If "Idol" wants to get back its former glory, it should once again show some sympathy for the devil.

'Idol' Worship

What's behind the newfound Jesus-friendliness of "American Idol"?

Emma Rosenblum, The New Republic

Published: Wednesday, May 21, 2008

"American Idol," which concludes its seventh season tonight, has always been touched by God. Each year, there's at least one contestant who sways through a gospel song, jams out to a song by a Christian rock band, or performs a number about how Jesus loves you (so call in to vote!). It's "American Idol," for crying out loud, so it's no surprise that Jesus would pop up here and there. But Christianity was never a show-sponsored policy, nor was its promotion a popular position. Two years ago, contestant Mandisa Huntley famously sang a song called "Wanna Praise You," announcing, "This song goes out to everybody that wants to be free. Your addiction, lifestyle, and situation may be big, but God is bigger." After the performance, Simon Cowell--producer, judge, voice of amusingly brutal and bitchy honesty--rolled his eyes and called Huntley "indulgent." Viewers also seemed to disapprove of her preachy (not to mention slyly homophobic) tone, and she was voted off two weeks later. That was the closest "Idol" ever came to being a forum for proselytizing. If anything, the producers have tolerated very un-Christian-like behavior from contestants, including lewd photos (Antonella Barba last year and this season's Ramiele Malubay) and backgrounds in male stripping (David Hernandez's pelvic thrusts made it all too obvious). Sure, second-season contestant Frenchie Davis was kicked off after a nude photo scandal, but only because the shots appeared on an illegal website promoting sex with underage girls. But showing skin on MySpace? Not a problem. And "Idol"'s penchant for dressing female contestants in crotch-grazing skirts and plunging halter-tops doesn't quite jibe with fundamentalist values, either. So how--and why--did this season turn into such a Jesus-fest?

To start, it has to do with this year's crop of contestants. Both 17-year-old front-runner David Archuleta (he of the controlling stage-father, recently banned from rehearsals) and perky blonde Brooke White, who came in fifth, are practicing Mormons. Though they didn't speak explicitly about their faith on the air, their religious beliefs have been widely reported, and they've both alluded to them onstage: Archuleta talks about his church performances as a child, and White, before she was sobbingly given the hook, shared her aversion to R-rated movies and alcohol. Archuleta, easily the fans' favorite performer this year, hasn't shied away from spiritual song choices: He's sang "Angels," "When You Believe," and "You're the Voice"--a trifecta of pro-God pop songs for which the audience has cheered (and cheered ... and cheered). Did Cowell or the other judges deem Archuleta's selections "indulgent"? Not in the least. They absolutely loved it, in fact. Cowell called "Angels," which Archuleta chose because he was moved by the song's "message," the "best song choice of the night so far." Huh? Since when did Cowell become a proponent of songs about religious faith?

Archuleta, whose fan club calls itself the Arch Angels, has no doubt mobilized the Bible Belt voting base, and the producers of "American Idol," faced with an average ten percent ratings decrease this season, are perhaps resigning themselves to the fact that the U.S. is, indeed, a very religious country. A guest appearance by Dolly Parton reinforced the new idea that "Idol" is open to getting in touch with its spiritual side. Parton belted out "Jesus And Gravity," and then the Clark Brothers came onstage to sing "This Little Light Of Mine/Jesus On The Mainline." "American Idol" used to be a home mostly for top-40 hits, from Britney Spears to Maroon 5, and the Jesusified combo was more than a little jarring.

Some chalked up the show to the God-heavy country music genre instead of seeing it as a reflection of "Idol"'s changing core values. After all, country week is usually "Idol"'s most religious (and most hastily fast-forwarded through by me). But the Jesus-happy tone this season has gone beyond a few outlier shows or contestants.

Take April's heavily-hyped "Idol Gives Back" charity extravaganza, in which the contestants, dressed all in white, sang a group version of "Shout to the Lord," accompanied by a full-blown gospel choir. The song began "My shepherd, my savior," with the word "shepherd" a substitution from the original version. As if the show's new politics weren't clear enough, the next episode started with a group version of the same song, only with the original version: "My Jesus, my savior." Whoa.

