Even though I’ve long since left it behind (get it? get it?) I remain utterly fascinated with Christian Evangelical “culture”. I am happy to submit to psychological analysis as to why that is; perhaps it’s simply that I spent the first third of my life in what was then a subculture floating beneath the mainstream, and this allows me to reconnect in some way. I have a framed original 70s Rapture poster, a Scofield Bible (with Christian Dispensationalist time charts), and any number of Chick tracts. One of the most fascinating developments has been to see how much of this stuff has been mainstreamed into the wider popular culture. Now everyone has at least heard of “End Times” mythology.
The advent of so-called “New Atheism” in the 2000s energized Evangelicals in the media. (I hope Christian social media apologists properly appreciate their debt to NA.) When I was a kid in the church Christian films were amateurish efforts, sub-Hallmark specials at best. (Many of them were simply filmed sermons.) The Billy Graham organization, media savvy or so they thought, cranked out tons of grot. But no more. At some point evangelical movie producers realized that to engage the wider popular culture they had to have sophisticated production values.
The God’s Not Dead movie franchise is now in its fifth iteration. The original movie, released in 2014, did boffo biz at the box office, and suddenly Hollywood noticed that there was a new market that they had largely ignored. If you haven’t seen any of these movies they have as their protagonist “Pastor Dave”, who struggles for his faith against the darkening secular culture, determined to undermine simple godly faith and destroy the moral values of our great nation. The movies trace his progress from local minister to national spokesman for the faith through his interactions with various figures he encounters along the line, both sacred and secular.
The latest movie finds pastor Dave running for congress against an evil atheist incumbent bent on tearing down the moral fiber of the nation while expanding the godless government’s power over our lives. (The election is taking place in Arkansas by the way. Think about the idea of a successful incumbent atheist congressman from Arkansas for a minute.) There is a secondary plot about the spiritual struggles of PD’s campaign manager which allows him to dispense biblical type advice – and quote the Bible.
I definitely encourage everyone to watch these moves if only because they present what a substantial portion of our population thinks about themselves and the status of our nation. They are better acted and better written (mostly) than you probably expect, and as I said they demonstrate the production values demanded by our media drenched society.
But what fascinates me most of all about these movies are the unspoken assumptions behind the narratives.
1. Christians are a persecuted minority opposed by a secular culture determined to destroy them. Now this idea of “persecution” goes all the way back to the New Testament. Believers were taught to expect opposition and indeed, opposition was itself considered a validation of the faith. If you disagree with me I must be right! Now there are places in the world where Christians are persecuted, imprisoned, even killed for their beliefs. But not here in the good ole USA where, even in the age of the “Nones”, the number of people who self-identify as believers still goes over 60%. North Korea we ain’t.
2. The line between politics and religion, foundational to our Constitution, is totally porous. It is expected that Christianity should dominate our culture, both culturally and politically. To say otherwise is to oppose the liberty and freedom of our nation. Once again this is no new plaint. When the Constitution was originally composed and published it drew much opposition from the clergy of the day precisely because of its “godlessness”. It is useful to point out that the only time religion is mentioned in the Constitution is the prohibition on religious tests for office.
So what conclusions can we draw from the success of these movies?
A substantial portion of our populace is convinced it is under siege. They believe that something fundamental is being taken away from them. In order for someone else to win they have to lose. These folks conceptualize it as “persecution” because that is the only way they have been taught to view it. Of course what is really happening is that they are not losing their freedom, which has never been an issue, but their privilege. They are used to being ushered to the front of the line. Now more and more they are being required to wait their turn. In the so-called “marketplace” of ideas (ugh) they are being challenged, required to assume a burden of justification. And dangerously, their fears are being pandered to and exploited by people willing to use the faith as a tool of manipulation.
Evangelicals are masters at classical psychological projection. They project their own desires and fears onto others while being totally unself-aware. In the movie the incumbent congressman is accused of being motivated by a desire for power but Pastor Dave has no clue that he could be accused of the same motivation. In the real world the churches are emptying in droves but the church looks for a solution everywhere but in the mirror. Self-analysis is strictly forbidden. No, it’s got to be dark, powerful outside forces. So the church doubles down and drives people away even faster.
