Saturday, February 03, 2007

Blogging Jesus Camp

My wife and I watched the docu-drama Jesus Camp this morning. The beginning of the movie made her so uncomfortable that she repeatedly needed to leave the room. Here are a few random musings about the film. It is
certainly worth watching. If you plan to watch it, you may not want to read this.

1. The absence of theology:

There is no deeply religious or philosophical discussion about the Bible or about religion. Instead, there are a series of authoritative claims that people, especially kids accept without discussion. For example, consider one of Ted “I have lust in my heart and needed to resign from ministries Haggard’s comments: “We don’t need to have a general assembly about it. It is in the Bible.” This overlooks competing interpretations of the Bible, how to decide which competing verses are more important, how to discuss different translations of the Bible (in the Greek texts, the Mary is not a virgin but a young woman), and how to decide which rules to follow and which rules to overlook (there are over 600 rules in the OT—some people would gladly adopt the rule that prohibits two men form laying with one another like a man and woman, but would gladly overlook the ban of shellfish, wearing clothes that contain multiple types of fabrics, and the rules that state we should take slaves from neighboring countries and not from our own people.) Further, why should we decontextualize the rules? The rules on shellfish develop out of concern for proper dietary preparations during the time of the Old Testament. We do not have those problems today. We are not about to impose slavery. Well, hopefully we are not.

Side Note: There is a funny scene in the movie when Haggard discusses homosexuality, which was filmed before he resigned. It appears as if he is repenting on camera.

2. Literalism, in the Bible and in Life.

Everything is literal- Not only Biblical interpretation; there is no distinction between literalism in any aspect of life and there is no distinction between fiction and reality. They cannot admit that Harry Potter is fiction. The camp leader states: “Warlocks are the enemy of God. If Harry Party had been in the Old Testament, he would have been put to death…. This is a generation devoted to purity.” Another will not discuss ghost stories because they do not honor God.

It seems everything that is non-Christian is a threat to Christianity. The consequence of this would be the death of the imagination, the prevention of political consensus, and possibly, the prevention of a political consciousness. Though I doubt that the leaders of this movement would care any of these if they developed against literalism. Will the strict adherence to this literalism lead to a rejection of the basic tenets of the Evangelical lifestyle like it did in the Puritan community, or, will Evangelicals reconcile spirituality and materialism in a way that the Puritans could not.

3. Agency and Invention:

There is a lack of agency throughout the culture, which seems to contradict the entire notion of being “born again.”

When discussing how he writes a sermon, one of the children stated, “I don’t write. God writes for me.”

Another minister told the crowd of children that “Levi would be a God seeker from an early age” and God wrote the book of his life. These metaphors deny agency, which denies the theological concept of being “Born-Again.” Oh wait, see number one

The rejection of anything else in culture, such as Harry Potter, Brittney Spears, etc., allows the kids to develop ideas and arguments only from Christianity. Yet, without the theology, a larger discussion of faith and religion, and a misreading of the Bible to favor social issues (such as abortion—there is no ban on abortion in the Bible), these children are indoctrinated to have only religious and authoritative premises to work with when engaging others in the public sphere. There would be no common values between the religious and the non-religious or even between some religious sects and other religious sects.

4. The political and the religious

There seems to be a difference between the two in many ways, especially with balancing competing beliefs in society. Yet, the subjects of the movie fail to differentiate between the two and reject communities other than the Evangelical Christian community. One little girl rejects the community because only God will “judge her.” Another Ted Haggard stated that if the Evangelicals vote, they determine elections. There is little need for political consensus.

Global Warming: While I can understand the rejection of some topics such as the absence of school prayer or including evolution but not creationism, but global warming? In one scene a mother home-schools her child and refutes global warming (because the average temperature of the Earth increased less than 1 degree in the past century). There seems to be less concern over stewardship of the land because there will be an imminent return. This plays into the hands of others on the right.

During the camp, they received a visit from “President Bush” in the form of a cardboard cutout. One leader mentioned he surrounded himself with spiritual people. They kids reaffirm their beliefs about religion and G.W. Bush as they recite, “One Nation Under God.” Yet, religious conservatives do not seem to be willing to hold the President accountable for civilian deaths in the war, torture, and for not enacting the social policies the base desires.

America is a Christian Nation: there is a reliance on a literal interpretation of the Bible except for this. There is no mention of this in the Bible and the historical interpretation does not warrant this; how can people reach this conclusion? The best example seems to be the treaty of Tripoli enacted by the Adams administration and the Congress of the time.

Pledging allegiance to a Christian American and the Bible seems dangerous.

5. Odd Practices:

Blessing the absurd: Before camp started, the leaders blessed the pews,
the computers, the electricity, and the Power Point because the devil
wanted to interfere.

Speaking in tongues and the constant crying: This is just too much, especially for the way in which the pathos supercedes the logos. There is no need to discussion.

No comments: