Why A Certain Priest Refused To Read A Newspaper

Father Gabriel Frangoulis (1868-1943) was a simple priest from Patras, Greece who in many ways personified an ideal image of a parish priest. Before becoming a hieromonk he was a farmer with the name Philip. During the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913, he was the pastor in the village of Agios Ilias. While serving there, he became very much involved in politics and excited about the national restoration of the Greek people and nation. Every day he would run to Myrtia Railway Station to buy a newspaper, and would absorb the news of the victorious advance of the Greek army into Macedonia and Epirus, feeling boastful with national pride. And when he read about the Bulgarian advance into Thessaloniki and the threat posed for the city, he would become inflamed and feel like he was going to burst. "Oh, if I was only there right now, I would crush some of them," he would say to himself. But when he internally realized what he was saying, he felt disturbed in his soul, and he heard a loud voice rebuke him: "Shame on you, Gabriel! What are you saying, as a clergyman! From now on, you will never read a newspaper again."

The Synthesis of the Triodion

By Protopresbyter Fr. Thomas Vamvinis

The entrance of the Triodion is an invitation to look a little better at ourselves. Not to enclose ourselves in our individuality, but to see clearly the roots of our individualism, entering into a process of education that connects interiority and sociality; an education that comes from the text called Triodion.

Pop Culture's New Enchantment With Witchcraft

Meryl Streep in a scene from the forthcoming film Into the Woods. Photograph: CAP/NFS/Image supplied by Capital Pictures.

Sarah Hughes

October 26, 2013

The Guardian

When Ryan Murphy, the creator of American Horror Story, announced that the third season of the American TV series would focus on witches, he was riding the crest of a wave. Not since the 1990s – the era of Buffy's geek goddess, Willow Rosenberg, and a scowling Fairuza Balk in The Craft – have witches been so much in demand.

In the young-adult section of bookshops, shelves that recently groaned under the weight of tales of tormented vampires and lovelorn werewolves, are now stuffed with stories of witchcraft and magic, from Ruth Warburton's much-praised Winter Trilogy to Jessica Spotswood's Cahill Witch Chronicles. Lower down the age range, last month the most recent in Jill Murphy's long-running Worst Witch series was published, while among the predictions for this Christmas's bestselling toys are the Bratz spinoff, House of Witchez. For adults, next year will mark the climax of Deborah Harkness's All Souls Trilogy, centring on the relationship between a vampire and a feisty American witch.

In film, highlights of the BFI's gothic season include Burn Baby Burn! a festival of witchcraft on film, which comes to Belfast's Queens Film Theatre in early November, and the once-banned 1922 Danish witch movie Häxan: Witchcraft Through The Ages, showing this week at Filmhouse Edinburgh and the following week at the Glasgow Film Theatre and Dundee Contemporary Arts. Even Meryl Streep is getting in on the act – recent stills from the forthcoming film adaptation of Stephen Sondheim's Into The Woods show her transformed into a hag complete with wild grey hair and long nails.

However, it is on television that the season of the witch has truly taken hold. In addition to American Horror Story, with its tale of voodoo queens and teenage witches, there's Lifetime's The Witches of East End, adapted from a novel by Melissa de la Cruz and featuring a family of spellcasters led by Julia Ormond. Vampire Diaries spinoff The Originals (on the Syfy channel) has a central storyline about witchcraft and in Universal's Sleepy Hollow, Ichabod Crane deals with dueling covens in present-day America.

So why witches – and why now? "The idea of being able to manipulate supernatural forces still resonates," says Owen Davies, professor of social history at the University of Hertfordshire and author of America Bewitched: The Story of Witchcraft after Salem. "Witches and ghosts speak to something fundamental and innate in our psyche. It's an emotional connection."

The last time witches were so in fashion, in the 1990s, the response from young girls was intense. "When Buffy and Charmed were at their peak, I would get letters from teenage girls, mainly from America, asking for help about where to look for spells," says Davies. "Those shows gave teenage girls a feeling of empowerment; there's something very appealing about magic and witchcraft. There have also been studies of girls who were interested in witch shows in the 1990s, following how many went on to become practising wiccans. It's not a huge number, but it's interesting that some of them watched the shows and thought, 'I want to know more'."

Ruth Warburton, whose latest young-adult novel, Witch Finder, will be out in January, feels the growing interest is partially driven by a teenage desire to see girls in less passive roles. The most striking thing about the recent movie Beautiful Creatures (adapted from a bestselling teen novel) was that the hero worshipped from the sidelines as his witch girlfriend came into her powers.

"Often the traditional way of looking at relationships in young-adult fiction is that the guy has all the power and the interesting life and the girl goes along for the ride, but that's not the whole story," says Warburton. "Increasingly, we're trying to bring our daughters up to believe they can be the leader; they can have the adventure; they can do the cool stuff and one thing about witches is that they allow you to explore that moment when girls become teenagers and realise the power they have as women and how exhilarating that can be."

It is also arguable that these new shows reflect a changing attitude in television. The era of the anti-hero is coming to a close with the end of Breaking Bad and the final seasons of Mad Men. In their place have come female-centric shows, from Orange is the New Black to Masters of Sex, and Scandal. Thus Witches of East End is as interested in the bonds between mothers and daughters as in potions and curses, while American Horror Story: Coven conducts a serious examination of outsiderdom, exclusion and the nature of power. "The witches are a great allegory for any minority group that's been persecuted and had to go underground and finally is like: 'You know what? Dammit no, we're fighting back,'" the show's creator Murphy said.

It helps that both shows are happy to play with stereotypes. We tend to see witches as withered crone or seductive enchantress, Baba Yaga or Morgan Le Fay, yet for Witches of East End the key is that these women are a normal family with a family's ups and downs.

Yet Davies argues that the key to witch-related success remains image. "The image of the witch has transformed from someone extremely dangerous, through the sexy domesticated witches of Bewitched to the new wave of young, sexy witches in Charmed and Buffy to now," he says. "We're not interested in the mundane reality – we don't want to watch a drama about someone falsely accused of bewitching a pig." In other words, just as our vampires are now soulful lost boys, so our witches must be appealing in looks, if not always in deed.

See also:

Witches in Film and Pictures

Why Do Witches Wear Pointy Hats?

Big Brother or Big Father? : An Analysis of a Reality Show

The following article was published in January of 2002 in Greece and gives a brief yet interesting analysis following the conclusion of the first season of the Greek version of the popular television reality show Big Brother, which aired in the fall of 2001 and in the U.S. is shown every Summer.

By His Eminence Metropolitan Hierotheos 

of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou

The "television game show" Big Brother which was aired as a "reality show" and considered a risk to a known television channel has now completed. There have been many reviews by accredited journalists and other scholars on the new phenomenon, which, of course, we are not going to mention here.

Before the "game" began, we pointed out some things associated with it. Now, however, in light of the criticisms that were heard and the various comments, we wanted also to highlight the following precipitation of messages Big Brother conveyed to the Greek television audience.

First, it undermined the Greek Orthodox family, because it gave off the message of coexistence in the same house of many young people of both sexes. It is an example/model that many couples can cohabit together in the same place and have a good time, since society tolerates it. Thus it negates the duality of relationships.

