Tim over at The Blurred Brain had some thoughts about my Narnia post. While I can understand [and even agree with] some of the points he made, I'm not sure that he fully understood the main thrust of my posting. So allow me to take another wack at it here. I'm going to try to explain what I think he thinks I was thinking . . . or something like that.
What I think Tim's point is:
We need to support/encourage good Christian art, lest we lose it all together.
My response:
I agree. We should put our money where our mouths are and support high-quality, wholesome art [such as Narnia and Lord of The Rings]. If we don't, we shouldn't complain when all Hollywood produces is crap. I'm with Tim here.
My continued qualm:
What role should the church play in this? I'm all for individual Christians using word of mouth to spread positive reviews. I'm even for pastors making recommendations of movies in the pulpit. But do we need to have our churches publicly endorse films? You might not think there is a difference between individual and pastor support verses church support, but I think there is.
When churches allow themselves to be an extension of a studio's marketing campaign, who's using whom? Sure, we might "get what we want" when it comes to quality media, but are we selling ourselves out? Connect the dots: Disney owns ABC who produces Desperate Housewives. You see any churches encouraging parishioners [twice in two days, YES!] to join a "Gospel According To Wisteria Lane" Bible Study? Despite never have seeing Housewives, I don't have a problem with this. But I doubt Zondervan has such a Bible study in the works.
Regardless of the good intentions of the artists, studios have but one use for churches: to make them money. Sad, but true. We just need to accept it.
My desire:
Not that we Christians merely react to culture, but transform it. The late Bob Briner wrote a book called Roaring Lambs [how about that for an Aslan connection?] in which he encouraged believers to avoid the Christian sub-culture, step out and make a difference in the "secular" world. It's a good read and coincides with this conversation.
Your thoughts? Let us know.
What I think Tim's point is:
We need to support/encourage good Christian art, lest we lose it all together.
My response:
I agree. We should put our money where our mouths are and support high-quality, wholesome art [such as Narnia and Lord of The Rings]. If we don't, we shouldn't complain when all Hollywood produces is crap. I'm with Tim here.
My continued qualm:
What role should the church play in this? I'm all for individual Christians using word of mouth to spread positive reviews. I'm even for pastors making recommendations of movies in the pulpit. But do we need to have our churches publicly endorse films? You might not think there is a difference between individual and pastor support verses church support, but I think there is.
When churches allow themselves to be an extension of a studio's marketing campaign, who's using whom? Sure, we might "get what we want" when it comes to quality media, but are we selling ourselves out? Connect the dots: Disney owns ABC who produces Desperate Housewives. You see any churches encouraging parishioners [twice in two days, YES!] to join a "Gospel According To Wisteria Lane" Bible Study? Despite never have seeing Housewives, I don't have a problem with this. But I doubt Zondervan has such a Bible study in the works.
Regardless of the good intentions of the artists, studios have but one use for churches: to make them money. Sad, but true. We just need to accept it.
My desire:
Not that we Christians merely react to culture, but transform it. The late Bob Briner wrote a book called Roaring Lambs [how about that for an Aslan connection?] in which he encouraged believers to avoid the Christian sub-culture, step out and make a difference in the "secular" world. It's a good read and coincides with this conversation.
Your thoughts? Let us know.