What Jerry Falwell, Zizek and Obesity Can Teach us About Our Evangelical Holiness Codes
Thursday, August 31, 2006
A couple of days ago (Aug 25, 2006), Chicago Sun Times religion columnist Cathleen Falsani wrote a piece entitled “Weighty Matter: Is religion making us fat?” In the piece, she recited Adam Ant’s lyrics in the 80’s “Don’t drink, don’t smoke, what do ya do?” She raised the question whether those Christian denominations that prohibit drinking and smoking were not in fact doing what was left to do: abusing food as substitute for these other prohibited pleasures. In support of this, Falsani quotes Ken Ferraro’s study from Purdue University that studied churches as the potential feeding ground for the problem of obesity and gluttony in North America. Published in the June issue of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, this study concluded (after accounting for several other factors) that some kinds of churches seem to encourage the problem of obesity. Ferraro in fact states that churches where drinking alcohol, smoking anything and even dancing are vices, “overeating has become the accepted vice.”
Now I come from one of those denominations. I minister under restrictions of no alcohol and tobacco. My denomination, along with others rooted in the old holiness movements of the turn of the century, still hangs on to the holiness codes that prohibit alcohol and tobacco for its clergy. I consider this to be “an adventure in missing the point,” to quote Brian McLaren, and I believe Falsani helps us see why. Let me explain.
If we prohibit certain behaviors as conditions of fitness for pastoral ministry, are we not really revealing the fear that we lack the character (or fitness) in the first place? If drunkenness and addictions that seek ultimacy other than in Christ is what we fear, why not name drunkenness and addiction as the symptoms that require discernment. Instead we prohibit all use as if to suggest we are hiding something. The total prohibition is a sign that we suspect we don’t actually have character formed in this direction in the first place. If this is true, we are we not really dealing with the issue of whether our clergy has fitness. We are just providing conditions to displace the lack of character (if it exists) to some other object that is safer, i.e. from tobacco, alcohol to food. We really do not have a test of fitness for ministry, just the means to obfuscate that the character may not be there at all.
Cathleen Falsani points to Jerry Falwell as exhibit A. in her Sun Times article. She says he exhibits the typical Baptist characteristic of shunning alcohol and tobacco yet overdoing on the food. The result has been numerous health issues for Rev Falwell. I have no desire to beat up on Rev Falwell. I want to be careful here about painting a broad-brush stroke across all of us who have struggled with weight. Please hear me. That’s not my point. I am someone who’s had food and weight problems. And I’ve had my own recent crisis with diabetes as a result. Rather, what I am trying to show here is how the holiness codes of my denomination and others do not address the issue, they merely reveal the symptom of the Real, what lies underneath.
Slavoj Zizek, post postmodernist (if there is such a thing) cultural critic, is famous for his use of Lacanian (post Freudian) analysis to help us see the ways cultures can manifest symptoms of the Real in ways that surprise and confound their own symbolic networks. I might just suggest a Zizekian move here and suggest, that in relation to our denominational holiness codes, Jerry Falwell is the symptom of the Real. That in the zeal of evangelicals to be different than culture, they have in essence revealed that nothing is really different. Instead the “hard kernel of the Real” has irrupted in the body of Jerry Falwell and the obesity epidemic in our holiness coded churches. As a result, the holiness codes and Falwell reveal the Truth. In Zizek’s words, “we overlook the way our act is already part of the state of things we are looking at, the way our error is part of the Truth itself.” (The Sublime Object of Ideology p. 59).
In the end, character is about the ordering of one’s appetites towards God’s purposes in creation through a purified vision of Christ and His glory. It is an orientation given through practices of worship in Scripture infused by the Holy Spirit. To have character as James McClendon says, “is to enter at a new level of morality, the level at which one’s person, with its continuities, its interconnections, its integrity, is intimately involved in one’s deeds. By being the persons we are (in Christ - my words) able to do what we do … “. (Biography as Theology p.30). If such desires are not ordered, if such desires are not integrated, holiness codes can only cover up the existing problem. The holiness codes then become a case of misrecognition. And as Zizek states, “the Truth arises from misrecognition.” (p.57). Thus we have obesity as an epidemic in our churches. .
More and more, the new generations cannot stomach these holiness codes. I have regularly met with outstanding candidates for ministry but who raise their eyebrow at my denomination’s persistence on its holiness codes for clergy. This is because these codes are not holiness. Instead, they trivialize holiness. They speak of a lack of character and virtue instead of one who does possess it. And so the lack of character may be subdued by the ideologies of holiness codes, but the “kernel of the Real” exposes its ugly head in our obesity.
The real question for us holiness denominations if we would ever be taken seriously by the postmodern generations (and our credibility slips everyday we hold onto to these “legalistic, and unbiblical” codes of behavior - e.g. there is no Bible verse prohibiting drinking alcohol, quite the contrary)… is whether we have the wherewithal within our doctrine and practice of following Christ so as to be sanctified in such a way as to be trusted with a drink or a stogie. The real issue that our denominational leaders should then turn to, concerning the fitness of its clergy, is the commitment to a holy life and what that would look like as worked out in a community. Obviously this refers to issues of so-called “personal holiness” (is any holiness personal?) like drunkenness, addictions that reveal our lack of dependence and prayer upon God including tobacco, pornography, gambling and food! But this should also include how we handle money, how we engage the poor, how we speak to our neighbors, whether we engage in conflict in holy and Christ like ways. We should not resort to legalism! To the postmodern generations, “no alcohol, no tobacco” speaks only to a religion of rules meaning people who don’t really believe what they say enough to live it.
