Facing some giant lessons

Like millions of other American kids, Alex Kendrick couldn't believe his eyes the first time he saw "Star Wars."

"I remember sitting in that theater, looking up at that big screen and thinking, 'I want to do that. I have to do that. If it's the last thing I ever do, I'm going to make movies,' " said Kendrick, the writer, director and actor whose low-budget "Facing the Giants" football flick has made headlines.

The evangelistic indie movie cost $100,000 to make and, showing on 418 screens in faith-friendly smaller markets, has made nearly $3 million at the box office in two weeks. It's backed by Provident Films, Sony BMG and Samuel Goldwyn films, but the critics have been merciless.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer noted: "It preaches to the converted -- literally." And then there was this Richmond Times-Dispatch love letter to Kendrick: " 'Facing the Giants' may have been made with all the best intentions in the world, but it was also made by writers who can't write, directors who can't direct, editors who can't edit and actors who can't act. And they're all the same guy."

It helps, however, to understand that the Southern Baptist guy at the heart of this movie has had a tough time turning his "Star Wars" epiphany into a career reality. He is learning how to make movies and "Facing the Giants" is only his second try.

Kendrick never had a real chance to study screenwriting, editing, directing or acting. When the time came to pick a career, he did what many young media-driven believers end up doing. He entered the ministry.

It's hard to explain to outsiders how this kind of thing happens.

"I kept trying to find people who felt the same way as I did," he said in an interview just before a ratings tussle with the Motion Picture Association of America that sparked a media firestorm. "I could see that movies were shaping our culture and I couldn't understand why so many other people couldn't see that. It was hard to find people who understood what I wanted to do."

Kendrick tried a Christian college, where there were no classes linked to entertainment and filmmaking, but ended up with an all-purpose degree in communications from Kennesaw State University near Atlanta. Then he went to seminary, but it was more of the same.

Eventually, he heard that Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Ga., was seeking help with its 24-hour Christian ministry on the local cable-television system. This led to Alex and his brother Stephen being hired as "associate pastors of media" at this modern megachurch, the kind where the faithful sit in movie seats and the preacher stands between two giant video screens.

"Basically we were putting church on TV," said Kendrick. "We were filming services, concerts and special events. But my brother and I still wanted to make television shows and movies that told stories that connected with people."

Then they saw some research that helped the leaders of their church understand what they were saying about media.

In their book "Boiling Point," evangelical pollster George Barna and e-commerce professional Mark Hatch put it this way: "The world of entertainment and mass communications -- through television, radio, contemporary music, movies, magazines, art, video games and pop literature -- is indisputably the most extensive and influential theological training system in the world."

That clicked.

Before long, Alex and Stephen Kendrick and their supporters had "prayed in" $25,000 to create a movie called "Flywheel" about a morally confused used-car salesman. It did surprisingly well in a few local multiplexes and on DVD, considering that it was made with volunteer actors and technicians, using store-bought cameras, lights from Home Depot and the video-editing software in desk-top computers.

This led to "Facing the Giants," where a slightly larger budget let the church hire five professionals to run a movie "boot camp" for church members, as well as to film some of the football scenes. It was a strange place to study filmmaking.

The folks at Sherwood Pictures team have learned many lessons, but are well aware that they're just getting started -- at last.

"So many miraculous things have happened to make all this possible," said Kendrick. "We're doing the best that we can and we're learning ... I truly believe that I'm doing exactly what I'm supposed to be doing."

Hellish grudges can kill

The helicopters kept making circles in the air so that the cameramen could keep showing the dairy farms and country roads, the bonnets and wide-brimmed straw hats, the horse-drawn buggies and the one-room schoolhouse framed in yellow police tape.

Soon the facts started going in circles as police recited a litany about 600 rounds of ammunition, a shotgun, a semiautomatic pistol, a stun gun, explosives and, later, the killer's sick collection of chains, clamps, hardware and sexual aids. Witnesses said Charles Carl Roberts IV was angry with God, angry with himself, haunted by guilt, fed up with life and driven by a hellish grudge.