I could go on and on (and probably will) but here are my questions.
Can the church survive not persecution, but indifference? Can the church be content to live and let live?
If your sense of self-worth is so tied up in your faith, and your faith is so out of step with the larger culture, can you let it go without a fight? Of course most believers aren’t assembling in paramilitary compounds, field-stripping AKs, but there is a well-financed hardcore out there, armed to the teeth.
Even if Trump loses these folks are not going away just as they didn’t just appear when he won the first time. A substantial portion of our population is convinced our democracy is corrupted and that they are under attack. Can it possibly end well?
The church needs to survive Bart Ehrman and other scholars.
A number of scholars have left Christianity.
I’m taking a “sabbatical” from the book of Genesis to double check origins of various creations.
I am investigating how Jesus relates to the Elohim, a plural notion of theology that is connected to the gods of Sumer.
Everyone mature in the Abrahamic faiths have to cover these basics.
I’m not a child when it comes to studying Jesus.
The biblical Jesus is a composite character of historical fiction.
The church cannot survive deep dives of investigation.
@Steefen
Democracy has the issue of whether or not people are fundamentally good or fundamentally evil.
If people are fundamentally evil why should they be allowed to vote and have democracy? If democracy is corrupted it’s because people are fundamentally evil.
I’m sure you’re aware of the Genesis Flood account supporting the statement that people are fundamentally evil. Genesis 6:5 & 8:21.
However, Pope Francis has now stated that he believes people are fundamentally good. This defends democracy.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Stephen, excellent post.
Yes, back in the day, no one really knew much about us, whereas today, it’s impossible not to.
A Rapture Poster! I, too, thought I’d be whisked away and hoped upon hope I would be ** you do not have permission to see this link **.
It really troubles me when American Christians claim persecution as it minimizes the actual persecution that is going on elsewhere. It seems there is this need to feel persecuted.
This siege mentality is such a disturbing fact as is the easy availability of weapons and what weapons at that. Those armed to the teeth, which fortunately are the vast minority, are obviously never going to live and let live.
As for Evangelicals as a whole, minding their own business has never seemed to be one of their virtues.
Steefen & Colin, friends, you seem to have been so caught up in your conversation that you stumbled through the door into the wrong thread. I have no moderating power here but my intention was to provide a forum to discuss the attitudes and responses of evangelicals to our changing culture, a culture seemingly less and less amenable to their point of view. And to do that through their own cultural expressions which can be very revealing. So if you want to talk about the film specifically or the larger issues it presents, then I will be the first to welcome you. I am especially interested in the comments of others like myself who grew up in the evangelical environment. I think you will admit that there already exist other threads for the issues you are fretting over.
—
One sad part of this whole thing is that there is an important subject here that needs exploring. How does the believer navigate these fraught waters? What does “spirituality” even mean now? of course what this requires is openness and questioning and good faith. Not sermons or propaganda. We must start from the position of admitting we don’t have all the answers. It must be an exploration, an ongoing journey. We must be willing to endure critique. More importantly we must submit to self-critique. Only we know what matters most to us. What we can accept. Of what we are most afraid.
I will restrict my comments here to film. Secular Hollywood is clueless. We can find the familiar trope of the religious hypocrite. And the struggle for social justice. Of course there are any number of earnest Biblical epics. But the entire subject of how the religious person should live out their lives in the modern world is simply beyond their comprehension. On the other side the films from religious groups tend to be like God’s Not Dead, full of certainty and conviction. We have all the answers already. If you do what we say everything will be perfect. Never noticing that this confidence leaves so many behind. The spirit of our age is lack of confidence!
I will tip my cap, slightly, to the producers of the GsND series. The third movie, A Light in Darkness (2018) did make a modest attempt to look at deeper issues. A local religious school is closing and is being turned into a secular school. Pastor Dave decides to fight. He consults his atheist (!) lawyer brother and reconnects after many years of estrangement. For a second there in the movie they discuss the problems of growing up in a heavily religious household. In the end Pastor Dave, who is winning the fight, decides that the effort has been so divisive in the community that it is doing more harm than good and gives up the attempt. Inevitably, perhaps expectedly, this iteration of the series was the only one that tanked at the box office.
