Listen to the Boys State episode
Kenny and Mike discuss the film and faith elements spotted in the documentary film Boys State. Directed by Amanda McBaine and Jesse Moss, Boys State documents the 2018 Texas Boys State gathering. Boys State is a national program dedicated to building in high school age teens greater understanding and participation in civics as well as developing leadership skills in community and state governance.
Dating back to the 1930s, Boys State and Girls State is sponsored by the American Legion with AL Auxiliaries in each state sponsoring and supporting boys and girls who attend their respective programs. Each state organizes and conducts their Boys and Girls State gatherings.
In planning the film, directors McBaine and Moss identified 4 of the 1150 that would be the primary subjects of the film. The film details as the boys go about the work of running for leadership positions in the political party they were randomly assigned. The for primary cast members are Ben Feinstein, Steven Garza, Robert MacDougall, and Rene Otero.
While the primary focus of Boys and Girls state is to elect statewide office holders, the program in Texas also elects members to the Boys/Girls State state legislature where legislation is presented and voted on. Each party also develops a platform which is a part of the election process.
Kenny’s reaction to a pre-screening event for the film:
Watching Boys State is a Dickensian experience as we see the best of our society and the worst of our politic. The best is watching 1100+ teenage boys spend a week taking serious the complex job of governance and reflecting on issues that impact society. The worst is the witnessing the imitation of the most inferior practices of Adult State. The hope is the rising generation will retain the former, refine the latter and lead the nation in a resumption of its foundational march toward a more perfect union.
Faith elements spotted and discussed include the appropriate and inappropriate ways persons of faith are called to deal with differences and disagreements. Such ways of keeping community in the midst of differences are an act of love Christ calls all persons to offer all others.
I Corinthians 13 is lifted up as an example and expectations for how individuals and communities are to behave. As with most of Paul’s letters to churches he founded, he offers corrections to some of their actions and drifting from the expectations Jesus and he has that they reflect the Kingdom of God in their beliefs, actions, and treatment/love for one another.
Other elements from I Corinthians include chapter 3, tribal divisions in the church (followers of Paul and Apollos.) Chapter 10:23-33 Do all for the Glory of God vs personal glory, satisfaction, and elevation. Just because something is lawful does not make it beneficial. Persons of faith are to aim for a higher standard.
Other example from Scripture for how communities and and persons of faith are to live and treat others include;
Romans 12: the Marks of a New Creation, blessing those who persecute and not repaying evil for evil.
II Corinthians 5: Ministry of reconciliation and serving as ambassadors of Christ.
II Corinthians 6:1-8 Do not accept the Grace of God in vain, by living contrary to the Way of Christ. Now is the acceptable time and day of salvation to serve Christ fully and not put up obstacles to others.
Ephesians 4: Unity in the Body of Christ. v25 speak truth to neighbors and fellow members of the Body, speak truth to one another, settle differences and anger.
Philippians: Chapter 2,4: Imitating the humility of Christ, and putting aside differences and be of the same mind in Christ and focus on what is true and good in Christ.
Another topic is maintaining an awareness that as younger members of society and communities watch, listen, and replicate the behavior of adult leaders, so persons of faith are observed by persons within and beyond the faith and seen as representative of their faith community but also of God and Christ. II Corinthians 5 above. To misrepresent God, the Gospel or the person of Christ is to put a stumbling block before others. (Matthew 18:6-7, Mark 9:42, Romans 14:13-23)
Lastly as one the subjects indicated after he saw the film, that he regretted some of his actions. While we do not have the luxury of seeing a film of our actions, or others seeing it, we know that God sees everything we do, and when we act in ways unbecoming a disciple we hurt the one we say we love and worship.
powerful stories of how the lives of the men were transformed through their presence and active role in parenting their children. Another source of the film’s richness is the diversity of fathers and families. In addition to the mix of celebrities and fathers who are not famous, there is diversity in economic and marriage statuses, nationality and cultural background, sexual orientation, and the health of the children. Through this diversity the core message of the film is presented; engaged and present fathers are needed and possible in all circumstances and lifestyles. The drive behind this message is not to just to bring out the importance of being a present dad for the children, something everyone is likely aware of, but it is to present the importance and transformative opportunity fatherhood provides the men. Being an active and present Dad is an important thread that adds much to the fabric of a man’s life.
are present and men can be present fathers even when they are absent. The connection established by being present in the life of one’s children can span the times when the father is away. Consciously or not fathers too often use the demands of work as justification for their absence from the lives of their children. In one of his reflections, Bryce’s father, Ron Howard, astutely cautioned fathers to make sure they were not using the demands of work to escape from being present in the lives of their children. Ron’s father, Rance, in a segment taped 3 years prior to the others, described how his suggestion to Andy Griffith regarding the portrayal of Opie (Ron Howard) changed the tone of the relationship between Andy and Opie Taylor and reflected a widower father ensuring his being present in the life of his son.