Posted by David Fitch | 9:47 AM
COMMENTS:
Very nice David. I'm always a little weary when I hear ethics as compartmentalized and separated from "the heart."
4:58 PM
This points more broadly to the addictive and obsessive patterns of our culture (G.Cosby talks a lot about this), patterns which expose the need to medicate ourselves.. to avoid unaddressed issues of grief, shame, guilt and pain. But rather than address those root issues, because they are so close to home.. we approve certain addictions and compulsions.. a consumptive, materialistic lifestyle, busyness, TV, food.. and if Peterson is correct, control itself. In some circles people are addicted to church.. to meetings, entertainment and charismatic personalities. One of my counselling profs used to say (systems theory).. families and personalities are like a balloon.. squeeze them one place, they bulge somewhere else.
6:57 PM
I've noticed a tendency to swing the pendulum on holiness issues. Either legalism rules the day or an “anything goes” mentality prevails. I like how you framed the whole issue, though. Holiness should be an expression of our internal desire to love and please God rather than a way to look good in the eyes of others, which is what I think often motivates people. If sin is defined as a “violation of relationship” then holiness is a commitment to people not our image.
5:20 AM
Skipping over the substance of a good post, I thought you might be intrigued by the following LRB article on Zizek: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n17/jame02_.html. I agree wtih Jameson, apprehension about what he's up to is, to me, more than called for at present, which isn't to say that he's doesn't have some great insights. But, rather like he acuses nearly everyone else, I think he's being deceived by his own apparent truths. How's that for paradoxical dialectic? ;)
8:01 PM
Good piece. While reading, I couldn't help but think that the action word "eating" could have been swapped out for "shopping" resulting in amassing useless goods. I have thought a lot about these acceptable addictions in the church (not only the North American church either). In my life, I have gone through stages of abusing first alcohol, then drugs, and on to food and shopping before finally coming to Christ. As a young Christian it was community and just knowing more of Christ himself that I longed for. Now that I have been walking with Jesus for about 9 years, I have come to understand that I must be vigilant and not attempt to fill my needs through "acceptable addictiions" like food, coffee and things. Now and then I become aware that little habits (usually sugar-related) have crept in and tried to take the place of what really satisfies - time in prayer or scripture.
So, my point? I guess ALL THINGS - even church activity like Len mentioned above, can become a substitute for Christ. Letting them go unheeded can result in unhealth in the body and spirit. But if we are vigilant, reckognizing these abuses before they become addictions, they can help us redirect our longings for satisfaction to Christ.
Thanks for being merciful with Rev. Falwell.
1:03 AM
I'll drink to that.
3:58 PM
Thansk to Len and others here for showing me other ways, the lack of a practice of sanctification leaves us open to all sorts of subtitute false copies of the same.
peace
David Fitch
7:48 AM
David,
I think your post here points to what you talked about in your book as rhythm...moderation and measure of one's life - modulation. If I remember correctly, you mentioned it in regards to the church calendar. I think modulation/moderation/rhythm is/can be embedded in all our activities...eating, "shopping", working, whatever. Liked the post. I guess I mention this because it creeps into my mind as PART of an answer to the question, "OK, what now?"
Jason
4:05 PM
Judgmentally and unfairly confuses obesity with gluttony. The Bible nowhere condemns the state of being fat as somehow sinful, while it does condemn the sin of gluttony. Which actually begs the question, "What is gluttony?" One taco too many? A few fries too many? And what about all the skinny gluttons we've all known, who could eat like a pig and not gain a pound? Recent medical and scientific research has revealed more and more of the whole picture behind the condition of obesity, and the fact is, it simply is not so cut-and-dried as those who like to poke the obese in the belly want to make it.
John E
12:15 AM
Ted Haggard brings this post to mind.
7:29 PM
Adam Krell said: "If sin is defined as a “violation of relationship” then holiness is a commitment to people not our image."
Amen, Adam. Sin is, first and by far foremost a violation of relationship; our relationship to the God of heaven who so desires communion with His people that He tabernacled in flesh so as to teach us the dynamic of the relationship He desires. Now, as living "icons" of Christ, we are to demonstrate to the world about God what Christ demonstrated to us in His Incarnation. Our failing in living a set-apart life is a failure to value the people around us enough to afford them a look at real anointed, holy Christian life. I am reminded of Paul's words, when he tells the Galatians that he makes up in his flesh what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ on their behalf. In short, Paul is saying that, at least a whole generation removed from Christ's earthly ministry, these believers were hard-pressed to imagine being Christ-like without His personal example there for them to see. Paul, by God's grace, became the "object lesson", the demonstration in real time of Christ's sufferings and patience and humility and love so that these Galatians could, as it were, "take notes". The other passage I am reminded of is where John (I think) says, "as He is, so are we in this world". Failure to live as we are given Spirit-led freedom and power to live is failure to put the living Christ on display for the lost and hurting to look upon and live.
I fail to see how rules about abstaining from foods or drinks or whatever could possibly make manifest a Christ-like holiness when almost total failure to obey, serve and imitate Christ is not seen to eradicate holiness in the average church's view. Perhaps those admonitions against "vices" could have a leg to stand on IF the vices were simply watched against like any other potential problem area in a person's life. Pastoral care and communal concern for one another, as family with unique spiritual perspective, are the safeguards against abuses, which idea pastor Fitch expresses in "Giveaway".
I hope these comments add something to this discussion. May God be praised.
6:50 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home