Tag Archives: language

“Good Christian Bitches” and the Ugly Reflection We May Not Wish to See

In just a few short weeks, ABC will launch a new mid-season series under the moniker GCB.[1]  Originally titled Good Christians Bitches, the series tells the story of Amanda Vaughn, a now-single, mother-of-two, who is forced to return home to Dallas, Texas after her marriage ends in a spectacularly public scandal.  As a former high school bully, Vaughn hopes to rebuild her life through the assistance of her mother and the help of the local church.  But as the title of the series not so subtly suggests, she is quickly given an education in the “true nature” of Christian women.  In the words of Leslie Bibb, the lead actress:

“This show shines a light on people who say, “I go to church every Sunday, I’m a God-fearing person.  [This show] is like, ‘Hey, y’all, let’s just look at what’s really going on.’”

Not surprisingly, last March, when the series was still in its formative stages, the Parents Television Council came out swinging.   According to Tim Winter, the President of the PTC:

“The ‘B-word’ is toxic and is used to degrade, abuse, harass, bully and humiliate women.  The ‘Christian’ element only adds insult to injury. Regardless of whether the title ultimately makes it to broadcast, ABC has publicly proclaimed its values and it has tarnished the Disney brand … Would ABC even consider another faith to denigrate?  Would they even consider a program title or a plot line based on ‘Bitches’ who were Muslim, Hindu, Jewish or Buddhist? I suspect not, and I certainly hope not.  So why the double standard?”[2]

Now on the one hand, Winter makes an excellent point.  For in American society, you do not see the widespread, open denigration of other faith groups in the same way that you see the media declare open season on Christianity.  In fact, having a character profess belief in Jesus the Christ has almost become a lazy, shorthand way of setting that character up as the antagonist of a screenplay.  But I’m not interested in talking about the unfair nature of negative stereotyping in the media.  Instead, I am interested in talking about our reactions to such messaging.  Consider, if you will, the words of the Christ as captured by the Apostle John in his Gospel:

“If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.  Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also.”[3]

Culture tells stories.  Indeed, culture itself is a story.  So should we be surprised that a secular company that is charged with the task of telling stories that make money denigrates Christianity?  Absolutely not.  Jesus told us to expect this sort of behavior.  But here’s the thing.  He didn’t simply say, “This is coming.”  He also entrusted His apostles to tell us a little about how we should respond.  And it is on this point that I want to turn your attention to the first letter penned by the Apostle Peter.

“Dear friends, do not be astonished that a trial by fire is occurring among you, as though something strange were happening to you.  But rejoice in the degree that you have shared in the sufferings of Christ, so that when his glory is revealed you may also rejoice and be glad.If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory,who is the Spirit of God, rests on you.  But let none of you suffer as a murderer or thief or criminal or as a troublemaker.  But if you suffer as a Christian, do not be ashamed, but glorify God that you bear such a name. For it is time for judgment to begin, starting with the house of God.[4]

Now I want you to look very closely at the latter portion of that passage.  It starts by reminding us that not all suffering is the result of unjust persecution.  Some suffering is nothing more than the product of our own actions – our own hypocrisy.  Some suffering is brought on by the fact that we claim the name of Christ, but act as if He has not given us a “spirit of power” that enables us to live lives that bring honor to His name.[5]

So today, on the eve of the launch of Good Christian Bitches, I want to ask a question.  Is society mocking us because of the exemplary way in which we bear witness to the love and sacrifice of Jesus the Christ?  Or are we being mocked because of the hypocrisy the world sees in a church that wants to claim the name of Jesus while still holding on to some of the very behaviors that we are called to release?

While I can’t say that I will likely be a regular connoisseur of this program, part of me is grateful that it’s going to air.  Part of me is grateful that society is holding a mirror up to the church, and is asking pointed, satirical – dare I say, prophetic – questions.  For through questions comes self-examination, and through self-examination comes refinement and renewed commitment to Kingdom values.

So here’s to hoping that so long as Good Christian Bitches airs, we have the courage look at this portrait of our community.  And here’s to hoping that through this ugly mirror, we, as Christians, might become more invested in telling better stories through our lives that are marked by humility, forgiveness, courage and a renewed commitment to justice.

[1] The title of the original source material was “Good Christian Bitches.”   After the Parents Television Council submitted a petition with over 120,000 signatures to ABC, the title was changed to “Good Christians Belles” before eventually being changed again to “GCB.”  New Zealand is the only market in which the show will be aired under its original title.