Then journalists began asking questions that went in circles, the questions that nag clergy as well as state troopers. Why? Why the Amish? How could God let this happen? How can justice be done now that the killer is dead?

"Like everyone else, I could not believe what I was seeing on my television," said Johann Christoph Arnold, senior elder of the Bruderhof communes. While sharing many beliefs with the Amish and Mennonites, the Bruderhof ("place of the brothers") embrace some modern technology. Still, these movements share European roots in pacifism, simple living and an emphasis on the sanctity of human life.

"The Amish are our cousins so I know some of what they must be feeling," said Arnold, in his thick German accent. "I know these parents are hurting, I know they are asking questions, but I know that they know the answer is forgiveness. ... Tragedy and pain can soften our hearts until they break. But if we trust God this will help us to feel compassion."

The gunman's stunned wife released a media statement that showed her understanding of her Amish neighbors and their beliefs. She knew she could appeal for prayers and forgiveness, even though outsiders might find her words hard to fathom.

"Our hearts are broken, our lives are shattered, and we grieve for the innocence and lives that were lost today," said Marie Roberts. "Above all, please, pray for the families who lost children and, please, pray, too, for our family and children."

Some of the Amish went even further. One woman told the Los Angeles Times: "I am very thankful that I was raised to believe you don't fight back. You should forgive."

To grasp the Amish point of view, it's crucial to understand that they truly believe God desires justice, but also shows mercy and "they believe that these are not contradictory things," said Arnold. "They know that God said, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay.' The Amish certainly believe that this killer will not go without punishment, but they also believe that his punishment is in God's hands."

These are hard words in an age when many Americans hold one of two competing beliefs about eternity and God's judgment.

Millions of believers -- lukewarm and fervent alike -- assume that the really bad sinners are the people who commit the really bad sins, those spectacular sins tied to violence, drugs and sex. These really bad people are easy to condemn to hell.

Meanwhile, many other people believe that all people are automatically going to heaven, no matter what they believe or what they do. According to this point of view, the massacre inside the West Nickel Mines Amish School will have no impact on the eternal destiny of Charles Carl Roberts IV.

Once again, the Amish believe that God knows all and that God, and only God, can judge. What the Amish emphasize, stressed Arnold, is that forgiveness is the only way that humans can break a cycle of violence and sin.

In this case, the gunman left suicide notes that showed that he was driven by guilt and a grudge that he would not surrender. It appears that Roberts could not forgive God and could not forgive himself.

In the end, this killed him and through him this grudge killed others.

"If you hold a grudge, it will live on in your heart until it leads to violence of some kind," said Arnold. "If you do not forgive, then you cannot be healed. Forgiveness can heal the forgiver as well as the one who is forgiven. This is what the Amish believe. It will be hard and it will take time, but this is what they now must strive to live out for all the world to see."

The new campus rebels

They are the campus rebels, the young women who refuse to play by the rules laid down by a male-dominated culture.

They wish that more young men would focus on their minds and souls, instead of their bodies. They are tired of crude social games that serve the desires of men rather than the dreams of young women.

They are rebels, the religious women who struggle with the frat-boy patriarchy that rules the modern university campus on nights and weekends.

"There is a mini-revolt going on out there and you'll find it in the Christian groups that you find on most campuses," said Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, co-director of the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University. "The students in these independent religious groups -- especially the girls -- are the new countercultural revolutionaries at our modern secular universities."

That's the good news. The bad news is that if alternative religious groups didn't exist on most campuses, then these young women would have "nowhere else to go if they are looking for the kind of moral support that they need to find some way around the 'let's get drunk and hook up' scene," she said.

Secular and religious researchers have tried to describe the causes and the effects of this alcohol-fueled sexual mayhem on mainstream campuses.