Will "Idol"'s Christly makeover continue? The Fox executive who oversees the show, recently declared, "'Idol' is all about cast and controversy." The goody-goody makeover certainly doesn't bode well for controversy. Little David Archuleta's not getting into any sex scandals, and Brooke White would sooner be caught dead than in Internet porn. Can the show live on Christian values alone? I have my doubts. Carly Smithson, a tattooed Irish rocker girl, was eliminated after a lively performance of the title song of Jesus Christ Superstar. Fans speculate that a contributing factor was the song's seemingly heretical stance--in the musical, it's sung by Judas. The Bible Belt's gain is "Idol"'s loss. A wholly wholesome music competition produces a lot of Pat Boones, but no Elvises or Chuck Berrys. It's no coincidence that the most Jesusified season of "Idol" has been its most boring one yet. If "Idol" wants to get back its former glory, it should once again show some sympathy for the devil.

Emma Rosenblum is an editor at New York magazine.

The church is the transformative agent of Christ’s love within culture through the direction of Scripture and the power of the Spirit

Pass the Popcorn Analysis: Engage culture without assuming it

By Jay Smith

Published: May 28, 2008

(ABP) -- I’ve got to be brutally honest; I’m not a Rob Bell fan, although many of my students are. He has two best-selling books: Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith (2005) and Sex God: Exploring the Endless Connections between Sexuality and Spirituality (2007).

Additionally, he has completed three “teaching” tours, the most recent in 2007, where he visited America with his “The Gods Aren’t Angry” tour. Each tour was staged in a secular venue with theatrical lighting and the ever-hip, culturally relevant Bell at its center.

Although I disagree with much of Bell’s theology, this does not mean that I don’t appreciate what he is attempting: an engagement with culture. “Culture” is the matrix of human activity and structures that give life significance. In Christian theology, culture, like humankind, has experienced the Fall.

As sensationalist and provocative as his titles are, Bell is attempting to be relevant to “fallen” postmodern culture. Many young believers and spiritual seekers, feeling disenfranchised from the modern church, have flocked to Bell’s tours, podcasts and books. In Bell, they have found a kindred spirit -- someone who has experienced their disenchantment with the modern church, yet one who seems to have found a way to connect them to an authentic, relevant faith in God through Jesus Christ.

Regardless of what position you take on Rob Bell, he forces each of us to deal with the issue of culture and its relationship to our theology. This is an age-old struggle. It is the struggle of the Israelites with the Canaanites, Jesus and the various Jewish sects, as well Paul and the Greco-Roman culture of his day.

Theology and culture are locked in an eternal struggle until the end of days.

Interestingly, Christians can claim that the Bible lands on both sides of the debate. On one hand, Paul seems to encourage an engagement with contemporary culture in the form of his sermon on Mars Hill (Acts 17:22ff).

On the other hand, Paul states that we should not “conform” to the world in his letter to the Romans (Rom12:2).

But if it is an age-old struggle, why then has it erupted with such a vengeance today?

A simple explanation is that culture is changing at a faster pace than ever previously understood. Technology advanced at such a rapid pace in the 20th century that it outpaced our ability to understand its moral implications. So, culture becomes a swamp of ethical and theological questions amidst a global technological explosion.

Complicating this situation, it would also seem that some of the philosophical concepts that helped sustain our modern culture are being questioned today. Thus, although the scientific, technological and philosophical ideals of modernity have been a great benefit to us, these ideals simply aren’t enough to sustain us spiritually.

Consequently, we now live in a culture of difficult change where the very basis of modern Christianity is being questioned at every turn. How are we to proceed as faithful followers of Christ in such a chaotic cultural climate? How can our theology meet this challenge?

Let me suggest a two-fold answer: engagement, not assumption.

First, we must engage culture, which I believe to be the very heart of our Christian mission. This is the legacy of the Great Commission (Matt. 28:19-20) and the witness of Paul on Mars Hill (Acts 17). The church is the transformative agent of Christ’s love within culture through the direction of Scripture and the power of the Spirit (Luke 10:25-27).

Nevertheless, in this engagement, we do not assume or acquiesce to culture. Christ transforms it (Romans 12:2; 1 John 2:15).

As Christians, we have something unique to offer to our world -- the witness of Jesus. As Baptists, we affirm the centrality of Christ and the authority of Scripture as our sole rule of faith. That is the “what” of our assumption.

The Scriptures, as the book of the Spirit, then give guidance in regards to the “how” of our practice. What the Scriptures do not address directly will stand in tension with our engagement of culture.

A vigorous attempt to understand and engage culture, without surrendering to its secularizing philosophical tendencies would benefit the church well in the third millennium.

So Rob Bell and others of the emerging generation, you’ve thrown down the gauntlet to us all. Thank you.

-30-

-- Jay Smith is assistant professor in the School of Christian Studies at Howard Payne University in Brownwood, Texas.