Then, it gave an example of isolation from society, thereby limiting human thought, since there was no information from the outside world, with very informal conversations with meaningless content. It is a peculiar form of dictatorship, when they were speaking of a "Big Brother Democracy", because "it depicts all behavior and emotions, the subtle strangulation of critical thought, that control and boredom are constituent elements of this parody democracy, which is not imposed with a weapon, but seems to be a product of free choice" (Marianna Tziantzi, Kathimerini, 12/30/2001).

Further, it broadcasted the viewpoint of living with the fact that someone or some people are watching you at any moment in time. This implies a trivialization of the person and everything they entail. Because surely this feeling in the beginning creates fear of the unknown television audience, but then it creates a certain boldness. In this way someone learns to live without shame in their personal life. And we know from various analyses that these personal, special relationships between the two sexes, when exposed to public view, lose their personal character, and are perceived as sleazy relationships.

And it also even develops the psychological and spiritual illness of voyeurism, with terrible consequences for those who see these images and for those who are "playing".

Beyond these it largely cultivates the problem of acquiring easy riches and easy money, as well as rapid and uncontrolled publicity, beyond that of the mass-man Minotaur.*

Important is the observation that the "stars" of this kind of program "can be considered the first public demonstration of the 'humanoid' type who seeks to produce power: a humanoid or mass-man" (Cleanthe Grivas, Eleutherotypia, January 7, 2002).

Finally, from the ecclesiastical point of view, that which troubled me was the problem of self-excommunication. While those involved in the "game" were baptized Christians, they self-excommunicated themselves from the church community for over three months and cut themselves off from the possibility of church attendance, even on Christmas day. Of course someone can say that whether it be in this way or another way, they would not go to church anyway, like others. But this is not a reason for pardon. According to the holy Canons, whoever does not attend church for three consecutive Sundays cuts themselves off from the Church. And this fact shows the great problem of the secularization of ecclesiastical life.

Eventually we should not be very concerned with big brother as much as we should with big Father, that is, our Father who dwells in the Heavens, who controls everything and sees the secrets of our hearts, which will be revealed before all at the Second Coming. We should also be concerned with how we can be children of the Grace of this heavenly Father. And if we put ourselves under the spiritual guidance of the great Fathers, who had an illumined nous, then we will become brethren of our great brother, Jesus Christ, and of course "fellow citizens of the saints and of the household of God."

* In Greek mythology, the Minotaur was fed with live youth. Ortega y Gasset, the author of Revolt of the Masses, says "the mass-man is the pampered child of History". In this work, Ortega traces the genesis of the "mass-man" and analyzes his constitution en route to describing the rise to power and action of the masses in society. Ortega is throughout quite critical of both the masses and the mass-men of which they are made up, contrasting "noble life and common life" and excoriating the barbarism and primitivism he sees in the mass-man. [note by trans.]

Source: Ekklesiastiki Paremvasis, "Big Brother ή Big Father;", January 2002. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

The Meaning of the Cross and the Resurrection

The following interview was conducted by George Vassiliou with His Eminence Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos. It was originally published in Επίκαιρα της Αιτωλοακαρνανίας, then republished in Paremvasis (April 1998).

What is the meaning of Orthodox Holy Week?

Holy Week in the Orthodox Church is the center of its life, its heart. It is preceded by a period of fifty days of asceticism, fasting and prayer, and after Pascha there follows another period of fifty days. In the first period the primary meaning is our preparation for a worthy veneration of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ, and in the second period that which dominates is the struggle to process with spiritual "digestion" this heavenly food. If one examines that every Sunday we celebrate the Cross and Resurrection of Christ, then they can understand that the spirit and atmosphere of Holy Week dominates more than half of the annual cycle and, to express myself better, the message of Holy Week and Pascha permeates throughout the year.

The Orthodox Church proclaims that the death of the God-man on the Cross is the salvation of the human race. I would like you to make a comment on this salvific event.

In the Orthodox Church we talk about the death by crucifixion of Christ as being connected to His Resurrection. This is because the Cross without the Resurrection is a hard and dire reality, and the Resurrection without the Cross is a false and emotional state. When we speak of the salvation of the human race, we do not mean an abstract or stochastic concept, but it is the deliverance of man from the tyrannical and horrible prison of death, sin and the devil. By His Cross and Resurrection Christ conquered death, sin and the devil, and in this way He gave us the power to overcome these three enemies. We should primarily note that by the sacrifice of Christ and His Resurrection we can overcome our mortality and createdness. From the day we are born we have in our biological existence death, which is manifested in many forms, such as in sickness, in the corruption of the body, in our insecurities, in the advancement of our age, in the passions for self-preservation, in avarice, etc. All people spend their life in the process of death. The child at the age of 8-10 years understands that death is an irreversible fact. The teenager sees the torture of death. The middle-aged see the years pass without purpose or meaning. And the retiree is going through a terrible crisis, proceeding towards his death. The Orthodox Church with its emphasis on the Resurrection, gives an outlet to the existential void in man.

How can we as Orthodox understand the meaning of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of the Lord?

The answer to the previous question shows how little we understand existentially these great events. That which I want to emphasize is that there are different ways to approach these events. One approach is the logical and historical process, to read about how these events unfolded. Another is to approach them emotionally, to see, that is, the pain and suffering of Christ. Another approach is to participate in the whole process through the manners and customs, to live them, that is, folklorically, to satisfy the children's experiences. However, the Church with the period of Great Lent seeks to help man approach it existentially. A theology that is not related to the existential anguish of man, and his deliverance from it, does not have value or meaning. For one to see the problem of death in their existence, as manifested by the tyranny of the passions, and to seek to heal it with repentance, which is a change of mind and lifestyle, is to partake of the Cross and Resurrection of Christ.

The feelings which prevail in the dramatized events of Holy Week are mixed. Pain walks alongside with joy, indolence with alertness, sin with forgiveness, betrayal with love, the fall with redemption, death with resurrection. Do you believe these feelings are a challenge for the contemporary world, especially young people?

First let me tell you that in the Church we are taught how we can alter these emotions into deeply spiritual experiences. Because, as you know, there are differences between feelings and emotions. The first are deep spiritual existential situations, while the second are superficial pleasures.

Indeed, these contrasts between pain and joy, indolence and alertness, sin and forgiveness, etc. are a formidable challenge. People, especially young people, mostly walk one-way, becoming a so-called "one-dimensional man". I want to say that contemporary people are usually pained and betrayed, feeling unsuccessful in life. It is terrible for a young person to feel alone, sad, hurt, uncomfortable and inconsolable, feeling the depressing weight of sin, experiencing an impasse in life. And yet the Church shows us the way to overcome the impasse by suggesting a way out. Today we need consolation, supplication and hope. And God exhorts: "Supplicate, supplicate for my people." Through the perspective of supplication and consolation we see the events of Holy Week and Pascha. To watch the harlot woman immediately become wise, since she loved Christ. To see the thief, the criminal, become the first citizen of Paradise. Too see the disciple who denied Christ become the Foremost Leader of the Apostles. Is this not a great consolation?

How would you briefly describe the events of the Divine Drama?

If one reads the synaxarion for each day they will see in detail what we celebrate each day of Holy Week. If I could make a brief analysis, I would say that all the facts show two realities or truths. One is the aggression and hatred of man towards the truth, and the other is the "aggressiveness" of the truth and love towards hate. As Father Justin Popovich would say in the past, man sentenced God to death and God "sentenced" man to immortality. Hatred and insecure aggression always show weakness, while love and voluntary crucifixion reveal the power of the spirit. People today see enemies everywhere and feel their neighbor to be a threat to their existence. Christ showed us that the enemy is not just outside of us, but within us is our traumatized freedom that acts as nothing and not as love. He also taught us that the presence of others is not a threat to our existence, but a "prophetic event", since the other is our brother, our joy. Sartre said: "Hell is other people." The Saints, through the example of Christ, exclaimed: "Christ is Risen, my joy!"