Thus, publications ranging from Christianity Today to Rolling Stone have published reports on this issue, with predictably different verdicts. Much of the news coverage has focused on novelist Tom Wolfe's profane morality tale "I Am Charlotte Simmons," in which a brilliant Christian from the North Carolina mountains suffers a moral collapse during her freshman year on an elite campus that is famous for academics, basketball and sexist lacrosse players. Many critics noted a resemblance to Duke University.

College administrators have responded by focusing on alcohol abuse and its impact on campus life. However, they have failed to realize that alcohol is linked to other moral issues, said Whitehead, author of a book on a related topic, "Why There Are No Good Men Left." Administrators must understand that campus gender roles have been turned upside down, with mixed results.

Only a few decades ago, men ruled the classrooms on most campuses, stressed Whitehead, writing in the progressive Catholic journal Commonweal. There were more male students and more male professors, resulting in powerful networks that dominated academic life. Women, however, controlled campus social life, with all of its formal and informal rituals of dating and courtship.

Times have changed.

"Women now rule the classroom," argued Whitehead. "With the strict enforcement of laws prohibiting gender discrimination and sexual harassment, the classroom has become more egalitarian and merit based. Women have flourished academically in this well-regulated environment.

"On the other hand, men increasingly set the rules for an unregulated social life. ... They've streamlined the old system. They've eliminated the time-wasting efforts to attend to women's wishes and gotten down to the fundamentals of adolescent male desire: playing competitive games, drinking with buddies and having sex with lots of compliant women. They've also taken charge of party venues and themes: they rent off-campus party houses, stockpile massive quantities of alcohol, hire strippers and organize female wrestling and wet T-shirt competitions."

It's hard to party harder than the guys who make the rules and the girls who are willing to play by them.

Yet, when reporters and researchers ask the right questions, even many young women who are not religious sound stunned by the choices they have to make when it comes to alcohol, clothing and sex. One Duke coed told Rolling Stone: "I have done things that are completely inconsistent with the type of person I am, and what I value."

Whitehead said that these young women often sound like they have been abandoned, rather than "empowered." Their confused statements sound like they want help, but don't know how to say so.

"In many cases their moral compasses have become so disoriented that they can't even describe how they feel," said Whitehead. "These young women feel bad, but they can't pin down why they feel bad. They feel guilty, but they've been taught that there's no reason to feel guilty about anything. ...

"Many girls sound like they want a way out. If their own parents and churches won't help them, who will? It sure doesn't seem like their colleges are going to."

Slicing the Veggies

If you were a television executive, which program do you think would offend the most viewers across America?

The first is a children's show featuring digital vegetables that sing and dance and tell silly parables. Each episode ends with a Bible verse and a witty tomato's reminder that "God made you special and he loves you very much!"

The second is a prime-time special in which Madonna sings her enigmatic ballad "Live to Tell" while hanging on a disco-mirror crucifix and wearing a crown of thorns.

If you decided that it's the vegetables that are too hot to handle, then you're on the same wavelength as NBC.

Actually, both shows got early green lights -- although the latter had to surrender its Bible verses and some key God talk. The man in charge of slicing the "VeggieTales" is Phil Vischer, the heart, mind and voice behind Bob the Tomato and many other characters. He has faced a crucial question while wrestling with NBC program guidelines: How much God is too much God?

"The parameters of what we're doing have not been clearly articulated," said Vischer, who works as a consultant for Big Idea, Inc., the company he created that is now owned by Classic Media. "It's kind of like hunting for the electronic fence in your yard. You keep walking until the back of your neck starts tingling and then you know that you've hit it."

However, he discovered a crucial clue while editing the broadcast version of "Minnesota Cuke and the Search for Samson's Hairbrush."

In the script, Larry the Cucumber is convinced Samson must have gotten his extraordinary strength from his hairbrush. No, replies Bob the Tomato, the Bible says that Samson's strength came from God.

"That line was OK," said Vischer. "Where we got into trouble was the next line, where Bob says, 'And God can give us strength, too.' The NBC people said we had to take that out, so we must have crossed a line right there. ...