Ever since, it’s been gangbusters all the way. Pastor Dave vs the godless, secular corrupt world system that can only be saved by voting for Jesus (who of course never puts in a personal appearance; we’re left to deal with his self-appointed ministers). The audience for these movies wants assurance, reinforcement.
Except for cranks like me. (Alas, most atheist responses are predictably mocking.)
The movies and pseudo history is of course becoming slicker because billions are being poured into making that happen.
Using faith to create a paranoid “End Times” world view is the essence of Christo Fascist porpoganda.
But Americans who are not obsessed with Premilleniest dogma are growing tired of this business.
The latest polling by PRRI continues to show Evangelical membership on the decline.
I suppose people are waking up.
This obsession of making the United States some kind of Theocratic Authoritarian nation is not only weird, it is tired. The nation is ready to move on.
MojoMan I think you’re conflating what are in fact two different attitudes. The Christian Nationalists believe that the US can be remade into a Christian theocracy through political action. The “End Times” folks tend to assume things have gone too far and are past saving. There is some overlap doubtless but it is a different approach.
Most evangelicals are not fascists in any definable sense. They simply want their religion privileged in society. Most of them seem content to accomplish this through the electoral process. There is always a hardcore of course but social media makes them seem much more fearsome than they actually are. The real damage to be done will be caused by cynical manipulators pandering to the fears and worries of the evangelical community. Making promises and offering assurances they have no intention of keeping.
You are correct that our society is undergoing a profound shift in viewpoint. This sparks the fear evangelicals have of being marginalized. The telling demographic is that disinterest in organized religion increases the younger the polling sample. Christianity will be a major player in our national discourse for decades but it is rapidly ceasing to be able to run roughshod over everyone else. And this is precisely my question. Can Christianity compete in a social environment where it is no longer privileged in some way?
My observation is that among conservative evangelicals there is actually very little private spirituality. It expresses itself primarily socially. So to be told to “mind your own business” and “tend your own garden” is frankly, confusing to them.
I’ve always advised my Christian friends to welcome this social marginalization. Why? When there is no social advantage to expressing belief then those who associate with evangelicalism for some reason other than genuine conviction will begin to fall away. I’m not sure they appreciate the analogy but have you ever seen a dog after it has been treated for ticks and lice? How much healthier it is? How much more vigorous compared to before? And how revealing it is to notice those “influencers” who are the most discombobulated by this loss of social privilege!
So…are there movies that deal with issues of spirituality in what I would regard as good faith (pardon the pun)? A few. Here are examples I’ve encountered. Happily all but one are on the YouTube. I will refrain from comments for a time in concern for spoilers. They all deal with various collisions between the life of faith and the real world. None are perfect but all succeed on some level. Doubtless the producers of God’s Not Dead and their audience would hate them all.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
As you will notice, Blue Like Jazz is the only one of the three focused on contemporary Evangelicalism. Admittedly the sample size is small but Catholics seem open to a level of questioning not normally tolerated in conservative Protestantism. To me the essence of art is to ask a question not provide a ready made answer. Any work that wants to do all the heavy lifting for me is simply propaganda.
I will wait for a time and then at least describe what it is about these movies that I find compelling. Enjoy!
I just watched The Catholics. I think I’d seen it as a kid, but only because I remembered a shot or two–it still felt new.
It was engrossing. The portrayal of the positions of the characters I found quite true to life; I’m not used to Hollywood getting Catholic inside baseball right; I’m more used to gross caricatures.
But I was baffled by the abbot. Without giving any spoilers, I couldn’t make sense of what motivated various important choices he made over the course of the movie (basically I couldn’t make sense of any of his important decisions). Once the moratorium on discussing details is lifted, I’d love someone to help me make sense of him. (Maybe, rather than waiting, we could just have a second thread about that movie in particular, with a spoiler alert at the top, where we can discuss and analyze.)
I’m also not sure why they set it after a hypothetical Vat. IV. That just confused me. There were only a few things that that setting changed, and they seem entirely incidental to me. The whole thing could just as well have been set in the actual 70’s, and putting it in some hypothetical future just required a greater suspension of disbelief. Maybe it hit differently closer to the time it was actually made. At any rate, I suppose that is a fairly minor artistic critique.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)