Notes from the Evangelical Wasteland, Installment 1
If you’re a pastor, you’ve likely been recently getting solicitations from an outfit called “Fox Faith”, a division of Fox (who bring you, among other things, FoxNews and FX, which is right up there with MTV as being the vilest outfit on TV). What Fox Faith is doing is producing good, wholesome films, and then trying to market them through churches. Some solicitations come with handbills, posters, and even Bible study booklets that you can use with filmgoers in, I don’t know, small groups, I guess. Well…
Well, first, I am certainly not condemning the making of films that don’t contain gratuitous profanity, mindless violence, or perverted romance. I’m glad someone is making films like this; let me be crystal clear about that. Flicka and Strawberry Shortcake and Christy and The Last Sin Eater and films like this are the kind of fare that are to be applauded, and if it was in my habit to go to a theater and see a first-run film more than once every two years or so (it isn’t, no matter what the film; call me cheap? Yep.), then I’d probably take in some of these. I do not, incidentally, feel a compulsion to “support these films when they come out” (an argument I’ve heard made several times) if by “support” the meaning is “spend a lot more money than you normally would on movie entertainment just so we get more of these types of movies.” Sorry, call me a…curmudgeon…but I just don’t care that much. But I’m a digressing curmudgeon…glad you’re making these films, Fox.
But (and you knew that a “but” was steaming down the tracks, didn’t you) the idea that I, as a pastor, would become an unpaid marketing arm for FoxFaith films? I don’t think so (and the pay isn’t the thing, by the way)! The cynic in me sees Fox execs saying, “hey, let’s tap into the Christian market, so we can make gobs of money off those good Christian folks!” And that same cynic in me seems justified, because it isn’t, for Fox, about cleaning up our entertainment environment (else “Nip/Tuck” and “House” and “Dirt” and Whatever-that-show-that-the-guy-who-used-to-play-the-Commish-is-on would be cancelled in a skinny minute). It’s about the almighty buck, pure and simple.
And there’s a further problem, of course, and it’s this: I’m not called as a pastor to be a promoter of nice, warm, fuzzy entertainment, even if it’s as clean as Strawberry Shortcakes’ little whatever. My calling is to proclaim Jesus Christ and Him crucified. Now, if a film does a good job of helping me to do that more effectively, sure, let’s talk. But to spend one second promoting in my church nice, heartwarming films? Not any more than I’d spend time telling folks to grow closer to God by watching Barney and Andy, or Jed and Elllie Mae, or…you get the picture.
And the irony is, I wonder how many pastors who get these solicitations get all excited and fall for Fox’s ploy…
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
13 Responses to “Notes from the Evangelical Wasteland, Installment 1”
I get the marketing mess as well. I do post a few of the more colorful, scenic flyers in the hall or on a bulletin board. Not gonna mention it from the pulpit however. Not gonna do it.
Mark Merritt ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 12:03 am
Finally a conservative pastor who ‘gets’ it – Christians have no business meddling in culture. And more importantly, Pastors have no business offering any sort of guidance on cultural things. A Pastor needs to stick to strictly spiritual things, things of the world and the culture that people have to live in have should have absolutely no connection to church and the pulpit.
If the people in a church want to wallow in the culture, let them find their own way. We’re not called to be relevant or to interact with the surrounding world; we are called to be separate and odd, set aside for the Lord’s cause.
Thank you for taking a stand against this insiduous trend of getting involved in the garbage around us. It is so rare to see someone willing to take such a stand these days. I salute you for your courage, and I can assure you that you have a new reader.
Tom Wright ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 2:17 am
Something tells me that “Tom Wright” is being facetious. And everyone who reads Byron’s blog knows that he isn’t advocating a disengagement from culture. He’s engaging it right here!
I agree with Byron that we can’t unthinkingly become an marketing tool. Of course, that doesn’t mean that we can’t recommend a film that we found encouraging, edifying, or evangelistic.
I don’t normally do this sort of thing, but I did recommend the Amazing Grace movie from the pulpit. Encouraging people to know and become like Wilberforce seemed like a good thing for a pastor to do.