"What God does in the past is OK as long as it stays in the past. But if you cross that line and say that God can affect your life in the present, then that's too much. That's reaching out to the audience and that's proselytizing or something. That's bad."

The rules get tougher when children are the primary audience, he admitted. Media executives worry about programs that blur the line between "values" and "evangelism." Still, anyone who studies modern cartoons knows that producers are constantly trying to shape the beliefs of children when it comes to the environment, racism, gender, self esteem and a host of other topics.

Thus, some angry conservatives sense a double standard.

"NBC has taken the very essence of 'VeggieTales' -- and ripped it out. It's like 'Gunsmoke' without the guns, or 'Monday Night Football' without the football," argued L. Brent Bozell III of the Media Research Center. "NBC is the network that hired a squad of lawyers to argue that dropping the F-bomb on the Golden Globe Awards isn't indecent for children. ... Or, as one e-mailing friend marveled: 'So, saying '(expletive) you' is protected First Amendment speech on NBC but not 'God bless you.' "

Also, some "VeggieTales" loyalists -- Big Idea has sold 50 million DVDs and videocassettes -- have posted notes at PhilVischer.com arguing that the grown-up believers behind the silly stories have "sold out" in the secular marketplace.

Vischer said the key is that edited "VeggieTales" episodes will be shown on television, but they will not replace products on store shelves. If children like what they see on Saturday mornings and want their own copies, they will end up watching the original versions -- with "the Bible verses and the rest of the God stuff still in there," he said.

The semi-open door at NBC, he said, is "kind of like being invited to sing at the White House. The good news is that you get to sing at the White House. The bad news is that they aren't going to let you sing all of your Christian songs because they might upset the ambassador from Saudi Arabia and some of the other foreign dignitaries.

"But it's still good, in the long run, that people at the White House get to hear your music. The goal is for them to want to hear more."

Please let Harry Potter die

Father Jonathan Tobias knows exactly what he will do when J.K. Rowling releases the final volume of the Harry Potter series.

The family tradition is that he reads the entire book out loud to his wife and two daughters. Then, when the final page has been turned, they start debating what will happen next.

Things will be different this time. However, the Eastern Orthodox priest knows how he hopes the last act plays out. Unlike many other ministers, Tobias doesn't want Potter to renounce magic or to lose his adolescent flaws. It would be awkward, he said, for the young wizard to "fall to his knees and make the sign of the cross." His suggestion is simpler than that.

Rowling should let Potter die, because that is what tragic heroes do.

"There is little decent tragedy around" in modern culture, said Tobias, at his "Second Terrace" weblog. "There is a lot of irony, where a non-heroic central character is pitched into the abyss of ambiguity. There is a lot of farce, where burlesque mummers traipse around in varying degrees of moral undress.

"But tragedy? No. ... We do not see the sense of the pollution of evil, and its uncleanness. We have no immediate feeling of the necessity to fix or to cleanse. And we haven't seen much of a fable where the story demanded, clearly, the surmounting and cleansing of evil -- even at the cost of real, hard sacrifice."

Tobias is one voice in a global digital chorus debating this issue at myriad websites with names like SwordOfGryffindor.com and The-Leaky-Cauldron.org. Potter fans have, after all, purchased more than 300 million copies of the six novels.

The faithful have been sweating ever since Jim Dale, the voice behind the U.S. audio-book editions, claimed that the author had told him Harry would die. Then Rowling stunned British television viewers by revealing that she had tweaked the finale (the last word is "scar") so that "one character got a reprieve, but two die that I didn't intend to die." And Harry Potter? She answered, "I can completely understand the mentality of an author who thinks, 'I'm going to kill him off because after I'm dead and gone they won't be able to bring back the character.' "

Podcasting guru Emerson Spartz of MuggleNet.com spoke for millions when he said he couldn't believe that Rowling would build her series around a "kid whose life sucks and then he dies."