[3] John 15:18-20a.

[4] 1 Peter 4:12-17

[5] 1 Timothy 1:7.

“Modern Family,” the “F-bomb,” and Rise of Language in the Evangelical Sub-Culture.

In the interest of full disclosure: I don’t watch Modern Family.  I’ve seen it twice, and honestly, I just didn’t find it to be all that funny.  And if a comedy wants my attention for 30 minutes every single week, it needs to do more than make me snicker.  I want at least three good chuckles and maybe even – dare to dream! – some full-on, all-out, belly laughter.  What can I say?  The early years of the The Simpsons set an awfully high bar.

But today, I want to talk about a recent episode of Modern Family that first aired during “prime time” on January 18th.  It was called “Little Bo Bleep,” and near the start of the show, 2-year-old Lily, daughter of Mitchell and Cameron, unexpectedly blurts out the “F-bomb,” which was bleeped out for the telecast.[1]  The rest of the scripted show revolved around her parents humorously attempting to clean up her language before attending a church wedding.  Needless to say, their damage control is unsuccessful, and the wedding is colorful, to say the least.

Now this brings me to the point of this article.  Prior to the airing of last night’s episode, the Parents Television Council entered the fray by issuing the following public statement:

“It’s not suitable language for a child that young in the real world, and it’s not suitable language for a child that young on television, either … It is certainly in poor taste … The more we see and hear this kind of language on television, the more acceptable and common it will become in the real world.  Since television is constantly adding to the likelihood that children will be exposed to this kind of language, we will naturally see more and more children eventually emulate that behavior.”[2]

My point here today is not to debate whether a 2-year old swearing is appropriate or even funny.  And my point is not to debate the role of Christian watchdog groups trying to censor or shape broadcast media.  I just want to know who the Parents Television Council believes itself to be representing.  In other words, I just want to know whether there is any sense of consensus amongst modern evangelical Christians as to what the Apostle James means when he says:

“If someone thinks he is religious yet does not bridle his tongue, and so deceives his heart, his religion is futile.”[3]

To get you started on the discussion, let me introduce you to some research conducted by Dave Kinnamen and Gabe Lyons back in 2007.  At that time, they published an excellent new book entitled UnChristian, which sought to explore the behaviors and attitudes of those within the church as compared to those outside.  When it came to using “profane” language, they discovered that only 17% of older born again Christians[4] claimed to use profanity, while almost two-fifths of the younger Christian generation[5] claimed the same.  So clearly, there is an emerging trend within the church that seems to think that the use of “profane” language is acceptable.  But what I found to be really curious about their study relates to how both groups view the use of the word “fuck” on television. When asked to give their opinion on the subject, both young and old Christians alike almost universally rejected the notion that this would be acceptable.[6]  So while the younger generation appears to be more comfortable using “profane” language in their day-to-day life, they still believe in erecting certain barriers around certain words in certain contexts.

To me, this is absolutely fascinating, and I would love to hear more from those that read this blog regarding how they interpret that passage and how they try to live it out.  As for me, I don’t tend to use profane language in my day-to-day life.[7]  But that statement may not mean the same thing to you that it does to me.  You may be reading this blog and say to yourself, “I just saw you use the word ‘fuck!’”  And to that, I would say that I stand in partial agreement with the Protestant Reformer Martin Luther, who believed that words have power and that we neuter that power and even sanitize the concepts that lay underneath the harsh language when we opt for polite euphemisms.  So while I would not say “Fuck you!” to anyone around me, I also don’t feel that we gain anything by typing “f—” instead of the word that we are actually quoting.  For in doing so, I think we white wash the culture around us, and somehow fail to bear witness to it by refusing to reflect it back to itself.

But enough about me and what I think.  What do you think? Do you think there is any sense of concensus on what is acceptable language?  How do you use language?  Do you agree with me?  Do you not?  Seriously, I am really curious to know more.

[1] Producers report that Aubrey Anderson-Emmons, who is actually 4, was asked to say the word “fudge” during the taping.

[3] James 1:26.

[4] Older Christians are defined as those older than 41 years of age.

[5] Younger Christians were defined as those between the ages of 23 and 41.

[6] 93% of young Christians and 94% of older Christians were against it.

