Two weeks ago I posted some thoughts about a video by a young man named Jefferson Bethke. The video was titled Why I Hate Religion, but Love Jesus, and as of that date it had been viewed about 17,000,000 times. Since then it has had nearly another two million views.Not only has the video been watched millions of times, it has inspired millions of words from people writing their reviews, responses, praises, and criticisms. It has even inspired the production of copycat videos--some taking differing views, some taking cheap shots, and some just taking advantage of the opportunity to ride the Bethke's viral coattails.
David Brooks, op-ed writer for the New York Times, wrote a column that I think deserves to be the last word on the subject. Brooks' insights are right on the mark as he considers not only Bethke's message, but also his motivation and effectiveness.
Click Here for Brooks' article.
Give it a read and let me know what you think.
Here is teaser excerpt to pique your interest:
Bethke’s passionate polemic and subsequent retreat are symptomatic of a lot of the protest cries we hear these days. This seems to be a moment when many people — in religion, economics and politics — are disgusted by current institutions, but then they are vague about what sorts of institutions should replace them.
This seems to be a moment of fervent protest movements that are ultimately vague and ineffectual.
We can all theorize why the intense desire for change has so far produced relatively few coherent recipes for change. Maybe people today are simply too deferential. Raised to get college recommendations, maybe they lack the oppositional mentality necessary for revolt. Maybe people are too distracted.
My own theory revolves around a single bad idea. For generations people have been told: Think for yourself; come up with your own independent worldview. Unless your name is Nietzsche, that’s probably a bad idea. Very few people have the genius or time to come up with a comprehensive and rigorous worldview.
From: How to Fight the Man by David Brooks, New York Times, February 2, 2012.
Thank you for sharing this, Dave. The timing of Brooks' op-ed piece is good because it has given all sides time to reflect on the poem and the frenetic reaction to it. His diagnosis of being grounded in something other than yourself, something much richer than any one person, confirms even more my effort to do so for myself. I grew up in the Stone-Campbell Movement full of independent churches that relied on their own history as a church and the Bible to stand on. What I realized in studying the SCM history alongside the history of the church is that I had much more to learn about the Christian tradition in order to better understand my faith.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, I appreciate what Valley has done in using the Nicene Creed for its faith statement. It lends credence to a larger tradition than just that of one church.
While it is important and valuable to have rich background, have done your research, and done extensive collaboration to make an effective argument that may become a "fight against the man," personal (and community) experiences are important. I think that Bethke was humble and honest to admit that his message was not scripture-based. However, I don't think that we can then discount his attempt to send a message. My guess is that his best intentions for the message got lost in his art medium, which is subjective to begin with.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, in order to communicate any message effectively, I think it is important to consider audience and medium. A big part of that is the education and background of the audience. I would guess that the majority of the 17 million viewers of Bethke's video have very little insight, let alone education, on Jesus, the early church, the history of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, the Reformation, or any aspects of even modern church history. That lack of background is where viral media - based on personal experiences and hearsay - can lead many people down dangerous paths of misunderstanding.
Bethke didn't "cave" as Brooks suggests, simply by admitting he hadn't done his research. I am not sure he was out to start some movement, so I think that assessment is unfair. But what he did do is make a name for himself. As of today (a day later than Brook's article, and your post Dave), Bethke has updated his blog and re-posted his most recent and controversial videos.
It makes me wonder what this was all for, and what he is trying to really prove...right now it seems he is only proving he is very media savvy.
Thanks Peter and Kris. Kris, do you have a link for Bethke's blog? Just saw this Nightline story on Bethke's facebook page.
ReplyDeletehttp://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/video/hate-religion-love-jesus-15552858
http://jeffbethke.com/blog/
ReplyDeleteDave, I just watched the video for the first time and wasn't offended at all. I think I understood his point, although I can see how some would find it abrasive. Almost reminded me of a young Keith Green :) Brooks makes a good point, although I don't agree with his reference to the genius of Nietzsche as being "comprehensive and rigorous" , as his conclusions have lead to the failed philosophies of existentialism, nihilism and postmodernism. I think young people are looking for something that is REAL. If we say we should love our brother we SHOULD. There HAVE been great thinkers and writers through the centuries. We should seek them out and benefit from their knowledge, Brooks is right here. I feel challenged by both of these men. Of all Jesus words I fear the most are " depart from me, I never knew you."
ReplyDelete