What is the message that emanated from the empty tomb of Christ for the people of this broadcast?

We live in an era of information and information technology, an age in which television broadcasts play an important role. Despite this, however, we live in an era of disinformation and misinformation. We learn a lot of news going on in the world, but we ignore the greatest news, which is the essence of things.

Henry David Thoreau, referring to the information of his age (1854), said that the newspapers offered "nothing new". He emphasized that if one reads of an incident, a robbery, a murder, etc. then nothing else needs to be read. "If you are acquainted with the principle, what do you care for a myriad of instances and applications? To a philosopher all news, as it is called, is gossip, and they who edit and read it are old women over their tea" (Walden, ch. 2). Walter Benjamin (1938) says that modern information is in reality "short disconnected information". He writes characteristically: "It is virtually impossible to write a history of information separately from a history of the corruption of the press" (The Paris of the Second Empire in Baudelaire). How much more is this the case for contemporary information!

But the empty tomb of the God-man offers old and always new information, about death that is conquered, about real life that springs up from death, about the kenosis, the sacrifice and the offering. It is probably better to say that the empty tomb of Christ does not only offer information, but even better - that life has conquered death.

Broadcasts run on created light and make people aware of the surface, but the empty tomb of Christ shows the uncreated Light, which illumines the darkness of Hades and fills all of creation with light. So while the channels of information satisfy the senses, the empty tomb of Christ gives rest to the spiritual senses, and reveals life beyond the senses.

Do you believe the contemporary world can attain the realization of the Resurrection? What is the message you would like to send, as a Hierarch, to young people?

What we have said so far shows the position of the spirit I want to get through in this interview. What I would like to emphasize at this point is that there exists a revolution occurring with hatred and the energies of the Beast of Revelation, and there is a resurrection occurring with love and the energies of the Lamb of Revelation. Christ by His Resurrection made the greatest revolution in history. Not every revolution is or leads to Resurrection, but the Resurrection in Christ Jesus is the true revolution, in the sense that the word "revolution" (επανάσταση) comes from the verb επανίστημι and shows the return (επάνοδο) of humanity to their first-created beauty, the restoration of humanity to our previous glory, and our resurrection from the Fall.

Christ was sacrificed and arose not to do some spectacular action for His own personal exaltation and glory, but to become the medicine for mankind. When medicine is found for a sickness, then we rejoice because then every sick person can be remedied. Likewise, Christ with His Cross and Resurrection became a more powerful medicine, "the medicine of immortality". All of us who are dominated by death can get rid of its dynasty and live the Resurrection. This was lived by the Saints, so can we as well.

Finally, I want to say that the Book of Revelation shows us the energies of the Antichrist, but also the glory of Christ; the mark of the Beast, but also the seal of the Lamb; the wickedness of the Beast, but also the people of the Lamb; the destruction of creation, but also the renewal of creation. The end of Revelation is the triumphant victory of Christ over the Antichrist, the new heaven and new earth, and new people only with the new Christ, Who makes all things new, and makes all things without corruption for all things to remain new, in our life, in our mindset, and in all of our existence.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Media Consensus on Climate Alarmism Cracking

The Economist and other journalism icons are beginning to reassess their position on global warming.

Lawrence Solomon

April 13, 2013

Financial Post

The overwhelming consensus on global warming among journalists may be cracking. Last week, the world’s most prestigious newsmagazine – The Economist – backed away from its past alarmist position, saying that “If climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, climate sensitivity would be on negative watch.” The Economist now discounts the high-end estimates of warming coming from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as being unlikely if not far-fetched.

And now the London Telegraph’s venerable Geoffrey Lean concurs, in an article entitled “Global warming: time to rein back on doom and gloom?” Says this pioneer of environmental journalism at the peak of his 40-year career: “climate change might not be as catastrophic as the gloomiest predictions suggest.” To the contrary, he says, the warming now expected could be “less than the 2C danger level.”

In both cases, these journalistic icons’ reassessment was based not on ideology but on fact. Temperatures have not risen over the past 15 years, making a mockery of the computer programs that showed temperatures rising in lockstep with carbon dioxide. “When my information changes, I alter my conclusions,” economist John Maynard Keynes famously said.

The information changed for both The Economist magazine and for Lean, and both then altered their conclusions. The Economist points to various reputable scientific bodies that have far less scary projections than the IPCC, including the government-funded Research Council of Norway, and it is clearly troubled by the failure of the computer models to match reality. One possibility, it says quite reasonably, is that the last decade of no warming has been an anomaly, and that warming will soon resume. “Or it might be that the 1990s, when temperatures were rising fast, was the anomalous period,” it states, meaning that we all got worked up over what amounted to nothing more than a temporary hot spell.

The Economist and Lean join a small group of prestigious colleagues who have long been skeptical of warnings of doom, among them writers and editors at the Wall Street Journal in the U.S., at Lean’s own Telegraph in the U.K., at Der Spiegel in Germany, at The Australian in Australia and at National Post in Canada. Other journalists are now also likely to take a second look at the IPCC’s assertions, both because a change of heart on the part of The Economist cannot easily be dismissed and because no journalist wants to be in the embarrassing position of being the last to know.

For the journalists who are now reading this, and especially for those without a scientific grounding who understandably feel they must rely on authority, here is what needs to be known to cut through the scientific bafflegab and be confident as skeptics.

1. All of the scary global warming scenarios are based on computer models.

2. None of the models work.

3. There is and has been no scientific consensus.

The most common reason for believing in a scientific consensus is the claim made in the previous decade, and then routinely repeated, that 2500 scientists have endorsed the IPCC’s findings (the Internet has countless references to this effect, with the number of scientists sometimes reported as 3000 or 4000.) This claim stems from a misunderstanding. The 2500 scientists associated with the IPCC were not endorsers, they were peer reviewers. Anyone can confirm this easily, as I have, by simply contacting the Secretariat of the IPCC.

The other common reason for believing in the existence of a scientific consensus was a widely reported survey that showed 97% of scientists believe in global warming. That number came from an online survey of 10,257 earth scientists conducted by two researchers who for various reasons decided to disqualify all but 77 of the 3146 who responded. The 77 accepted had unknown qualifications – a PhD or even a Master’s degree was not required for inclusion in the survey. Of those 77, 75 thought humans contributed to climate change; the ratio 75 over 77 yields the 97% figure. Another study also brandished a 97% figure, this one produced not by a scientist but by a computer administrator doing Google Scholar searches.

To keep track of, and follow, the journalists who are becoming more skeptical of anthropogenic global warming, I have created a Twitter list, entitled Newly Skeptical AGW Media, that anyone on the Internet can see. The list now has three members: Geoffrey Lean, The Economist and Oliver Morton, a journalist who participated in an Economist podcast describing its new position. As other prominent journalists become more skeptical in their views on climate change, I’ll add them to the list, creating a record of sorts of the media’s evolution in thinking on climate change (feel free to email me with names of other journalists who belong on this list). I’ll also report on the progress of the list, or lack thereof, in future columns.

