Icarus Films (the producers of the brilliant and incredibly well done “The Bible Unearthed” which I reviewed for the Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament) has produced another sure to be important film titled Jesus Politics: The Bible and the Ballot in which the filmmaker
meet[s] with religious activists supporting the Democratic and Republican candidates. From the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire and South Carolina primaries to Super Tuesday in Oklahoma, JESUS POLITICS shows the efforts of Baptist activists for Obama, Catholics and evangelicals for McCain, Christian conservatives for Huckabee, as well as the political efforts of evangelical organizations such as Christians United for Israel. … JESUS POLITICS explores themes including the social role of the church in the African-American community, the religious rhetoric of the candidates and their sometimes controversial associations with religious leaders, how moral issues such as abortion became political weapons, and how biblical interpretation is used to validate political beliefs.
The film begins with an autobiographical retrospective on the filmmaker’s youth in Israel where, he says, there was a strange mixing of the Bible and politics. Unwilling to live in such an environment, when of age, he moved to the United States. The events of the 2008 election campaign brought to the fore the fact that America too had become a strange land which blended politics and religion.
Indeed, as the film unfolds, the frightening truth is exposed that on both sides of the political spectrum religious rhetoric and political claims are blended in a way that is both theologically harmful and politically dangerous.
Randall Balmer is one of the talking heads, and he does a fantastic job of describing the history behind the African-American community’s disinterest in separating Church and State (which is why, historically, Black American Christians tend to be more concerned about social issues). This leads to a fascinating discussion of the Black Church and naturally to the candidacy of Barack Obama who, in some quarters, was seen as a redeemer figure, a ‘Cyrus’, and a ‘Prophet’.
On the Republican side, religion was a central question again because, early in the campaign, the question as to who conservative Christians would support was most important. Interestingly, the film-maker reminds us, in 1971, the SBC supported the right of abortion in cases of incest, danger to the life of the mother, and rape. Within a few years (of 1971) of course abortion and gay rights would become the central concerns of the Republican party.
Meanwhile, the connection between McCain and John Hagee is fully explored. Of course this leads the film-maker directly to Hagee and Christian Zionism and the religio-political maneuverings of this sect. This part of the film was extremely difficult to watch. Not because the film-maker did a bad job but because he did a good job. When one of the interviewees says ‘I have to side with Israel no matter what’ it’s a denial of the Gospel and the universality of faith. The bible is used to justify politics by the Zionists, and the Palestinians have paid the price for it. Hagee’s literalism leads directly to bloodshed. McCain was able, then, through his ties to Hagee, to convince evangelicals of the legitimacy of his Christianity.
The film turns then to an interesting historical resume of the rise of revivalism in America and the Second Great Awakening and how religion became important in and for politics.
Mike Huckabee next comes in for inspection. His supporters seem to be the most committed evangelicals; the sort who wish to be known for what they are for, and not simply for what they are against.
Next, the battle between Obama and Clinton comes to the fore. In South Carolina, the faith of both candidates is important to voters. Indeed, some of Clinton’s supporters describe her as the ‘family values candidate’. I can’t presume to know what the producer was thinking at this point, but it seems to me that as the film unfolds each voter interviewed sees ‘their’ candidate as the mirror image of their own religious intentions- whatever those intentions are. When Black Americans call Obama a Prophet, that is what they wish him to be. When some call Clinton a ‘family values’ politician, they do so because they wish her to be so. In a sense, then, candidates are nothing more than whiteboards onto which voters write their own script. And politicians love it because they can be all things to all men (at least among their supporters).
Super Tuesday was spent by the film-maker in a Mosque. Do Muslim Americans view religion and politics differently than Christian Americans? Surprisingly, many in that community are fearful that America is becoming a theocracy. It’s one of the more fascinating aspects of the film that Muslims are more interested in the separation of Church and State than many Evangelicals. Perhaps if Christianity were a minority religion it would be as fearful.
This is an exceptionally insightful film. It offers the viewer a very fine opportunity to step back from their own point of view to see life in the States through other’s eyes. Yes, if you have a chance to see this film, you should. You must. It concludes with a sage warning against worldwide Holy War. A Holy War that will come about unless we learn the lessons of history that politics and religion are dangerous partners.