Nevertheless, Tobias is convinced that Potter combines many characteristics seen in heroes through the ages. He was born to greatness, but suffered the tragic loss of loved ones. He has special gifts, glaring weaknesses and carries the burden of a haunting prophecy that hints at tragedy, triumph or both. Supernatural trials? Potter has seen it all.

"A hero is not perfect. In fact, his flaws are part of what make him great," said Tobias, pastor of St. John the Baptist Orthodox Church outside Pittsburgh. "By the end of a story like this one, the hero has simply become too big to remain in this world. This kind of hero is born for a purpose and he dies for a purpose."

Thus, it's significant that Rowling -- in an early interview with a Canadian newspaper -- noted that she is, in fact, a Christian. "Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said, 'yes,' because I do. But no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that and, I have to say that does suit me. ... If I talk too freely about that, I think the intelligent reader -- whether 10 or 60 -- will be able to guess what is coming in the books."

Also, Rowling has acknowledged the influence of beloved Christian works like the seven-volume "The Chronicles of Narnia" by C.S. Lewis and "The Lord of the Rings" cycle by J.R.R. Tolkien. Both of these fantasy classics, noted Tobias, feature endings that combine death and rebirth, along with the bittersweet passing of a magical age.

"Part of being a hero is to have a great love and to be willing to make a great sacrifice for that love," he said. "It seems to me that Harry Potter has been walking down that same road. ... It's just hard to see him going home and settling down. He's been through too much."

Why eulogies have changed

Seconds after American Airlines Flight 11 passed overhead, another Franciscan brother ran to Father Mychal Judge's room in the friary to let him know the World Trade Center was on fire.

The veteran chaplain quickly changed out of his simple brown habit and into his fire-department uniform -- pausing only to comb and spray his hair. Judge was heading into danger, but he was also ready to face the cameras. Soon, a photographer captured unforgettable images of firefighters carrying the priest's body out of the rubble and his name was on the first Ground Zero death certificate.

"While he was ministering to dying firemen, administering the Sacrament of the Sick and Last Rites, Mychal Judge died," said Father Michael Duffy, at St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church in New York City.

"... Look how that man died. He was right where the action was, where he always wanted to be. He was praying, because in the ritual for anointing we're always saying, 'Jesus come,' 'Jesus forgive,' 'Jesus save.' He was talking to God and he was helping someone. Can you honestly think of a better way to die? I think it was beautiful."

Anyone who wants to know how to deliver a eulogy should study this poignant section of Duffy's remarks at the funeral of his close friend, said Cyrus Copeland, a former advertising executive who edited "Farewell, Godspeed" and the recent "A Wonderful Life," two collections of famous eulogies. The new book includes a chapter focusing on Judge and three other men who died on Sept. 11, 2001.

This one anecdote reveals two sides of the same man, mixing humor -- the final ritual of comb and hairspray -- with a vision of a faithful priest's willingness to risk his own life to provide comfort to his unique flock.

These days, said Copeland, the loved ones who gather at a funeral want to hear a celebratory toast to a life well lived, just as much or more than they want to face spiritual issues involved in their loss.

"People want honesty," he said. "They don't want to hear about the saint that nobody knew. They want to hear about the real Father Mychal, a man who loved the human soul, but also knew a good photo opportunity when he saw one. ? They want to hear about life, more than they want to hear about eternal life. Eulogies today are more human and they are becoming less religious."

Copeland is convinced there are several reasons that the art of the eulogy has changed so radically in recent decades.

For starters, most people alive today have grown up in a video age, surrounded by celebrity news and, more recently, the tightly edited rush of "reality television." They have seen their share of high-profile funerals. Millions wept as Lord Edward John Spencer spoke at the funeral of his sister, Lady Diana. Many watched as superstar Cher laughed and cried her way through a eulogy for her former husband, Sonny Bono.

Clergy rarely command the spotlight during these rites.

