christ and moving toward its ultimate realization in his coming again. . . . Of course, this does not imply an antinomianism in which everything is permitted. Let me refer here to another Lutheran idea, that of the Three Uses of the Law. But it sharply relativizes the moral codes of any society or any age.

Berger self-identifies as a Lutheran, but also as a theological liberal (and politically mildly conservative), so you may not be able to embrace his entire argument. (I dare say, the use of historical criticism in studying the Scriptures may have been an act of intellectual or academic freedom (certainly Luther would have found it strange to attach his name to it); but it also brought with it certain presuppositions that did as much harm as good in understanding how the Scriptures were intended to be read by their human authors, to the extent such an investigation could prove fruitful or even possible. It is one thing to say that the gospel writers were rooted in a certain cultural context; it’s quite another to reduce them to it.)

Found on the Gnesio Lectures & Sermons page.

 

Rest in Pizza, Juan Epstein

OK, Welcome Back, Kotter wasn’t Yes, Minister. It wasn’t even The Odd Couple. But damn the cast looked like they were having fun — and they each carved out a goofy persona that, when thrown into the volatile mix of high school hijinx, unrequited love, and a frustrated comic of a homeroom teacher, delivered some explosive laughs.

Robert Hegyes, who played the Puerto Rican Jew Juan Epstein (and who was himself of Hungarian-Italian extract), was both Chico and Harpo to Gabe Kaplan’s Groucho. Overshadowed by John Travolta, who would go on to stupid-super-stardom, and even Ron Palillo, who looked like he was game for a small career as the perennial whiny next-door neighbor, a poorer man’s Rob Schneider, Hegyes never quite gained the career traction his talent warranted.

I was sorry to hear that he died today at age 60.

My high school friends and I used to repeat their routines in class, including turning our desks around 180 degrees when our math teacher came into the room. That may not sound like much to brag about in the way of rebellion, but this was a small, strict Lutheran parochial school, and so it was tantamount to Italianate chaos destroying the machine-like efficiency of a Teutonic institution of lower learning.

Vinnie (“What?”) Barbarino, Juan, Freddie “Boom Boom” (“Hi, there”) Washington, and Arnold (“Ooh! Ooh!”) Horshack would be labeled “special needs” today, with a touch of Asperger’s and a side of Prozac, but they were just adolescent mentalities trapped in post-adolescent bodies.

So, in honor of the late great Juan Epstein, here are a few moments from the show that taught us all to say: “Up your nose with a rubber hose.” (And oh yeah: Remind me to tell you the story of how I got roped into keeping a somewhat “tipsy” Ron Palillo from feeling up the guests at a “Where Are They Now?” party thrown by Biography Magazine back in 1998. I also got my picture taken with Mary Ann from Gilligan’s Island — our arms around each other. Yeah, you heard me. This was before I met my wife, so it was OK. So take that you Ginger lovers…)

 
4 Comments

Posted by on January 26, 2012 in R.I.P.

 

I Hate Religion Too

So this kid, Jefferson Bethke, aged 22, now has his 15 minutes of fame. I think less for his video in which he raps his contempt for religion but love of Christ, and more for the negative criticism it has engendered. LCMS Pastor Jonathan Fisk rapped his own response, and the blogs have weighed in, Catholic and Protestant, with an irenic back-and-forth between Bethke and Kevin DeYoung rounding out the rodeo.

So here’s my take on this whole I hate religion/love Jesus thing: the kid’s basically right, and everyone should stop getting their Roman collars and Geneva bands in a twist about it.

It shouldn’t come as any great surprise that a young evangelical hates religion but loves Jesus. Anyone who has spent any time in the evangelical world, which I did for many years, knows the familiar trope: Religion kills. Not in the Inquisition/Crusades/Thirty Years War kinda way (although that too). It kills the spirit. It’s the stuff of rite and ritual, litany and lethargy, pious sighs and disappointment.

Evangelical churches are filled with people who got fed up with religion, especially the religion of their youth. They wanted something more. They wanted a personal relationship with God. They wanted union with God. They wanted something that meant more that going through the diocesan or synodically approved motions. They no longer wanted the church, which had become falsely equated with religion, as their mediator — they wanted Christ. And Christ is a person, not a religion. Read the rest of this entry »

 

Strange Quote of the Day: Oswald Chambers

You shall not go out with haste, . . . for the Lord will go before you, and the God of Israel will be your rear guard —Isaiah 52:12

Security from Yesterday. “. . . God requires an account of what is past” (Ecclesiastes 3:15). At the end of the year we turn with eagerness to all that God has for the future, and yet anxiety is apt to arise when we remember our yesterdays. Our present enjoyment of God’s grace tends to be lessened by the memory of yesterday’s sins and blunders. But God is the God of our yesterdays, and He allows the memory of them to turn the past into a ministry of spiritual growth for our future. God reminds us of the past to protect us from a very shallow security in the present.

Security for Tomorrow. “. . . the Lord will go before you . . . .” This is a gracious revelation— that God will send His forces out where we have failed to do so. He will keep watch so that we will not be tripped up again by the same failures, as would undoubtedly happen if He were not our “rear guard.” And God’s hand reaches back to the past, settling all the claims against our conscience.

Security for Today. “You shall not go out with haste . . . .” As we go forth into the coming year, let it not be in the haste of impetuous, forgetful delight, nor with the quickness of impulsive thoughtlessness. But let us go out with the patient power of knowing that the God of Israel will go before us. Our yesterdays hold broken and irreversible things for us. It is true that we have lost opportunities that will never return, but God can transform this destructive anxiety into a constructive thoughtfulness for the future. Let the past rest, but let it rest in the sweet embrace of Christ.

Leave the broken, irreversible past in His hands, and step out into the invincible future with Him.

From all of us at Strange Herring, to all of you wherever you are, as the new year dawns, please remember: it could always be worse, and frequently is.

I thank you.

 
5 Comments

Posted by on December 31, 2011 in Strange Quote of the Day

 
 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 144 other followers