The question of censorship on Christian campuses
What prompts censorship in the greater Christian community?
Michelle Rindels
Censorship. It is a 10-letter word that I have been thinking about a lot lately. I recently went through a personal experience of censorship. I wrote a film review and just before it was printed it was pulled because of the content of the film. I do not blame The Chimes or any one person on staff, because I think that we as Christians and as a university have a deeper problem with censorship.
I think the vast majority of censorship is not nefarious or intentional, but systemic. It is not the people who are to blame, but the systems established ages ago with a long history of censoring people from certain ideas or material. This can definitely be seen in the ongoing conflict between art and faith.
Whether it is the Catholic Church trying to censor art and thought during the Renaissance or Biola making movies illegal on campus or The Chimes having to censor me for the controversy my words may cause, it is a constant throughout the ages.
I understand there are certain limitations Christians need to follow for the sake of our spiritual lives, yet this doesn’t preclude us of the responsibility to support and defend free expression. If we do not have the free exchange of ideas, we will have dire consequences. If we suppress the written word even in the name of morality, we subvert not only journalism, but also core principles of education and democracy. This means standing up for opinions, despite your agreement or disagreement with them. This defense of free expression should be ever present even at a Christian university.
A heartbreaking connection with the Christianity and censorship is also seen whenever there is a challenge or reinterpretation of Christianity. This is apparent in media sources ranging from harmless comedies like “Monty Python: The Life of Brian,” “Saved” and “Dogma” to fiction books like “Angels & Demons” and “The Da Vinci Code” to documentaries like “Deliver Us From Evil” and “Jesus Camp.”
Unfortunately, there are two common reactions when any of these sources present themselves. One reaction is to develop a plan to counteract the film or book through sermon series or special events with authors specifically writing books that debunk work in question. The second and more extreme reaction is a wholesale boycott usually with massive public protests and demonstrations and self-serving television appearances. Yet I believe there is a third reaction, one that is too often ignored and devalued; it is watching or reading these controversial works and not having a visceral reaction.
For far too long, I think we have relied on our first impulses and denied careful thought and examination when it comes to things such as art and literature that question or reinterprets our foundations of faith. Instead of attacking or boycotting such things it would be nice to see Christians read or watch these things and learn from these perspectives.
Learning from these perspectives?
Yes, I think that God appoints certain people whether agnostic, atheist, Christian or part of some other religious/philosophical group in order to test and reveal to us places where we have failed or where we need to grow and mature. It seems too often we miss those things out of our own selfish desires to stamp out such people.
I believe we can change, but it requires much work and thought with an overall foundation of humility. I hope we will use this reasoning when we encounter future art and literature including the upcoming film, “The Golden Compass,” based on the books that are an atheist response to “The Chronicles of Narnia” series.
We need to be outspoken and against these forms of censorship. My prayer is that students as well as Christians as a whole will think and talk reasonably about these things. A constant vocal presence about this issue is important, because inaction perpetuates the unfortunate status quo. I hope that no one will have to go through such an experience as I did just a few weeks ago. It is my prayer that we are able to respond in a reasoned manner that would not censor or encourage the defeat of others, but with quiet humility respond with a receptive heart to the message God is trying to send us through others’ work.
Comments
1.
Nov 9, 2007,
4:15 p.m.
micheller says:
I'm really glad you brought this up, Matt. I think it absolutely deserves discussion -- is The Chimes the place to be reviewing an NC-17 movie? When I read a review of Lust: Caution in the L.A. Times, it was a pretty difficult experience. That's a secular paper, and the reviewer said she was cringing at how graphic the movie was. She said there was virtually no distinction between that and a pornographic film, except that the sexuality was much more artfully directed and had a profound message to convey.
I want Christians to be at the vanguard of these things. I want to know that if something like an NC-17 movie comes out, a thoughtful, intelligent Christian reviewer will be right there, not just giving a superficial bashing, but also interpreting the film's message and pointing out the goodness of the art.
But at the same time, I think the average Christian should not see Lust: Caution or similar films. I think a very select group of people should see it -- Christians who are specifically called to engage in the culture of film and who are spiritually prepared to wade through the evil and mire that accompanies the art. Those people should then warn Christians about the dangers within.
Those who don't feel specifically called to such duties ought not subject themselves to things that aren't pure, noble, excellent and praiseworthy. Why would you do that? Why spend time trudging through evil, dark things rather than seeking the higher things of God?
Although I agree that The Chimes shouldn't run a review of a movie like this (because in my mind, review implies potential applicability to a mainstream audience), I am all for the themes and messages this film brings up being discussed in the opinions section. We need to be aware of what the broader culture is talking about and decide what we believe in the face of that.
2.
Nov 10, 2007,
1:51 p.m.
Michael Farr says:
As a journalist myself I do often cringe at censorship...I also have had to deal with it in my own works a couple times. It doesn't feel pleasant.
Ever since I heard about the Golden Compass movie I've been telling fellow Christians not to run. Like you said, so many times we mass a huge protest against things that go against our faith--and I don't that's helpful, rather we need to engage media like that with our own ideas.
With all that being said, I do have a bit of reservation to your message here.
While it is good to be open minded, we can't become like the people who Paul criticized: "children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine..."(Eph. 4:14). We have at the core of our faith certain beliefs that we need to hold ourselves to. There are definitely media that challenge these core beliefs. Why should we not challenge these media? Engage it, yes. But let's make sure we're influencing culture, not the other way around.
Now, I don't think you directly suggested that we have loosy goosy doctrine, but I believe your ideas here could naturally lead that way. Having and open mind is good, but make sure your brain is rooted to something, otherwise it'll fall right out the hole.
3.
Nov 10, 2007,
1:59 p.m.
Michael Farr says:
err...an open mind, heh.
4.
Nov 14, 2007,
12:46 p.m.
Michael Longinow says:
The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution mentions a free press. That notion of freedom, however, is one that I would argue is based on a sense of responsibility. That responsibility isn't to absolutely unfettered expression. It's to serve the best interests of one's audience(s). And the audience for the Chimes is a population of people who might not all agree with the university's mission statement, but have at least agreed to gather under that umbrella for a period of time. A thinker named E. Stanley Jones said once that when people who know God get together, there need to be ground rules or we beat each other up.
My paraphrase of his approach is that we should not assume we'll always agree (we won't); nor should we even believe we'll come to any sort of conclusion on some matters (that often won't happen either). But we'll agree to two things: We love God, and we love each other.
There's a place for review of movies that don't fit the university's mission. In fact, Ecclesiastes would suggest there's a place for about everything. But the pages or Web space of the Chimes isn't the place for review of the film Matt Groves had in mind.
Your Turn
Requires a free Chimes account. Comments must adhere to the Chimes usage policy and Biola's code of conduct, and are subject to removal if they do not.