"It's important to remember that the celebrity memorial service was the first kind to be secularized," said Copeland. "So you expect to hear about heaven in a eulogy for Father Mychal Judge, with a priest in the pulpit. But eulogies for celebrities like Marilyn Monroe may not mention heaven at all. That's just the age we live in."

There's another practical reason that eulogies have changed so much. Friends and relatives are taking control of the microphone.

In the past, loved ones asked the family's pastor, rabbi or priest to deliver the eulogy. Today, it would be hard for most people to name such a person. Most modern families are scattered across the nation, divided by career choices and, far too often, broken relationships. Family members may not even share a common faith and they certainly have not spent most of their lives in the same neighborhood in the same city.

Clergy used to deliver about 90 percent of all eulogies. Today, "that number is about 50 percent and it's falling," said Copeland.

"So for many people a memorial service simply isn't a religious event anymore. It offers us a chance to say our good-byes to the dearly departed, but many people no longer think of this event as a bridge between this life and the next."

Georgetown revises its rules

David French knew what he was getting into when he signed up to study on a Churches of Christ campus in Nashville.

"When I went to David Lipscomb College, we all knew there was no drinking and there was no sex until you were married. We knew about the daily Bible studies and the required chapel services," said French, a Harvard Law School graduate who leads the Alliance Defense Fund's Center for Academic Freedom.

"There's nothing wrong with a private college trying to maintain a distinctive religious tradition, whether Jewish or Catholic or evangelical or whatever. The U.S. Constitution says that's fine. But you're supposed to tell students the rules up front."

Twenty years later, things haven't changed much at Lipscomb University and at many other religious schools -- yet students choose to enroll anyway. Meanwhile, other private colleges and universities have made headlines and inspired a few lawsuits by tweaking or overhauling their rules that affect faith and morality on campus.

That's why French wasn't surprised that Georgetown University administrators have decided to ban outside Protestant ministries from holding on-campus worship services, Bible studies, prayer groups or fellowship meetings. More than 50 schools -- including Princeton and Harvard -- have tried to do the same thing in recent years.

Georgetown leaders said the goal is a more unified Protestant voice on campus. Groups rocked by the decision say it's an attack on diversity.

"While we realize that this comes as a great disappointment, please know we are moving forward with this decision after much dialogue with the Lord," said the Rev. Constance Wheeler of the campus Protestant ministry office, writing to InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, Chi Alpha and other evangelical groups affected by the ban.

The banned groups may be able to maintain some presence on the world-famous Jesuit campus if they can find evangelical or conservative Protestant professors to serve as official sponsors, said Kevin Offner of the InterVarsity staff. The problem is that they are having trouble finding faculty members who will stand with them.

"What we want to know is if different religious groups are going to be treated alike," said Offner. "To what degree do Catholic, Jewish and Muslim students on campus have access to national organizations that support them in their faith, while there's this funny stuff going on with the Protestants?"

Ministry leaders from off-campus have, in recent years, been required to sign a covenant written by mainline Protestants in the official Georgetown campus-ministry office. In one clause, they pledged to "maintain respect for the various religious traditions" on campus, while avoiding actions that could be interpreted as "denigrating or ridiculing" others. Ministers were asked to help students of all faith traditions, yet the covenant specifically prohibited evangelism or "proselytizing" among those who might be "vulnerable in their faith or personal lives." Another clause stressed: "I affirm the legitimacy of Roman Catholicism as a path to salvation."

There are some tensions between religious groups at Georgetown, especially in an era in which Muslim students and donors have played a big role in the growth of new programs and facilities. However, the strongest tensions on campus are caused by moral and cultural issues, not over-zealous Protestant evangelists, said Manuel Miranda, a conservative Catholic activist and Georgetown alum.

"There are far more Protestants who convert to Catholicism while at Georgetown than the other way around," he stressed. In his opinion, the key to the ban on independent Protestant ministries is "the fact that all of these groups take very orthodox positions on the crucial social issues, like gay rights and abortion. If anything, they're more Catholic on these issues than lots of Catholics there."