In our conversation, I asked Bryce why the film was titled “Dads” rather than “Fathers.” Ms. Howard said the original title referred to fathers, but her husband suggested Dads was a term that better communicated the familiarity of men being active and present in the lives of their children. Communicating this familiar, more intimate relationship and understanding of fatherhood is evident in Christian Scripture and theology.
father’s heart. The forgiving father was not one who stood on convention and formality but was one who was present with and for his family. This is the model of fatherhood as described by Jesus and is the model presented in “Dads.”
successful businessman who had connections with the Los Angeles and California business establishment. Even with the greater acceptance of successful black businesses, because of their race, Garrett and Morris faced limitations in the size and type of investment opportunities they could pursue and wealth they could build.
The script is fast-moving and, given the importance of the subject, surprisingly full of lighter moments and humor. One of the major twists in the true story is most engaging, and though it could easily have been mishandled in the film, it seems genuine and not forced.
In an interview with the director and co-screenwriter George Nolfi, I asked about the genesis of the story and his involvement. The details of Bernard Garrett’s career and his struggles against the systemic racism of his time were captured in taped interviews prior to his 1999 death. The rights to his life story were then purchased by another studio where the story languished for many years. While Nolfi was directing Anthony Mackie for a scene in The Adjustment Bureau, Mackie pitched The Banker to Nolfi for him to take on the project. As is often the case, other projects intervened and it was another five or six years before things fell together for the film.
In making the film, Nolfi came face to face with the reality that without the opportunity to build wealth, people are unable to truly experience freedom and stability in their finances and life. He became more aware of the impact systemic racism had, and currently still has in society. Nolfi hopes this film will help viewers realize, that although they themselves may not be racist, the echoes and effects of systemic racism in the past and present continue to erect higher hurdles for persons of color. With such understanding, it will be easier to dismantle the surviving elements of systemic racism as well as the lasting impact from its past application. Nolfi also hopes that learning of the injustices these men faced, and their willingness to take them on and set in motion events that resulted in their eradication, others will be challenged and empowered to stand against current injustices and systemic hardships.
The Banker has several touchpoints with Scripture. As Moses was forced to leave his home in order to find peace and security and then after finding it was called to return to Egypt, (Exodus 2-4) Bernard escaped the land where, because of his skin color, intellect, and drive to succeed, he was a target. After Morris raised the risks associated with seeking to return and serve Blacks in his hometown, Bernard, like Moses, resisted the temptation to stay where he was, afraid of losing what he had, and returned home to help his community escape the indentured servitude that had confined them so long.
Queen Elizabeth (Claire Foy) and her mother Elizabeth (Victoria Hamilton) watch a news report of Billy Graham’s first Crusade in London. In his sermon Rev. Graham (Paul Sparks) defines revival as living out the teaching of Christ in one’s daily life through relationships with others. Part of revival includes living out a Gospel of hope in the certainty of God’s love and triumph rather than living a Gospel of despair in the midst of worldly uncertainty. This Gospel of hope extends to the individual, society, and all the world.
After hearing Rev. Graham preach on television, Queen Elizabeth invited him to preach at Windsor Castle. Following the worship service, Queen Elizabeth met privately with Rev. Graham where she expressed the pleasure it was for her to worship as Elizabeth, not as Queen and the head of the Anglican Church. She shared with Graham that it was her desire to be a “simple Christian.” As it turns out the idea of being a simple Christian is complicated. The Queen’s dilemma with her uncle and former King will reveal to her that being simply Christian is anything but simple.
The Duke of Windsor’s (Alex Jennings) request to re-enter English society and service to the Crown and country led to the Queen’s discovery of the depth of Edward’s sympathies with and rumored support for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party against his country and former subjects. With this new revelation, Queen Elizabeth struggled with the Christian command to forgive her Uncle. To assist in her struggle, the Queen asked for a second meeting with Billy Graham.
In this meeting Elizabeth asks about forgiveness; “are there any circumstances do you feel where one can be a good Christian and yet not forgive?” Rev. Graham responds that “Christian teaching is very clear on this. No one is beneath forgiveness. Dying on the cross, Jesus himself asked the Lord to forgive those who killed him.” After a discussion on whether the forgiveness of those who crucified Jesus was conditional given they did not know what they were doing, Graham still maintained that and lack the strength and perfect love of Christ, as recipients of God’s forgiveness, it is required that Christians forgive. Although humans are mortal, Graham says, “We need not be unchristian ones.” Seeing the Queen struggle, Rev Graham offered a solution for her and all people. If there is someone she cannot forgive, she should “ask for forgiveness for herself, humbly, and sincerely, and then pray for the person she cannot forgive.” 
While holding on to anger can lessen the pain, it does not address nor reverse the effects of the harm. As pain relievers simply mask the symptoms of injury and can allow further damage to occur, so holding on to anger can lessen emotional pain in the short term but it damages one’s spirit.
Although Elizabeth may have forgiven Edward, and other members of the family did forgive him, the consequences of his abdication were continued exile from his country and desire to serve. Edward, known to family and friends as David, shared with another King David the reality that though forgiven, he had to live with the consequences of his actions.