An evolution in thinking among journalists would bring journalists into the mainstream of society – journalists today are among the few groups that overwhelmingly subscribe to the view that global warming is both man made and represents a major danger. The public certainly does not. According to a Pew report released earlier this month, among Americans global warming ranks last among 21 public policy priorities that the government should deal with. European polls show similar results. This skepticism among the public – quite remarkable considering the steady diet of imminent danger that most of the western world’s press has dished out – would only increase should journalists start questioning climate change orthodoxy, as The Economist has, ending the overwhelming consensus on climate change in the media.

The Postmodern Sacred

Emily McAvan’s interesting thesis, summarized in an issue of the Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, has now been expanded in her recently published thesis The Postmodern Sacred: Popular Culture Spirituality in the Science Fiction, Fantasy and Urban Fantasy Genres. Below is an abstract of McAvan's earlier thesis along with a link, together with a description of her book:

By Emily McAvan

Division of Arts

Murdoch University

Journal of Religion and Popular Culture

Vol. 22(1)-Spring 2010

Abstract

I argue that the return of the religious in contemporary culture has been in two forms: the rise of so-called fundamentalisms in the established faiths—Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, even Buddhist—and the rise of a New Age style spirituality that draws from aspects of those faiths even as it produces something distinctively different. I argue that this shift both produces postmodern media culture and is itself always already mediated through the realm of the fictional. Secular and profane are always entangled within one another, a constant and pervasive media presence that modulates the way that contemporary subjects experience themselves and their relationship to the spiritual. I use popular culture as an entry point, an entry point that can presume neither belief nor unbelief in its audiences, showing that it is “unreal” texts such as Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, The Matrix, The Passion of the Christ and Left Behind that we find religious symbols and ideas refracted through a postmodernist sensibility, with little regard for the demands of “real world” epistemology. I argue that it is in this interplay between traditional religions and New Age-ised spirituality in popular culture that the sacred truly finds itself in postmodernity.

Read the entire study here.

And below is the description of her recent book The Postmodern Sacred:

From The Matrix and Harry Potter to Stargate SG:1 and The X-Files, recent science fiction and fantasy offerings both reflect and produce a sense of the religious. This thoughtful volume examines this pop-culture spirituality, or “postmodern sacred,” showing how consumers use the symbols contained in explicitly “unreal” texts to gain a second-hand experience of transcendence and belief. Topics include how media technologies like CGI have blurred the lines between real and unreal, the polytheisms of Buffy and Xena, the New Age Gnosticism of The DaVinci Code, the Islamic “Other” and science fiction’s response to 9/11, and the Christian Right and popular culture. Today’s pervasive, saturated media culture, this work shows, has utterly collapsed the sacred/profane binary, so that popular culture is not only powerfully shaped by the discourses of religion, but also shapes how the religious appears and is experienced in the contemporary world.

The Ethics of Facebook, Twitter and Social Media

By Douglas Groothuis

SYNOPSIS

Social media are growing explosively and are changing the way people around the globe think of friendship and community. While media such as Facebook offer us unique opportunities, they also present real dangers. Christians should realize that not all forms of culture are advantageous to human flourishing and that every medium has it limitations. We are shaped in profound ways by every medium of communication. Yet, for all its immediacy and possibilities, the computer world of social media cannot replace the significance of embodied interactions. Friendship, fellowship, and community cannot be duplicated at the deepest levels in social media. Nevertheless, if we resist gossip and gullibility, and are careful not to overexpose ourselves in these media, we can engage these forms of communication wisely and usefully. The following principles can help guide our involvement with social media: (1) Monitor yourself for unhealthy behavior. (2) Restrict late evening and early morning for other activities. (3) Avoid narcissism and present one’s true self. (4) Pay special attention to specific Facebook friends each month. (5) Be skeptical of how others present themselves on Facebook. (6) Periodically abstain from Facebook. (7) Develop a philosophy of what a Facebook friend should mean to you. For me, this means presenting thoughtful material to as many people as possible, which includes apologetic engagement.

---------------

With the meteoric rise of social media such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and others, we should ask how these modes of computer-mediated social interaction are affecting individuals, groups, and culture at large. One may have hundreds of Facebook “friends,” but what kind of friends are they? And what kind of “community” is Facebook and related social media outlets? What are the beneficial elements of social media and what are its dangers? Consider two episodes that highlight the strengths and weakness of this new medium.

In May of 2006, a woman left her expensive cell phone in a New York City cab. Rather than giving it up for lost, she used various social media to trigger a massive campaign for her cell phone to be returned. The person who found the woman’s cell phone initially communicated his refusal to return it by sending a nasty e-mail message, but he was eventually pressured to give it back when the case was made widely known. The recovery of the woman’s phone would have been impossible apart from the connections available through social media. This highlights new forms of social association and action that would have been impossible previously. Political demonstrations in repressive regimes have been organized in this way as well.1

On another occasion, a man decides to use a Facebook post to vent his pent-up frustrations against someone he knows. He attacks the person’s character and issues false charges. Although both he and the person he vilifies are Christians, he fails to communicate first with that person about his complaints (see Matt. 18:15–20). Instead, he issues a broadside in a media environment where all his “friends” can read the post. This takes gossip to a whole new (social media) level. Feelings are hurt, lies are broadcast, and no one is the better for it.

FACEBOOK, THEOLOGY, AND THE NATURE OF TECHNOLOGY

Although there are other forms of social media, we will concentrate on the strengths and weaknesses of Facebook, given its size and influence. The ascent of Facebook has been remarkable. During the first quarter of 2009, five million people joined Facebook every week. From August 2008 to March 2009, its membership doubled from one hundred million to two hundred million and the vast majority of its members (140 million) have joined since February of 2007.2 Facebook has rapidly generated a spontaneous ordering of human communication that is unique in history.

Internet technologies have swiftly changed cultures around the world through their speed, availability, and new contexts for information exchange, whether through text, audio, still images, or video. The rise of social networking has raised significant questions about the meaning and experience of community in the digital domain. Christians believe in authoritative principles for human flourishing designed by God. Therefore, they should be especially concerned with how these new and nearly ubiquitous technologies are shaping ourselves and our society. If the greatest commandment is to love God with all of our being and to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matt. 22:37–39), then it behooves us to discern the strengths and weaknesses of these technologies and “hold on to the good” while avoiding “every kind of evil” (1 Thess. 5:21–22).3 The place to start is at the beginning—the beginning of humanity. Only this framework is large enough to give us discernment regarding the wise use of these media.

Human beings, as image-bearers of God, are social creatures. We were designed by a loving God to demonstrate love for God and for others. In this context, we are to develop God’s good creation for human flourishing and God’s pleasure. The first man, even before the Fall, would have been lonely and incomplete without another image-bearer of God who was fitted to be his partner and lover. Although put into a garden of goodness with unrestricted fellowship with God (Gen. 1–2), our first parents listened to the lie of the serpent, opting to go their own way by doing the one thing that God had forbidden: eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3).

Despite our wounded, fractured, and fragile existence in a world east of Eden, God has not abandoned us to our own devices and despair. Rather, He pursues errant mortals by revealing Himself in creation and in conscience (Ps. 19:1–6; Rom. 1–2), through prophets, miracles, and supremely through sending His one and only Son, Jesus Christ (Heb. 1). God commissions His people to disciple nations according to His teaching, since He has all authority in heaven and on earth (Matt. 28:18–20). As agents of God’s Kingdom, Christians should discern the results of the Fall and advance redemptive strategies to lead people to Christ and to encourage social interaction that furthers God’s shalom (peace and flourishing for the creation under God). As Jesus said:

"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.