But I wouldn’t do this!
Matt ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 7:15 am
I’m getting a little concerned, because I really liked Byron’s stance on this post, too. I think it has to do with how my church seems to not only endorse certain movies, but radically goes out of their way to promote them. We saw previews of Amazing Grace and the Last Sin Eater during Sunday morning worship, had pamphlets for End of the Spear in the narthex, and a sign up sheet to go watch the Passion of the Christ in groups. To me, it’s too much and out of place.
gurufrisbee ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 8:23 am
I’ve never read Richard Niebuhr’s “Christ and Culture”, but I understand that he speaks of seven different reactions Christ-followers have to culture. I do not believe, of course, in disengagement from culture, but I do believe that I need to be very clear about my role as a pastor, and it is surely not to become FoxFaith’s marketing partner.
I did encourage folks to go and see “The Passion of the Christ”, and I might have, in my 13 years in PA, encouraged one other film. I might consider encouraging folks to see “Amazing Grace”, because I’m given to understand that it is high quality. But it’s one thing for me, acting as an individual, to recommend a given film based upon my research; it’s quite another for me to see myself in the way I think FoxFaith wants me to.
And yeah, I’m disappointed that our friends over at LifeWay market the Mayberry stuff. That just strikes me as a bridge too far…
Byron ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 8:32 am
Niebhur suggests 5 different relationships:
Christ Against Culture
Christ Of Culture
Christ Above Culture
Christ And Culture in Paradox
Christ the Transformer of Culture
Each has some strengths (biblically speaking) and each has some weaknesses, some bigger than others.
Watch for this book from D.A. Carson in the coming year.
Matt ~ Mar 15, 2007 at 8:54 am
Thanks for this really good discussion. As the writer and producer of The Last Sin Eater, and a lifelong Christian, it’s my contention that the cultural media conversation is going to continue with or without Christians… so I prefer to light a candle rather than curse the darkness. The fact that Fox is a secular company now trying to target market to a specific audience is no different than a Christian college buying ads in Christianity Today to attract potential students. Michael Landon, Jr., and I are filmmakers who happen to be Christians, and Fox Faith just so happens to be the current distribution channel for us to reach an audience with our stories. It’s no more complicated than that. If the films are worthy of a church’s support, what harm is there in a pastor either recommending a film to his congregation? Research shows that Christians consume Hollywood entertainment at pretty much the same rate as non-Christians. Rather than ignore that fact, it seems to me that pastors should be culture warriors themselves. If your flock is watching 24, Lost, American Idol and The Office all week, and then seeing Hollywood’s latest flick on Saturday night — and you have them for an hour and a half on Sunday mornings — it seems to me that you better know what they are consuming and you better help interpret all of that media from a Christian worldview. Just my two cents. God bless your ministry
Brian ~ Mar 16, 2007 at 12:33 am
To say that a pastor would become an unpaid marketing arm for FoxFaith by promoting their films is probably a little on the extreme, though I do understand what you’re saying. Nobody likes to be manipulated. But at the same time I do see Brian’s point. Better to “light a candle rather than curse the darkness.†It seems to me that the wise thing is to use discretion and moderation. Showing movie trailers during Sunday morning worship would be extreme. Duh! Posting flyers on a bulletin board or recommend a film we liked is lighting a candle with moderation. “Let all things be done decently and in order†– 1 Corinthians 14:40.
Don ~ Mar 16, 2007 at 8:10 am
Brian,
First, thanks for joining this conversation; hard to believe you found it, but I guess it really IS a “worldwide” web! Second, thanks for making quality films. As I hope I made clear, my beef isn’t with your film at all; I commend it, wish Hollywood would make more like it; believe Christians ought to be in areas like film in order to be salt and light. Thanks for your witness there!
That said, I don’t agree with your premise, which is that there’s an equivalence between a Christian college advertising in CT and FoxFaith marketing your film to churches, on a couple of counts: one, the “bottom line” for a Christian college isn’t the same “bottom line” as for Fox. A Christian college worthy of the name exists, not to make money, but to train young people for the purpose of impacting culture with the gospel, to glorify God in all it does, etc. This is a key component of my argument: FoxFaith, as a division of Fox, is going to be judged by the parent company as to its success, not by how many wholesome films it makes, but by whether or not at the end of the day it is turning a profit for Rupert Murdoch.