[7] Again, in the interest of full disclosure, that is not to say that I do not, on rare occasion, use language that I do not believe to be appropriate or in line with God’s call upon my life.  Interestingly enough, of all the things that I had to leave behind when I became a Christian, language was the hardest thing for me to bring under control.

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (part 2)

Yesterday afternoon, I introduced you to the world of the half-breed Timothy, bastard son of the Jewish disciple, Eunice, who herself was seen as a prostitute by the community around her.  It was an ugly world to be sure; and if you haven’t taken the time to read about it, I would highly suggest that you do so now before continuing forward with this discussion.

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (part 1)

Today, I want to continue forward in our exploration of the remarkable life of Timothy because I believe that there are staggeringly beautiful gems to mine down in the deep shafts of “incidental words.”  So why don’t we start by talking about the age of Timothy.  Read with me the words of the Apostle Paul found in 1 Timothy 4:12:

“Don’t let anyone look down on you because you are young, but be an example to the believers in what you say, how you behave, in love, faith and holiness.”

The word I want to focus upon here is the word “young” (from the Greek word: neotes).  From the use of this word, we can rightfully conclude that Timothy, at the time of this letter, is somewhere between the age of 25 to 33.[1]  But there’s more to this puzzle.  Notice how Paul is advising Timothy not to allow anyone to look down upon him because of his youth.  Why is he doing that?  Well the answer is really rather simple.  In Jewish culture, men were not allowed to take leadership positions until the age of 30.[2]  So in all probability, Timothy is actually younger than 30 at the time of this writing, which explains Paul’s warning to him.

This is the Lytra Tell located in the modern state of Turkey.

Now the pieces are beginning to fall into place.  From history, we know that the First Epistle to Timothy was written sometime between 65 and 66 AD.  We also know, from history, that Paul’s second missionary journey (when he first found Timothy) began in 49 AD.  So if Timothy was under the age of 30 at the time when Paul advises him not to allow anyone to look down upon him for his youth, then we can rightfully conclude that Timothy was roughly 10 to 12 years old when Paul first encounters him in the small, out-of-the-way town known as Lystra.

Don’t gloss over that.  Timothy was 10-12 years old when Paul first looked at him and said: “In the Messiah, there is neither Greek nor Jew, Timothy.  Everyone is equal.  All the social layers and the hatred that this world constructs … it means nothing in Jesus, Tim.  Nothing!”

To me, this is utterly fascinating.  A few days ago, I walked you through the ages of the disciples chosen by Jesus and we concluded that all of them, with the exception of Peter, were under the age of 20.  Now, when it comes time for Paul to chose his disciples, he continues the tradition of his day and the tradition of Jesus; and he selects another “kid.”

Why is it that when it came time for the Kingdom of God to be announced throughout the ancient world, Jesus the Messiah and the Apostle Paul chose “children?”  And why is that much of our youth ministry is centered around keeping our “kids” safe and making sure that they are thoroughly entertained and not bored?

Somewhere along the way, there has been a radical disconnect between the potential that Jesus and Paul saw in “children” versus the immaturity that we see and foster through a prolonged adolescence that we currently extend into the late 20s.  Is it time for us to be begin to respect the capabilities of our “kids” by challenging them with deep, insightful teaching that actually equips them to become true disciples in this world?  Is it time for us to give them the best of our teachers as opposed to giving them the newly-minted seminary grads that are merely putting in time before they can become senior pastors themselves?  Is it time for a sea-change in how we do youth ministry?

[1] The Greek word neotes merely suggests youth.  But, the word is also used by Luke in his account of the “Rich Young Ruler.”  When we look at the parallel account of the “Rich Young Ruler” found in Matthew’s Gospel, we see that Matthew uses another word to describe the age of the ruler: neaniskos.  This word is a bit more specific, and it actually suggests a man anywhere from his mid-20s to his early 30s.

[2] The Code of Jewish Law (O.C. 581:1) instructs Jewish gatherings to look for certain qualities in those that would lead the services on the High Holidays.  Amongst these qualities is a minimum age of 30 because, as the Mishna Brura explains, a 30-year old is humble, soft-hearted, and capable of actually “praying from the heart.”