You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven" (Matt. 5:13–16).

To be salt and light requires an understanding of culture and its effects on us all. We should be like the tribe of Issachar, “who understood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron. 12:32).

Human culture is multifaceted, variable, complex, and often invisible. Put simply, culture is the mark that humans make on nature and on each other (see Gen. 1:26; Ps. 8). However, that mark may be blended into our lives in ways that we hardly notice. Competent cultural criticism brings the cultural background into the foreground, as Marshall McLuhan observed. This allows us to discern what is typically out of view.

The unique human touch takes manifold forms— involving the sartorial, the architectural, the orchestral, the automotive, and so on—and extends to various discursive communicative media such as spoken language, smoke signals, forms of signage, and written language. More recently, it has included electronically mediated communications, such as the telegraph, telephone, radio, television, and Internet. The latter has afforded us, in a very short time, a plethora of possibilities for communication, from e-mail to text messaging to blogs to what is now called “social networking,” a phenomenon that occurs on the Internet by broadening the kinds of computer-mediated social contact offered by e-mail, blogs, or Web pages. This creates a digital agora, but with no one there in the flesh. Bodies are absent, but interaction is very present in this new electronic forum.

In his insightful book, The Church of Facebook, Jesse Rice repeatedly emphasizes that new technologies produce unforeseen and unique effects. Radical new patterns of association emerge. He sets forth three principles at work with social networking technologies and structures the book around them. (1) There is a force that is capable of synchronizing a large population in very little time, thereby creating spontaneous order. (2) This spontaneous order can generate outcomes that are entirely new and unpredictable. (3) These unpredictable outcomes require the affected population to adapt their behavior to more adequately live within the new spontaneously generated order.4

To put this in Neil Postman’s terms, technological change produces “ecological” effects that go beyond minor adjustments in a culture.5 For example, television changed American culture economically, politically, and intellectually. It was not merely another medium added to newspapers, the telegraph, and radio. Thus, political debates in American politics went from being intellectually robust exchanges, often lasting for hours, to televised events in which the one with the best looks and one-liners wins.6 In fact, Postman claims that the sensibilities fostered by television affect our very sense of truth and falsity. This observation could be extended to say that all forms of electronic communication shape our ways of approaching and understanding the world. It therefore seems important to explore some basic cautions in navigating this new world before giving some specific principles for engagement.

SOME BASIC CAUTIONS

Facebook and related social media tend to foster the overexposure of the underdeveloped self by facilitating the mass distribution of text and images related to oneself. The problem is that one may expose a self that is not mature enough for that exposure. As the Book of Proverbs so often says, the wise hold their peace, but fools proclaim their folly. One should choose confidants carefully (see Ps. 1). Some aspects of one’s life should be concealed. There is much folly, frivolity, and triviality in social networking. Not everyone should know everything about everyone. While secrecy wrongly conceals vices or wrongdoing, confidentiality is prudent because it shields things that need to be kept out of view. Social networking makes the broad distribution of text and image virtually effortless, and many lack the discretion required to hold their peace. One Facebook post lamented that a woman’s husband had treated her harshly in a way that never happened while they were dating. This was a cry of pain, but Facebook was not the place to air it. This confidence belonged in a marital discussion, in prayer, and perhaps in a pastor or counselor’s office.

One should also be careful of gossip. Given the nature of Facebook, gossip can spread rapidly and widely. Gossip can be defined as repeating unfavorable things about people for no good reason. Biblically understood, gossip is sinful and should be repented of. Some of the statements may be true, but they are unedifying and without constructive purpose.7 Paul includes gossip in several of his “sin lists,” putting it alongside adultery, murder, and so on (Rom. 1:29; 2 Cor. 12:20).

Moreover, there is a time to retreat from words entirely, as the Preacher of Ecclesiastes warns: “The more the words, the less the meaning, and how does that profit anyone?” (Eccl. 6:11; see also 5:1–2). The same is true for images. Many Facebook users recklessly post photographs of themselves in immodest and/or narcissistic poses. Even innocent photographs may be misunderstood given the often-ambiguous nature of the image. Facebook comments and images have come back to haunt their authors, as when potential employers assess the Facebook pages of those they are considering hiring.

What is called social media may become profoundly antisocial. Some who are immersed in social media prefer such media over face-to-face encounters. This furthers the technological problem of “the absent present”: although someone may be right next to you, she is immersed in her cell phone, Blackberry, iPod, or laptop. For example, students in the classroom may use their laptops to take notes or perhaps look up something related to the lecture. As a teacher, I have found that quite often students are not using their laptops in these ways, however, but are doing any number of other things online, including checking social networking sites such as Facebook and eHarmony.

Many students are prone to this, since they have grown up with multitasking as a habit. The idea of undivided attention strikes them as strange and uninviting. But trying to divide one’s attention between the classroom (the lecture, student comments, the textbook) and social media impoverishes the classroom, vitiating it of its unique possibilities for learning through lecture and dialogue. John Medina argues that the brain itself is incapable of multitasking effectively, whether in the classroom or elsewhere.8 For these reasons, I have banned laptops from my classes at Denver Seminary and have added the following comment to my syllabi: “No laptops are allowed in the classroom. While many students will use them responsibly, many will disappear behind the screens. For this reason, I am banning them from the classroom. The classroom needs to be a zone for knowledge and inspiration. Knowledge needs students and students need knowledge. We need to breathe ideas together without the distraction of alien mediation. Therefore, please print out the class notes for the day and be ready to take notes and discuss the material face-to-face, voice-to-voice, soul-to-soul.”9 I find that the unmediated classroom is far better than one mediated by computers and their manifold distractions.

PRINCIPLES FOR ENGAGEMENT

Rice recommends several specific principles for using Facebook, which I have adapted somewhat and to which I will add some of my own:

1. Practice regular check-ins. Since social media can induce “out-of-body experiences” (digital interactions apart from personal presence), we should monitor ourselves in the midst of using Facebook or similar technologies. What are we feeling and thinking? How are we responding to this world? Given the hyperconnectedness that Facebook affords, it is easy to get swept into the data flow without being mindful of what is happening on the screen and in the soul. Think of Jesus’ admonition, “Therefore consider carefully how you listen” (Luke 8:18), which applies to Facebook as well as to face-to-face situations. Many people post immodest photographs of themselves online. If we tend to ogle such photographs, we should not; we should repent of this. This may mean not perusing online photo albums— or it may mean getting off of Facebook entirely. Jesus was very serious about this particular sin:

"You have heard that it was said, “Do not commit adultery.” But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell" (Matt. 5:27–32).

2. Resolve not to go online immediately before bed or immediately after waking up. These significant times of the day should be reserved to memorize Scripture, meditate on it, and pray (See Ps. 119). One should start well and end well.

3. Practice authentic Facebook engagement. Facebook caters to narcissism, with many people presenting flattering images of, and words about, themselves that are unreal. Therefore, we should evaluate the “presentation of self in everyday life” on Facebook.10 Does the content we post reflect our God-given nature? Are we being authentically ourselves here, or are we hyperactive and hyperconnected pretenders? God knows: “For God will bring every deed into judgment, including every hidden thing, whether it is good or evil” (Eccl. 12:14).

