This post is, hopefully, going to answer some questions that everyone has been asking me lately. As a Christian who hopes to make my own film for the Christian market very soon, I get asked all sorts of questions pertaining to my philosophy on "Christian Movies" and the role of media in today's church.
Before I even begin, I must define some terms and hopefully get you thinking properly about this whole notion of a "Christian Movie." For starters, what is a Christian Movie? To me, that is like asking what a Christian painting would look like, or a Christian sculpture. Or, more closely (since film is a storytelling art), what is a Christian novel? I challenge anyone to give me a biblical definition of any of these things. Most people are only able to define Christian movies (or any other form of art / entertainment) by existing media.
My argument is that there is no biblical definition for Christian art and entertainment. And yet, Christians have been expressing themselves through various art forms for centuries. God gave us a creative spirit, and it is one of the tools which He gives us to earn a living and, hopefully, point others towards Him.
So... what about Christian movies? Well, I would argue that there is no such thing. The whole concept is a product of marketing. What you have, since a film can neither be Christian or secular (they are amoral), are Christian Market films.
Films that we would identify as "secular" are secular why? Because they do not deal with issues pertaining to God or morality, and if they do, it is not from a biblical perspective. These films are never marketed to Christian audiences, and thus are termed "secular" by those within the evangelical community. Many evangelicals, however, view these films. In fact, we sometimes use them as sermon illustrations (ie. how often does "The Matrix" show up in Christian dialogue?).
Films that we identify as "Christian" are Christian why? Because they do deal with issues such as God and morality from a biblical perspective. These films are not marketed to the secular audences, and are thus termed "Christian" because you will only likely hear of it if you are in the evangelical community. Unfortunately, very few unbelievers ever watch these films - even though they are often very evangelical in nature.
For starters, the question should first be to discover the purpose of filmmaking.
No matter what your message is, you must first and foremost tell a compelling story. The purpose of film is to tell stories using a dramatic, visual, and audio experience. Film is the mixing of many art forms to ultimately create it's own art. But, at it's base, it is a storytelling art. Message movies simply do not hold up to the most important dynamic to this art form: audience participation.
The second question, then, is what is the purpose of a Christian market film? I think most Christians would agree that film should be used as a means of evangelism. However, it is the nature of that evangelism that I find myself at odds with people. The difference can be defined as one of two perspectives: planting and harvesting. (Other types of Christian market films would be for entertainment or instruction, but those categories are for another blog.)
To put it simply, I do not believe that a film is a good way to go about harvesting (defined as the actual process of leading someone to Christ). It doesn’t work, for starters, because film is one-way communication. Second, filmmakers have no relationship with the audience member. Third, films are fictional stories told for entertainment - they are not sermons. Trying to morph the two does a great disservice to the process of evangelism. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the current culture has become incredibly biblically illiterate. In order to effectively communicate the whole council of the gospel, it is necessary to provide tremendous back-story to the biblical narrative before anything can be understood. We can not rely on our church-taught vocabulary to smooth over these waters if we hope to present a gospel message within the context of a fictional story. It's even more impossible to do all this and stick to the foundational goal - tell a compelling story.
Take the "Passion of the Christ," for example. This film was a blatant "Christian film," - demonstrating the act which brought God's salvation to mankind. However, by itself was it successful in bringing people to salvation? Not at all. Our culture is biblically illiterate, so watching "The Passion of Christ" doesn’t in any way demonstrate who Jesus was, why he had to die, how that saves us, or that we even need to be saved. For most audience members, it was a puzzling film about an innocent guy who gets the snot kicked out of him. Without relationships with other Christians who can explain questions and start conversations, the "Passion of the Christ" cannot, by itself, lead people to salvation. For that matter, I don't think any "Christian film" really could.
That leaves the Christian Market film with the task of planting seeds. More specifically, it is the creating of a cultural climate open to the gospel message by means of communicating biblical truth.
Put simply, all Christian films should adequately and accurately reflect truth in their messages and themes in order to draw audiences closer to a biblical worldview so that they would be more open to accepting the gospel. For example, such themes as “man is evil and in need of salvation” or “there is objective truth’ or “there is hope for mankind” or “pride goes before the fall” or films demonstrating “the power of grace” and countless other messages told in creative, powerful ways would be the best thing a Christian filmmaker can do for advancing God’s truth.
I must clarify something first, before I move on: I do not believe that Christian films should or need to reflect the exhaustive truth (essentially the entire salvation story). It is enough to communicate truth and not the totality of truth. For example I would be perfectly comfortable making a film that shows that the “heart is above all else wicked” without feeling obligated to tell the audience how its wickedness can be overcome (salvation in Christ). Jesus, himself repeatedly withheld telling his disciples and the mass of people who followed him the totality of truth. Many times he waited until they were ready to hear, and as Christians we should do likewise - with confidence that the Holy Spirit will do a work in their lives so that they can hear all that must be said to them. To put it simply, not all films need a conversion scene.
What am I saying? Is all of this a huge sell-out? No, not at all. Quite the opposite, I would argue. It rather puts the responsibility for evangelism where it belongs biblically: on the believer.
We have already discussed that there is no such thing as a Christian movie, just a Christian market movie. And since we are on the subject of evangelistic Christian market films, isn't our primary goal then to be able to get the unbeliever to watch it? If so, then we must capture and entertain the attention of the unbeliever. But to what end? To force a gospel presentation into our narrative? No. Our film is to be used merely as a tool to, as stated before, to create a cultural climate that is open to the gospel. The Bible does say not that salvation comes by watching a film, but rather faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. God's Word is the only thing that will bring people to salvation.
--Please Note: It is not the church's job to entertain an audience, but rather the responsibility of the filmmaker--
So, practically, how does this work out? Well, if Aunt Sallie wants to share the gospel with Joey, why not give her a film that can then be used as a conversation starter? Joey will likely watch the film if it is entertaining, but not if it is preachy. Let's leave the preaching to Aunt Sallie. She is much more equipped to share the Word of God with Joey than I (the filmmaker) am.
So, practically, what does this mean for the Christian filmmaker? Well, he needs to get back to the basics and start competing with the world for the attention of men by telling thoughtful, engaging stories that reflect God's truth. He needs to demonstrate the futility of selfish living - not glorify it. He needs to reflect the reality of the human condition - not ignore it. By doing this, he will be making a much more honest art. And an honest art, that reflects true spiritual truth, will be that much more meaningful to the audience - giving them a film they are more likely to discuss and remember. By doing this, we give Aunt Sallie a tool that can be used to cross that first, sometimes insurmountable, first step: beginning a discussion about spiritual things.
So, practically, what does this mean for the Christian ministry leader? It is my hope and encouragement that pastors and ministry leaders around the country would begin looking for films (product) that they can put into the hands of their congregations to use as discussion starters. What we did with "The Passion of the Christ" is a great example: get our congregations into the movie theatres so that we can start acting as a part of the culture, and not just reacting to it.
If everyone is doing their part, an incredible transition will happen: evangelistic Christian market films will no longer be preaching to the choir, but bringing the feet of the church to the street, where it is most needed. The film can do nothing for the cause of Christ - only the Church can when it is obediently preaching the gospel. The film can only serve as context.