The bottom line, said French, is that a private school can do what it wants to do, as long as it keeps any written promises it has made to students. The Georgetown campus-ministry website says, "Welcome," "Shalom" and "Assalamu-Alaikum (Peace be upon you)." The university claims to welcome students of "every religious profession."

"The issue is whether Georgetown is doing a bait-and-switch routine," he said. "The school says it has a come one, come all approach to religion. But when evangelical students get there, they may discover that they don't have the same rights when it comes to free speech, freedom of association and freedom of religion. ... The university has to state its rules clearly and then live by them."

Heathens make better flicks?

Broadcaster Dick Staub thinks the gridiron drama "Facing the Giants" will be a hit in Middle America, in theaters far from the bright lights and nasty movie critics of New York City and Los Angeles.

As a veteran observer of Christians and entertainment, he's sure that born-again moviegoers will have tears in their eyes as the movie's salt-of-the-earth heroes conquer their fears, honor their parents, get saved, get healed and witness miracles on and off the football field. And since Sherwood Baptist Church in Albany, Ga., spent only $100,000 on its second indie project, Staub thinks it will make money for Provident Films, Sony BMG, Samuel Goldwyn Films and everyone else involved in this long-odds project.

However, he doubts that "Facing the Giants" will reach the unconverted, especially those in Hollywood power suites. Professionals who love movies are rarely impressed with the efforts of rookies, he said.

"I've been 'moved to tears' by art my kids brought home as children, but I did not expect it to be mounted at the local art museum," said Staub, head of the Center for Faith and Culture and a part-time professor at Seattle Pacific University.

"If this film DOES make tons of money, Hollywood may distribute more of them. Do we really want to send the message to Hollywood that the kind of films Christians want will be characterized by poor acting, low production values that are inoffensive, make us cry and also make tons of money? Is this truly how we want to influence Hollywood for God?"

So far, the headlines about "Facing the Giants" have focused on the Motion Picture Association of America's decision to rate it PG. The squeaky-clean movie -- which opens in 400 theaters on Sept. 29 -- tells the story of a downtrodden high-school coach whose life turns around with God's help. It was created by two "media pastors," brothers Alex and Stephen Kendrick, and includes numerous scenes of prayer, Bible study, evangelism and other controversial activities.

The ratings board says the PG was based on "thematic elements," such as scenes discussing infertility. But members of the production team insist that the MPAA originally said that parents should be warned about "proselytizing" in the movie.

It's true that many Christians find it hard to make movies -- or any other form of popular art -- without including blunt scenes of witnessing and evangelism, noted screenwriter Thom Parham, who teaches at Azusa Pacific University, an evangelical campus near Los Angeles. Thus, they are often accused of producing manipulative manifestos, rather than the kinds of subtle, mysterious parables seen in scripture.

The irony is that non-Christians have created many mainstream classics featuring Christian characters and themes, movies such as "Chariots of Fire," "Tender Mercies," "The Shawshank Redemption" and "Signs," noted Parham, in an essay entitled "Why do Heathens Make the Best Christian Films?"

Meanwhile, Christian companies have produced "The Omega Code," "Left Behind: The Movie," "Carman: The Champion," "Joshua" and similar niche-market products. "Overall, these films are unwatchable," he said.

It's crucial that the successful mainstream films were crafted to compete in 2,000 or more theaters across the nation. Meanwhile, the low-budget "Christian movies" were produced for "Christian market" consumers and either went straight to video or appeared in a few selected theaters in smaller markets.

Far to often, concluded Parham, "Christian filmmakers seem to believe that they do not have to compete in the mainstream market. Thus, storytelling and production values end up taking a backseat to the movie's message. The films are merely bait to lure viewers to a homily or altar call. ... The result is more akin to propaganda than art, and propaganda has a nasty habit of hardening hearts."