Two, your film, and probably a couple others advertised by FoxFaith, differ (from my understanding) from most of the FoxFaith offerings, in that there is a clear Christian/gospel message woven into it. I’d have LESS of an issue if this were the case with all of the films, but it’s not. Flicka is a fine family film, I’m sure, and Strawberry Shortcake is great for kids and probably teaches good moral lessons. Many of the films represented probably do the same—but Muslims and Jews and Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses all could support films (I assume) that portray good moral lessons and warm stories. Please, I’m not AGAINST such; I only say that it isn’t my place as a pastor to spend time promoting such. It is my place to proclaim the gospel of Christ, to promote Christ in the culture, to speak clearly of Him.
I appreciate Narnia and The Passion and, most probably, The Last Sin-Eater as well; I’ve seen both of the former, and now that I’m buddies with the producer of Sin-Eater, I’ll see it too!
But that doesn’t mean I agree that promoting FoxFaith films is something I need sign onto en masse…
Byron ~ Mar 16, 2007 at 11:32 am
Good points. Maybe the college ads in CT are not a good comparison. How about Zondervan advertising its books in CT? Zondervan is actually for-profit company owned by Harper Collins, a division of News Corp/Fox. Several other Christian media companies are owned by secular conglomerates… Provident Music by Sony, etc. Anyway, I also don’t want to see my pastor/church turned into the Tonight Show where the filmmakers, Christians or otherwise, stop by to plug their latest films. I guess I was just making the point that there will be some films worthy of consideration by pastors to recommend to their flocks. Not all, but some, and I hope you’ll be able to look at them on each of their merits.
Brian ~ Mar 17, 2007 at 11:21 pm
Brian,
That’s a point much better taken. And your point about Zondervan does seem a better analogy, and honestly, it’s one I really struggle with, I do. I do not believe that Zondervan SHOULD be owned by, should have ever been sold to, Harper-Collins, for precisely this reason. I agree with Steve Camp on this point; I think that we are at least borderline infringing on a passage I read just today in my time with the Lord, II Corinthians 6.
I agree with your desire to make good, Christ-honoring films; in a perfect world, I don’t think it’d be FoxFaith, but a Christian company—with a bottom line of honoring Christ first and foremost, not making profits (not that making a reasonable profit is wrong, of course)—that would be producing great quality films (not “Thief in the Night” stuff). In this fallen world, lines get blurred, that’s for sure…
Byron ~ Mar 19, 2007 at 8:12 pm
Byron, I may have to disagree with you on this one. What you propose with a “Christian” Film label is just a furtherance of our Christian Ghetto, where we must have our own version of everything. But then again, I’m not a big fan of “Christian” movies. Movies are static objects, they can’t be Christians. I’d much rather see the imprint of “FOX FAITH” disappear and instead see great filmmakers working for just plain “FOX” who are christians making great movies that also are honoring to Christ. It doesn’t have to evangelize (although if that is the purpose then (1) Jesus example of talking to people works better and (2) then you do probably need some seperation), just be a great movie.
Hefe ~ Mar 20, 2007 at 7:49 am
I may have to disagree with myself, because I certainly see your point about a “Christian ghetto”. My difference might be that I’m not convinced that folks like our friend Brian, who are making quality films AS Christians (as opposed to “Christian films”, in the sense of all of them being evangelistic in nature), couldn’t band together to do the best possible films period, films that would be of sufficient quality that they would succeed. Why not start a new company, not for the purpose of marketing films to the church and the already-convinced, but for the purpose of making quality films as Christians (but having a different “bottom line” than does Fox)? I think THAT would be the best scenario.
Oh, and I think that there ought to be Christians working at Fox, etc. as well; that’s a bit of a different issue, though.
Thoughts?
Byron ~ Mar 20, 2007 at 9:24 am