4. Focus on one or two Facebook friends for one month for special involvement. One’s involvement in Facebook can become more meaningful by picking just a few people to focus on, instead of distributing one’s attention more widely but superficially. Keep your other friends, but pay special attention to these souls. Pray for them; send messages only for them; post photographs with them that are meaningful, and so on. Then consider whether this has deepened your relationship with them.

These four recommendations are sane and solid. I often challenge people to develop a philosophy of Facebook to guide their involvement, and Rice’s encouragement should spur reflection. On the basis of my experience with Facebook, let me commend three other principles.

5. Practice skeptical Facebook activities. Just as one might give a false impression of oneself through doctored photos or hyped-up words, one should realize that others are likely doing the same thing. In other words, Facebook may not be the best source to fathom someone’s character or skills. The image presented may not be the reality reflected by the person herself. It is unwise to grant very much trust to someone only known through Facebook, especially given all the scams and frauds out there.

6. Abstain from Facebook or other social media if you find yourself obsessing on it or if your interaction is bearing bad fruit in your life. One’s spouse can be a savvy observer for this. It is easy to lose track of time or not notice what so much time online is doing to one’s character. If a spouse or another trusted person is concerned about your involvement, hear them out and take stock of your situation before God. According to the Book of Proverbs, one of the qualities of a friend is their willingness to challenge the attitudes and behavior of the one he or she cares about. “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses” (Prov. 27:6).11

7. Decide carefully what a Facebook “friend” means to you. There are at least two schools of thought on this. On the one hand, the Facebook user may retain a more biblical meaning of the word friend and allow only those people with whom he or she has a significant relationship. This principle will cut down on the volume of “friends,” but increase the quality of the interaction. On the other hand, someone may want a large audience for one’s posts. If so, a “friend” does not mean someone existentially significant, but rather a person who may benefit from what one posts. I have adopted the latter strategy. Because I am a teacher, I endeavor to use this forum to educate and edify people through my own pithy comments (sometimes in the form of aphorisms or epigrams); quotations from Scripture, classic literature, or philosophy; and links to thoughtful articles or (more rarely) videos. I keep personal comments to a minimum in order to avoid self-absorption, and because I have a larger base of Facebook friends than those who limit Facebook friends to “real-life friends.”

In some cases, I am able to have meaningful interaction with strangers who are Facebook “friends.” Recently, a troubled young Christian from Asia sent me an instant message about her fear of betraying Christ and never getting free of sins that hinder her obedience to God. Although her English writing was rough, I tried to understand her plight, sympathize with her, and offer her biblical counsel. We exchanged messages for about fifteen minutes and I assured her I would pray for her and that she could contact me if I could be of further help. While this kind of interaction is far removed from real pastoral counseling or the accountability of a small group, it seemed that I was able to offer this troubled soul some spiritual substance through Facebook. As a Christian philosopher, I also seek to defend the truth and rationality of the Christian worldview wherever I find a healthy opportunity to do so, even if it is on Facebook (1 Peter 3:15–16). If I sense in the Facebook interlocutor a genuine interest in my arguments, I will continue to interact. But if there is flippancy and belligerence (all too common in social media), I disengage, not wanting to “cast pearls before swine,” as Jesus said in Matthew 7:6.

VIRTUAL CHURCH?

Some engage social media outside of these boundaries. Some even advocate social media as a form for the church meeting itself. One author proposes “SimChurch,” in which people congregate not in the flesh, but in virtual environments through the use of avatars (graphic digital identities).12 In the summer of 2009, I was on a BBC radio program with someone who pioneered “Saint Pixels Church,” which caters to those who want their fellowship virtual instead of embodied. But I argued that those who sponsor such innovations have a deficient view of culture, the body, and the church.

Given that human culture is fallen (James 1:27; 1 John 2:15–17), we must not embrace every innovation that emanates from the innards of a computer. Some things that can be done ought not to be done. As Paul said, “‘Everything is permissible for me’—but I will not be mastered by anything” (1 Cor. 6:12). While I cannot here offer a broader critique of the use of avatars in virtual worlds,13 we should consider that virtual representations of one’s self typically do not correspond very closely to the person behind them. One may argue that this masquerade is allowable in some entertainment settings (virtual or otherwise), but the virtual self should not be embraced carte blanche. Leaving one’s body behind (as one does in SimChurch or St. Pixels) allows for numerous cartoon-like possibilities, but it does not honor the biblical understanding of fellowship.

Both the apostle Paul and the apostle John longed to be physically with the people to whom they wrote their Epistles. Consider the words of Paul as he began to pen the Book of Romans: “I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong—that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith” (Rom. 1:11–12). Although Paul was writing some of the most profound theology imaginable, he still desired to be together with those in the Roman church. The apostle John affirmed the same: “I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete” (2 John 12; see also 3 John 13–14).

The most profound elements of church life are not possible online, since they are embodied. One cannot offer “the right hand of fellowship” through an avatar, nor can one partake of communion or baptism, the laying on of hands, the anointing with oil, or corporate worship—all constitutive parts of church life and fellowship. Whatever our social media involvement may be, we must not let it eclipse the God-ordained structures of the local church.

SOCIAL MEDIA: LIMITS AND POSSIBILITIES

Social media provide fast, far-reaching, and free interaction with a huge number of people. Yet we should not become intoxicated with this rapidly expanding and easily addicting social world. While it offers the benefits of interaction with those outside of our general vicinity and can be used to communicate the truth in love (Eph. 4:15), it lacks significant elements of meaningful friendship that are found only through more embodied interactions. It can never substitute for the local church. However, if used intentionally, prayerfully, and with restraint, it can add a new dimension to our social interactions that might otherwise not be possible.

NOTES

1 Clay Shirkey, “It Takes a Village to Find a Phone,” in Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations (New York: Penguin, 2009), chap. 1.

2 Jesse Rice, The Church of Facebook (Colorado Springs: David C. Cook, 2009). For my review of this book in Denver Journal, see: 

http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/the-church-of-facebook-how-the-hyperconnected-are-redefining-community.

3 All Scripture quotations are from the New International Version.

4 Rice, 20–21.

5 Neil Postman, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992), 18.

6 See Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death (New York: Penguin, 1985).

7 See Melody Green, “Gossip!” at: http://www.lastdaysministries.org/Mobile/default.aspxgroup_id=1000040808&article_id=1000008545. This was originally published as a tract by Last Days Ministries in the early 1980s.

8 John Medina, Brain Rules: 12 Principles for Surviving and Thriving at Work, Home, and School (Seattle: Pear Press, 2008), chap. 4.

9 See Douglas Groothuis, “Banning Laptops from the Classroom,” The Teaching Professor, March 2010.

10 This is the title of an influential book by sociologist Erving Goffman, first published in 1959.

11 For a biblical study on the meaning of friendship in the Book of Proverbs, see Ajith Fernando, Reclaiming Friendship (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1991).

12 Doug Estes, SimChurch: Being the Church in the Virtual World (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009).

13 I take this up in The Soul in Cyberspace (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997). However, the technological involvements have far exceeded what I discussed there. Nevertheless, the basic principles I used to critique the technologies then available are still applicable today.

Source: Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., is professor of philosophy at Denver Seminary and the author of many books on apologetics. This article first appeared in the Christian Research Journal, volume 33, number 03 (2010).