A “Bastard” in a Fatherless Age … (Part 1)

Today, I want to continue our discussion of youth and ministry by looking at a seemingly harmless little passage at the beginning of Acts 16.  Read with me for a moment:

“[Paul] also came to Derbe and to Lystra.  A disciple named Timothy was there, the son of a Jewish woman who was a believer, but whose father was a Greek.  The brothers in Lystra and Iconium spoke well of him. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was Greek.  As they went through the towns,they passed on the decrees that had been decided on by the apostles and elders in Jerusalem for the Gentile believers to obey.  So the churches were being strengthened in the faith and were increasing in number every day.”

Now, are you ready for the story behind the story?  Here’s how it works.  When you and I read this account, we see some odd biographical details that don’t mean a whole lot to us.  We know that Timothy is part Greek, so we know that he has not been circumcised and we know that Paul, for reasons we will not discuss today, needs for him to be circumcised.  We also know that after this, Paul travels around with Timothy, and that the churches are growing stronger every day.  And that’s as far as most of us in the 21st century get because we don’t understand the ancient Jewish culture.

So today, I’m going to unpack a bit of that ancient culture for you; and to make sure that I have your complete and total attention, I’m going to put this in words that you understand.  Assume for a moment that you are an African American kid.  How would you feel if I said to you:

“Your Mama’s nothing but a two-bit whore!  And you – you’re nothing but a nigger! Now get out of here, you little bastard!”

Offended yet?  Good!  You should be!  “Nigger” is an offensive word.  It’s a word that is filled with hate!  It’s a word that should have no place in our culture.  It’s a word that spits on the “image of God” that is placed in hundreds of millions of people around the globe.  Now how about someone calling your mama a “whore?”  Are you comfortable with that?  How about being called a “bastard?”  How does that feel?  How does that sit with you?

You see, in order to really understand what is happening at the beginning of Acts, you need to understand what the author is saying when he tells you that Timothy’s mother was a Jew and that his father was a Greek.  In the ancient world, this means that Timothy is a mamzer (From the Hebrew word: ממזר‎).[1]  But what does that mean?  If I had tried to explain the meaning of that word using “clean” English, it would have meant nothing to you.  But when I tell you that this word mamzer has all the power of the hatred that filled my example above, you can begin to truly understand the remarkable nature of this passage.

So what did it mean for Timothy to live as a mamzer in his society?  Well, for starters, it meant that everyone around him viewed his mother as a prostitute.[2]  It meant that every one around him saw him as “defective,” “corrupted,” and “spoiled” by “strange, alien” DNA.[3]  He was a half-breed in a society that lamented half-breeds; and he was a bastard child with no legitimate father willing to call him his own.  In a world where the Jews were wrestling with what it meant to be “outsiders” themselves, Timothy was the ultimate “outsider.”

  • Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy wasn’t circumcised on the eighth day of his life because he really wasn’t part of the community.  (Genesis 17:12)
  • Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy wasn’t allowed to go to the Tabernacle or the Temple because mamzers were forbidden.   (Deuteronomy 23:2)
  • Unlike other Jewish children, Timothy was cut off from his people because his mother’s failure had left him on the outside of the covenant.  (Genesis 17:14)
  • And lest Timothy think that things would somehow get better for his children, he lived with the knowledge that this status would be passed on to his children for 10 generations to follow.  (Deuteronomy 23:2)

Yes … Timothy was the ultimate outsider, reviled by a religious community whose leadership had called down curses upon those who were inter-marrying and giving birth to mamzers (Nehemiah 13:23-27).   So what do you think it meant for him, when he first heard the words of the Apostle Paul:

“For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith … There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female– for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.”  (Galatians 3:26-28)

What do you think, reader?  What does this mean for us as Christians?  Are we to be looking for the ones that conform to our expectations?  Or are we to be looking for the ones that are broken, and marred with jagged scars?  Do our youth ministries make a place for kids like these?  Or do we want them to “get better” before they come to us?  Are we ready to deal with the ramifications that come from ministry to kids with pain?  Are we ready for the disruption? Or do we simply want to do life with a little interruption as possible?

[1] Mamzer is also sometimes spelled mumser based upon the Yiddish variation.

[2] The Greek Septuagint translated ממזר as the “son of a prostitute” (from the Greek: ek pornes), while the Latin Vulgate translated it as de scorto natus meaning “born of a prostitute.”

[3] According to the Brown Driver Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, mamzer is derived from the root m-z-r, meaning “spoiled or corrupted.”  As per the Talmud, mamzer is a blended noun that joins mum (meaning “defect”) and zar (meaning “strange” or “alien”)