If Christians aren’t engaged in culture, they will not change the world or have an impact on society

Pass the Popcorn: Christians struggle to decide how best to engage culture

By Jennifer Harris

Published: May 28, 2008

(ABP) -- If Christians don’t learn to engage the popular culture that surrounds them, they will drown in it, experts insist.

“Christians tend to hear the words ‘popular culture’ and react as if spitting something yucky from their mouths,” said David Dark, author of Everyday Apocalypse: The Sacred Revealed in Radiohead, the Simpsons and Other Pop Culture Icons and The Gospel According to America.

But popular simply means “of the people,” he said. “It is never something we exist objectively from. It’s like the air we breathe, the language we use. … If we’re thinking, ‘Now we’re going to engage pop culture,’ it’s too late. We’re already soaking in it.”

Jeffrey Overstreet, contributing editor for Seattle Pacific University’s Response magazine, freelance movie reviewer, and author of Through a Screen Darkly and Auralia’s Colors, agreed.

“We are born into a pop culture,” he said, describing that culture as the very temporary, disposable details of a particular time and place.

Overstreet didn’t always see the importance of connection to culture. He grew up in a family that encouraged him to avoid pop culture and “steer clear of anything that did not have a clear connection to church,” he said. Rock music was questionable, and theaters were “dens of sin, contaminated by culture.”

Under the guidance of teachers, he realized complete separation from culture wasn’t the model Christ set.

“He was to be found at the corner pub, surrounded by messed-up people,” he said. “He was there among them, but he was different. He was compassionate.

“The more I look at it, in order to have a meaningful influence on society, we need to live fully engaged lives. How do we do that without hearing the stories told [in the wider culture]? Without listening to the music played?”

If Christians aren’t engaged in culture, they will not change the world or have an impact on society, said Greg Fiebig, associate professor of communication and theater at Indiana Wesleyan University and former theater director at Southwest Baptist University in Bolivar, Mo. “We’re not going to do it. Period.”

He said Christians, especially in Christian academia, tend to live in a bubble. “People isolate themselves,” he said. “There is nothing wrong with isolating ourselves -- Jesus did -- but if we don’t know how to exist in the larger culture when we emerge, we have failed.”

Instead of hiding from culture, Christians can use it as a learning tool, Fiebig said.

“When I show someone a movie or present a show, I’m telling a story that needs to be told,” he said. “Jesus spoke of loving and caring for people where they were. The last thing he did was judge people. It is harder for us to judge when we are willing to listen to their story.”

Part of the learning experience is realizing that Christians don’t have a monopoly on the truth, Dark said.

“We are learners of Christianity,” he said. “It’s weird the way we talk, as if truth is something we have over other people. That’s no way to talk about faith, as if it is property. … When we view our faith as a bragging right or a secret password, I don’t know how we think others will be attracted to that.”

Instead, that type of view cuts Christians off from their neighbors, Overstreet said.

“We need to see and understand our neighbors,” he said. If Christians only pay attention to items of culture that affirm their own worldview, “we don’t understand what the world looks like to them.”

Christ went to the woman at the well and began asking her questions, he said. He didn’t simply bombard her with the gospel.

He added that people know when they are the subject of marketing campaigns. “So much of Christian art is just advertising for Jesus,” he said. “If we just keep shouting, we shouldn’t be surprised when people react like we are salesmen.”

He recalled driving under an overpass where someone had spray-painted in big letters, “Jesus is the answer.” Underneath, in a different color, another person had responded, “Yes, but what’s the question?”

Christians shouldn’t be handing out answers to questions that haven’t been asked, he said. Instead, pop culture can be used to kindle questions.

But engaging culture will, no doubt, lead to viewing, reading or listening to objectionable content.

“As a Christian, I believe it can be insightful to critique movies for what they might have to say about important aspects of our lives,” said David Thomas, associate professor of rhetoric emeritus at the University of Richmond and freelance writer for Christian Ethics Today.

“I’m less interested in whether a movie contains language that offends me, or has scenes that depict sex or violence, than I am in determining whether the stories and characters ring true, and in what the characters’ moral and ethical choices lead to.”

That’s not necessarily a widely held view among many believers. “Christians tend to believe that films have the power to single-handedly disrupt or uproot a person’s spiritual development if they contain corrupting elements,” said Chad Johnston, production assistant for Allen Press in Lawrence, Kan., and adjunct online instructor in communication and film at Drury University in Springfield, Mo.

“I do think people should be discerning about what they watch, but throwing out the baby with the bathwater -- and sometimes the bathtub -- is a flawed method of encountering and dealing with media.”

He compares watching films to meeting people. When meeting a person, it is easy to dismiss him or her due to a simple disagreement, but perhaps at the expense of a potential relationship or opportunity for growth, he said.