Relevant Quotes From Marilyn Manson's 1999 Essay on the Columbine Massacre

After incidents of violence like the shooting at Aurora, Colorado take place, many people begin to question why something like this happens, and in their grief and confusion find comfort in blaming something or someone that usually should not be blamed.

When the Columbine shootings happened in Colorado in 1999, not too far from the shootings a few days ago, many pundits and politicians blamed games, goth culture, and dark pop/rock figures like Marilyn Manson. The following quotes are from the essay "Columbine: Whose Fault Is It?" by Marilyn Manson, published in Rolling Stone and written on May 28, 1999, after he was falsely blamed for influencing the gunmen and in turn received dozens of death threats, and it is still relevant today.

- It is sad to think that the first few people on earth needed no books, movies, games or music to inspire cold-blooded murder. The day that Cain bashed his brother Abel's brains in, the only motivation he needed was his own human disposition to violence.

- A lot of people forget or never realize that I started my band as a criticism of these very issues of despair and hypocrisy. The name Marilyn Manson has never celebrated the sad fact that America puts killers on the cover of Time magazine, giving them as much notoriety as our favorite movie stars.

- Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised.

- Does anyone think the Civil War was the least bit civil? If television had existed, you could be sure they would have been there to cover it, or maybe even participate in it, like their violent car chase of Princess Di.

- When it comes down to who's to blame for the high school murders in Littleton, Colorado, throw a rock and you'll hit someone who's guilty. We're the people who sit back and tolerate children owning guns, and we're the ones who tune in and watch the up-to-the-minute details of what they do with them. I think it's terrible when anyone dies, especially if it is someone you know and love. But what is more offensive is that when these tragedies happen, most people don't really care any more than they would about the season finale of Friends or The Real World. I was dumbfounded as I watched the media snake right in, not missing a teardrop, interviewing the parents of dead children, televising the funerals. Then came the witch hunt.

- Man's greatest fear is chaos.

- Did we look for James Huberty's inspiration when he gunned down people at McDonald's? What did Timothy McVeigh like to watch? What about David Koresh, Jim Jones? Do you think entertainment inspired Kip Kinkel, or should we blame the fact that his father bought him the guns he used in the Springfield, Oregon, murders? What inspires Bill Clinton to blow people up in Kosovo? Was it something that Monica Lewinsky said to him? Isn't killing just killing, regardless if it's in Vietnam or Jonesboro, Arkansas? Why do we justify one, just because it seems to be for the right reasons? Should there ever be a right reason? If a kid is old enough to drive a car or buy a gun, isn't he old enough to be held personally responsible for what he does with his car or gun? Or if he's a teenager, should someone else be blamed because he isn't as enlightened as an eighteen-year-old?

- America loves to find an icon to hang its guilt on.

- Right now, everyone is thinking of how they can prevent things like Littleton. How do you prevent AIDS, world war, depression, car crashes? We live in a free country, but with that freedom there is a burden of personal responsibility.

- It is no wonder that kids are growing up more cynical; they have a lot of information in front of them. They can see that they are living in a world that's made of bullshit. In the past, there was always the idea that you could turn and run and start something better. But now America has become one big mall, and because of the Internet and all of the technology we have, there's nowhere to run.

- In my work I examine the America we live in, and I've always tried to show people that the devil we blame our atrocities on is really just each one of us. So don't expect the end of the world to come one day out of the blue -- it's been happening every day for a long time.

Jonathan Jackson's Orthodox Acceptance Speech at the Emmy's

This past Holy Saturday Jonathan Jackson, a five-time Emmy Award winning actor on General Hospital, together with his family, were received into the Orthodox Christian Church.

Wikipedia

Official Website

Along with acting, Jonathan is also the lead singer of the indie rock band Enation. www.EnationMusic.com

Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick interviewed him about his journey into Orthodox Christianity, his family, how he lives his faith as a Hollywood actor, music and writing, on an episode of Roads From Emmaus, which can be heard here. For background on the interview, read here.

On Sunday, 24 June 2012, Jonathan won his fifth Emmy for his work on General Hospital as a Supporting Actor. His acceptance speech is below, in which he begins by thanking the Holy Trinity while making the sign of the cross, and ends by thanking the monks of Mount Athos for their prayers for the world.

Documentary: "Culture of Fear"

The documentary details the epidemic of fear in our society, ranging from child predators to immigrants and from flu pandemic to terrorism. It features interviews with Dr. Noam Chomsky, a renowned linguist, human behaviorist, and political activist; US House Representative Dennis Kucinich, once US presidential candidate; and many other experts offering an in-depth exploration of the culture of fear. Culture of Fear is a term used by certain scholars, writers, journalists and politicians who believe that some in society incite fear in the general public to achieve political goals.

The term is used to describe fears about Islamic terrorism which, it is argued, are fears that are usually exaggerated or irrational in nature. The term has also been used to describe irrational fear in other contexts, such as citizens fearing persons of different ethnic backgrounds, or neighborhood residents fearing retribution if they assist police in identifying criminals.

Source

How Media Influenced My Journey As A Christian

My personal Christian journey began well before my teenage years, and many things influenced my path towards growing in the wisdom and knowledge of the Lord. It was a slow journey with many steps along the way, and many hurdles as well, before I began to really take Christianity seriously, but it seems from the moment I could talk I was always a philosopher. Though I was born and raised an Orthodox Christian, my family was not particularly religious or philosophical or even educated. So wherever and whenever I found a kernel of gold somewhere, I treasured it. The few who know me know that I am still the same way, because I have found for me that this is a tried and true method. Among my early pre-high school influences I could name a few people that had a major influence on me, and possibly even a few books. But nothing influenced me more in my journey as a Christian than the media, specifically television and film, since media can mean many other things.

I understand that there are many Christians who may find this confusing, since to them television and film are seen to be as more on the evil side of influences, especially for youth. This is something I have always disagreed with, by personal experience. I have found that if you're raised to fear something, your life will be lived in fear, which I find unhealthy. My personal opinion has always been that nothing can influence you deeply unless you are inclined for it to influence you (influence is usually based on deep human experience), and if you are inclined towards good then you will get good out of something no matter how evil it may seem, but if you are inclined towards evil then evil will be its fruits even if it appears good. And this not only goes for the media, but for everything. Life offers many opportunities to choose between good and evil without the media, as it always had throughout history, so the weak will fall one way or the other, and the strong will grow if it is in their will to grow. It is not my intention here to defend my influences or the media with simplistic answers, but only offer this as food for further reflection.

Below is a list of ten ways (with video links in the titles), of many, in which the media influenced my early Christian journey:

1. Superbook

As a child, like most children, I loved watching cartoons. Before there were networks entirely devoted to children's programming, most kids would only have the chance to watch their fill of cartoons on Saturday morning, which I did. After school was another great time to watch cartoons for a few hours. But my favorite cartoon program in the early 1980's, when I was about 5 or 6 years old, was a cartoon I discovered in the morning at 7:00 am which I could watch every day before school. This cartoon was called Superbook. Superbook, also known as Animated Parent and Child Theatre, was an anime television series produced by Tatsunoko Productions in Japan in conjunction with the Christian Broadcasting Network in the United States. The series chronicled the events of the Bible's Old and New Testaments in its 52 episode run. I will not get into the details, but this show was a tremendous influence in my life. I had seen every episode and because of it I knew every major story in the Bible. This series was so influential that it made me buy my own Children's Bible, which beginning around 7 or 8 years old I read every night before bed. When my friends would come over they would make fun of me for having a Bible next to my bed, but I didn't care because I loved it. Superbook for me was one of the biggest reasons not only for loving Scripture, but for knowing it as well as I do. It helped me appreciate and be excited about the stories before I got into the meat of the book.