This is why, stressed Staub, that Christians who want to reach mainstream viewers must work harder to develop the technical and artistic skills that will earn the respect of the professionals -- religious and secular -- who set the pace in Hollywood.

"I honestly do not bear ill will towards the sincere attempt of a local church to produce a film, and today's technology means good movies can be made on lower budgets," said Staub. "But if we want to glorify God and enrich the culture, we need to model our commitment to excellence by producing films that meet or exceed the highest known standards. ... We owe God our best."

Democrats, faith and Roe

Talk to Democrats at church and you will usually find citizens who yearn to find middle ground on America's most painful social issue, to find ways to restrict or even ban most abortions.

Talk to Democrats as they exit voting booths and you will almost always find voters who pulled levers to elect candidates who oppose these compromises.

The vast majority of Democrats want change on abortion. That's one of messages in a new study on politics, faith and social issues produced by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. Yet harsh political realities make it almost impossible to find middle ground.

"If you ask Democrats, 'Would you like to see some compromises on abortion?', you will see high numbers" of people saying "yes," said veteran researcher John C. Green of the University of Akron, who is working at the Pew Forum during this election year. "But if you ask them if they want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, you will get a totally different set of numbers."

For millions of Americans it is "impossible to reconcile their emotional attachment to Roe with what they believe about finding middle ground on abortion," he said.

The Pew report provides plenty of evidence that Americans are hard to pin down. They lean right on gay marriage, but are beginning to lean left on embryonic stem cell research. On abortion, small camps of true believers dominate both parties, while millions of average Americans say they want compromise.

"Abortion continues to split the country nearly down the middle," according to the Pew team. Still, "majorities of Republicans (62%), Democrats (70%) and political independents (66%) favor a compromise. So do majorities of liberals, moderates and conservatives. More than six-in-ten white evangelicals also support compromise, as do 62% of white, non-Hispanic Catholics."

It's hard to define "compromise" in terms of legislation, said Green. Study participants were asked if abortion should be "generally available," "allowed, but more limited," "illegal, with few exceptions" or "never permitted." As expected, Republicans were more conservative than Democrats.

Nevertheless, 10 percent of "liberal" Democrats chose the most anti-abortion option and 13 percent said abortion should be illegal, except in cases of rape, incest or to save a mother's life. Then, 14 percent said abortion rights should be restricted with new laws, which Green said might include a "partial-birth" abortion ban, parental-notification laws, mandatory waiting periods and even a ban on late-term abortions.

"Many of those liberals are black Democrats who are frequent church goers," said Green. "But those Democrats are still out there."

Meanwhile, 12 percent of "moderate" and "conservative" Democrats backed a complete abortion ban, while another 39 percent said abortion should be "illegal, with few exceptions," the choice that Green called a "modern pro-life stance." Another 20 percent backed legalized abortion, with more restrictions. Once again, church attendance seemed to influence these views.

In all, 37 percent of liberals and 71 percent of centrist Democrats said they supported policies that would not be allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court under current interpretations of Roe v. Wade and other decisions defining abortion rights.

However, the modern Democratic Party is led by liberals who lean left on abortion and hot social issues, according to Peter Steinfels, the veteran religion columnist of the New York Times. But this creates a problem, since the centrists make up 67 percent of the party and the liberals only 31 percent. "The ideologically dominant group -- certainly on abortion, less so on same-sex marriage -- is the numerical minority," he noted.

The Republican Party has internal rifts of its own on religious and cultural issues. For example, 44 percent of white evangelicals now support embryonic stem-cell research, which is a 12-point increase over the past year alone. Democrats are split over whether to push gay marriage, but Republicans are split over the issue of whether to amend the U.S. Constitution to ban it.

Green stressed that most Americans, especially those who frequent pews, want to affirm what they believe are "traditional," even conservative, positions on these kinds of moral issues.

"But they also want to affirm personal freedom and the right of individuals to make their own choices," he said. "So they are not so sure how to put all that together, when it comes to deciding what to do about an issue like abortion."