“It always surprises me that Christians will dismiss an ‘R’-rated film, yet read ‘R’-rated books in the Bible, like Judges,” he said.

“I tend to think that life is ‘R’-rated and should not be experienced without a Parent -- i.e., our heavenly Father. After all, how can we handle the tougher realities of life, being as fragile as we are? So I recommend that if you are hesitant to watch a particular film, you should ask yourself why, and perhaps do some research. If you are still uncomfortable with seeing it, or you simply feel it is bankrupt of any value spiritually, by all means avoid it.”

“To think of a human story as objectionable is not fair,” Dark observed. “If all we do is count bad words or feel offended, we are not relating to the world we are called to love or the world God so loved.”

But that does not mean anything goes, he emphasized.

“I wouldn’t say anyone needs to walk into dangerous places,” Overstreet said. “Each person needs to know their own strengths and weaknesses. But a lot of ‘R’-rated films are profound movies.”

The importance lies in knowing how to interpret films, which may be difficult for those who have never studied literature or other arts, Overstreet said.

Fiebig added that the American culture has lost a lot of ability for interpretation because of the tendency to be individualistic. “Movies are not meant to be seen in the privacy of your own home,” he said. “They should be communal, with time for discussion.”

Dark agreed that too much such privatization has occurred. Typically, he said, Christians will watch, listen or read, but pretend the stories aren’t important to them when they step into church. “We are not living out loud to one another,” he said.

When Christians view things in isolation, they often miss the redeeming value, he said. “When we live isolated lives, we often hold wrongly applied guilt, as if our enjoyment is somehow separate from our relationship with God.”

Thomas’ church tries to break through the isolation by offering courses in faith and culture. He worked with Doug Gebhard, a pastor in Rockingham, N.C., to design a liturgical film class that accompanied the seasons of Lent and Advent.

“The movies we chose had a Lenten or an Advent theme,” Gebhard said. “David explained rhetorical devices in the film -- plot, symbolism, etc. -- while I pointed out theological themes [like] suffering, sacrifice, redemption.”

Gebhard has led other classes that reached beyond film.

“I hoped to prod people of faith to look at movies, listen to music, read novels with a lens of faith,” he said. “What spiritual messages can you see in Star Wars? The Matrix? Ironman? Where is Christ found in Springsteen’s anthems? U2’s music?”

Johnston also partnered with a friend to lead a film class, called Sanctuary of the Cinema, at University Heights Baptist Church in Springfield, Mo., where he lived until last year.

“Our goal was to explore films through the interpretive lens of Christian spirituality -- to see the light of God in the light of the silver screen,” he said.

The class met in the upstairs college Sunday school class, which featured comfortable chairs and couches and a projector to watch films on a large screen.

Sanctuary of the Cinema was advertised at local college campuses, coffee shops and an independent movie theater. As a result, the class was a diverse group. “Some of them were churchgoers, and others were a bit leery about the whole thing being set in a church,” Johnston said.

The group watched independent, art and foreign films together, then discussed the film, using questions from a faith perspective to help guide discussion.

Despite differences among the class members, “we all bonded because of the beauty of cinema,” Johnston said. “I think it’s because cinema is capable of reminding us all of what we share, rather than how we differ. Narrative cinema tells the sorts of stories that are common to all of us, and we therefore feel like we have a share in what’s happening onscreen.”

And, ultimately, that viewing can lead to Christ. “I have come to see the silver screen as a window overlooking a theologically charged world,” Johnston said. “As I look through this window, I find that I am better able to understand who God is, who I am, and how I relate to God and others. It is not a substitute for the Bible, but rather a supplement to it.”

A starting place for finding films to use in discussion is the Arts and Faith websites’s Top 100 Spiritually Significant Films list, published at www.artsandfaith.com/t100. The list is compiled by voting members of the site, including Overstreet, and is updated each year. The website also features discussion groups on film, music, literature, visual art, theater and dance, and television and radio.

Fiebig helps lead a film festival at Indiana Weslyan. Last year, the first year of the festival, they decided to screen Hotel Rwanda, a film depicting the true story of Paul Resesabagina, a hotel manager who helped house over a thousand Tutsi refugees during the Rwandan genocide.

A student from Uganda who had lost family members during the struggle attended the screening. He began the discussion after the film by announcing he could not stay, due to the fresh emotions the film conjured, but he asked the other students to pray for Rwanda and Uganda.

“It was an amazing moment,” Fiebig said. “In a room full of college students, you could hear a pin drop. A Hollywood film became a worship service.”