2. He-Man

Probably the most influential after-school cartoon for me when I was about 7 years old was He-Man and the Masters of the Universe. He-Man was not necessarily a Christian cartoon, but it was influential on me because it was the first time I got into a series where good and evil were clearly separated, as well as virtue and vice. It was also about transformation, where a young man named Adam, who was lazy and cowardly, would transform dramatically as He-Man by fighting evil with courage and strength. The clear delineation between good and evil, darkness and light, virtue and vice portrayed in this show was also very influential on me to become the type of person I wanted to be.

3. A Christmas Carol

As a child, and even still as an adult, I have always loved holidays, and when I was a child Christmas was my favorite. Yes, I loved the presents, the music, the tree, the lights, the school vacation, etc, but from a very young age I also started a unique practice. When I was very young I would always try and stay up till midnight on Christmas Eve to capture a glimpse of Santa Claus. By the time I was about 7 years old I discovered, through a great loss of innocence, that there was no Santa Claus, but this did not deter me from still loving Christmas. I wanted to hold on to the holiday as much as I could so I would try and stay up all night watching Christmas programs on TV. And when I was very young I noticed a movie that came on every year around 2:00 or 3:00 am called A Christmas Carol. Despite it being a black and white movie, I loved it. Growing up, this was my favorite movie, and I watched it in as many versions as I could. This movie taught me many things as a child, but most especially the idea of repentance from evil and selfishness and the joy that selfless sacrifice brings. I still watch it every year on Christmas Eve and it is still a major inspiration to me, and I have read the novel by Charles Dickens many times and make every effort to see the play every year around Christmas time.

4. A Charlie Brown Christmas

From the time Thanksgiving rolled around and the networks began airing Christmas specials, I was right there in front of my TV taking them all in. It didn't matter what kind of Christmas program it was, I watched it. But my second favorite after A Christmas Carol was A Charlie Brown Christmas. Believe it or not, I had actually read the cartoon book before I saw the special, so when I saw it on TV I appreciated it even more. The main influence for me of this show is that it hit such seemingly adult themes, such as Charlie Brown's depression and angst, that it gave me something to really identify with. I was always a deep thinker who wanted more out of life than what the superficial world offers, and in this cartoon the main character seemed to be going through the same thing I felt. It also taught me that there is great beauty in humility. One thing it taught most however was about the true meaning of Christmas. Linus' rendition at the end always had me confused, but I always knew he was talking about Jesus and His Nativity, and this always helped me focus on what Christmas was really about from a very young age.

5. Horror Movies

It is hard to name just one horror movie, but if I were to narrow it down to three, I would choose The Exorcist, Poltergeist and Ghostbusters. I saw all three of these movies at a very young age, and all three scared me a lot. They scared me, but they also fascinated me. I would turn away often, but I would always go right back to them. In fact, I saw all three, especially the latter two, many times when I was a young child. If horror movies taught me anything, it was that the supernatural is something very interesting. I wanted to know more about it and what inspired these films. They would always leave me wondering what was fake and what was real. If you were to ask me back then if I liked horror movies, I would have said no, but deep down I also knew how fascinated I was by them, especially the supernatural ones.

6. The Seventh Sign

My fascination and fright of horror made my experience watching The Seventh Sign all the more interesting. This was the first R-rated movie I had ever seen in the theatre in 1988, when I was about 12 years old, so it was pretty exciting. The story however blew me away. As mentioned earlier, I had known much about the various Bible stories by the time I was 12, but this movie opened my eyes to a story in the Bible I had not read about in my Children's Bible - the story of the end of the world. Scripture was being quoted often throughout the movie, especially the Book of Revelation, which I had not heard about, but one verse written out was Joel 2:29. When I got home I looked for a real Bible to find this verse. My sister had a King James Bible someone gave her, so I took it and flipped through the entire book looking for references contained in the movie. And I found many interesting things to confirm the truth of the apocalypse, to my horror. This was not only the first time I ever opened up and read a real Bible, but it also opened up to me the fascination to return to it again and again until I read and understood the whole thing.

7. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade came out in 1989 and I saw it in the theatre. I did not have happy memories about Indiana Jones, because I had also seen Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom when I was much younger in the theatre, and that movie had scared me so much that it caused my family to walk out of the theatre in the middle of it. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade was different however. It had more comedy and was not as dark as the previous one, but it also had an adventure I could better relate to, since this time around Indiana Jones was going in search of a Christian relic, specifically the cup Christ used at the Last Supper. Not only did the story fascinate me, but this movie inspired me a great deal to study history, archaeology, and even my own personal faith.

8. Jesus of Nazareth

Though I am typically not a fan of depicting Jesus in film, the best portrayal I had ever seen came one night in Holy Week when I was about 12 or 13. As I mentioned earlier, I loved holidays, and Easter was no exception. This particular Easter happened to be a year in which Eastern and Western Easter coincided, so the specials on TV in this rare instance coincided with our Holy Week. On Holy Thursday night, to get in the spirit of the week, I saw that the movie Jesus of Nazareth was on and was going to play over three nights, since it is a 6-hour movie. I decided to watch it, even though I knew I also had to go to church and probably would not watch it all. Within the first hour it mesmerized me. One thing that captured me most especially was its constant references to Old Testament prophecy, and how Jesus fulfilled these prophecies. This was a new concept for me, and I knew that if this was true, then this would establish Christianity as fact. Not only did this movie greatly enhance my Holy Week experience, but it changed my life and my perception of Christ. It also made me all the more want to study Scripture to find out more how Christ fulfilled all these prophecies.

9. The Story of the Other Wise Man

The Story of the Other Wise Man I am referring to was a 30-minute cartoon that I saw early one Christmas morning, though the movie is also good which I saw a few years later. It is based on a book by the minister Henry Van Dyke called The Other Wise Man written in 1896. I saw this around when I was 12 or 13 and it reminded me of another cartoon they would show us in Elementary School that had a major influence on me called The Little Prince, based on the short story of Oscar Wilde. These stories taught me greatly about virtue and sacrifice and selflessness perhaps more than any other up to that time. It brought saintliness to real life for me, and for that it was a major influence on me.

10. The Egyptian

This movie is based on the historical novel by Mika Waltari which was published in 1945. I believe I saw this movie around when I was 14 years old after browsing around the video store. Being fascinated by the Bible, I wanted to watch every Bible movie I could, so I picked The Egyptian. At first I was a bit bored by it because it was not a story out of the Bible, as I had hoped. But as I watched I observed another character I could relate to, who was searching for the truth in an environment which was hostile to the truth. I saw characters who sacrificed even their lives for the truth and even left society to cultivate the truth within them. It has a very subtle Christian message, but powerful, and till today remains one of my favorite films.

There are many other movies and shows I could name that had a major influence on me, but these are among the most memorable of my young life. Over the years I have continued to appreciate this medium of communication not only as a learning experience, but for offering stories one can relate to and even just be entertained by. Of course it is not the highest form of communication, but it played a role in my life and continues to play a role in a major way. The media is only one of many means towards the end rather than an end in itself. I like to compare it to Plato's Allegory of the Cave, where knowledge is dispersed in many levels and many forms before one can appreciate ultimate truth and see everything in proper perspective.