We could use a hypothetical situation to describe one reason why people change. Suppose we have a young person who grew up in religiously conservative Christian home where they were taught that liberals are always wrong. But then that person goes away and through friends, some of whom might be liberals, that person realizes that not only are liberals not always wrong, but that that person's own group displays some some general faults of their own. One possible result from that hypothetical situation is that that person changes from being a conservative to becoming a liberal who now believes that conservatives are always wrong. How is that person the same? The answer is obvious, that person still believes that people from another group are always wrong. And they came to that conclusion by remaining the same while beng disillusioned with what they previously believed and surprised by what they didn't believe.
The above leads into today's review. Only instead of reviewing a particular work by an individual, I would like to review the subject of Netflix's movie Come Sunday (click here for info on the movie). The movie Come Sunday is about an emerging Pentecostal megastar preacher, Carlton Pearson (click here for his bio), and how he changed his beliefs from Fundamentalist-Pentecostal beliefs to Universalist ones. For those who are unaware, Carlton's spiritual transition meant that he no longer believes that people must have faith in Jesus Christi for the forgiveness of their sins to be saved by God from spending eternity in hell. He now believes that there is no hell for people to go to after death and that all people are saved.
There are two reasons why Pearson's story interests me. First, I went to ORU during the same time he did. I knew who he was, though I cannot remember any personal conversations with him. I also remember his spiritual mentor, Oral Roberts. Now while Oral softly spoke with Pearson in the movie, that is not how I remember him. For example, I remember sitting in the new sports arena called the Maybee Center with a friend when Oral came up to us. Oral was a physically imposing figure who demonstrated an outgoing, somewhat authoritarian personality. Oral spent the next few minutes monologing to us rather than conversing with us. His concern was whether we liked this new building.
But also Pearson's story interested me because starting in 2001, I went through a drastic change in belief systems. My new beliefs did not include changing my theology as much as changing my political ideology. I went from being a political and religious conservative to being a religious conservative but political leftist--I went past being liberal but did not past go and did not collect $200. So I can understand some of the turmoil Pearson went through in the process of drastically changing belief systems. I should note that understanding what he went through does not imply agreement with him.
Now while those of my fellow religiously conservative Christians (a.k.a., my fine, fellow flaming fundamentalist friends and family--I can sometime be an ill-alliterate) who have either commented on Pearson's change or reviewed the movie focus on the changes themselves, I would like to focus on what in Pearson remained the same while self-converting to Universalism.
The movie starts out with displaying two pronounced characteristics displayed in Pearson: his great compassion for people and his burden for helping them. And it seemed that getting people saved was Pearson's primary way of helping others. The movie illustrated this in the beginning when Pearson prays a prayer of accepting Jesus with an attorney who was sitting next to him on a flight and when he visited his aging uncle in prison. In fact, Pearson talks about about the need to get people saved so they don't suffer eternity in hell during various times of the movie.
Now some religiously conservative Christians who are familiar with Pearson's story have challenged the movie script on whether Pearson spoke about getting people saved. For example, in a response to one of my comments about the movie, Roger Olson said the following in his blog (click here for the particular blogpost):
Interesting perspective. I only knew Carlton as a figure in chapel, but I could sense Oral's love for him. I often even wondered if he was grooming Carlton to succeed him in some way--"just in case." Okay, I'd better not say more about that ;) Anyway, I bristled at the movie's language--mostly put in Carlton's mouth by the writers--about "saving people." No Pentecostal or evangelical minister or evangelist would talk about "saving people" or even "healing people." The secular book and movie writers ALWAYS get something wrong when they write about evangelicals. I'm reading a novel right now that includes some plot lines involving a Southern Baptist church and the author talks about "altar boys" and the "chancel." Very few, if any, Southern Baptist churches would ever refer to their "platform" as the "chancel" or have "altar boys." I wish writers would do their homework when writing about religion.
However, I came across some documentation that proves how Pearson spoke (click here and look through the quote of Pearson where he talks about 'getting people saved' and having to 'save' people). Olson assumed, as a Christian theologian who is very conscientious about being theologically precise, that because no legitimate conservative preacher he knows would say the phrases 'saving people' and getting people saved.' Thus, Olson believes that the use of those phrases in the movie reflected solely on how the writers wanted to describe what Pearson said. The documentation cited contradicts Olson here.
The accuracy of Pearson's phraseology is important here. That is because for as long as Pearson regards evangelism as something he must do to deliver people, a belief of Pearson emerges: his gospel puts quite a bit of focus on man. In Pearson's case, the Gospel puts a lot of focus on preachers.
The movie goes on to portray some events and relationships that act as catalysts for Pearson's spiritual transformation. How Pearson stays the same includes the following: having great compassion for people, still having a burden for helping people, and the significant focus that Pearson's understanding of the Gospel places on man. For as Pearson discovers he is incapable of helping the people he feels the greatest burden and responsibility for, the dissonance produced by that combination required him to change beliefs from a Fundamentalist-Pentecostalism doctrine of particular salvation to Universalism. I believe that seeking relief from the great tension caused by that dissonance led Pearson to believe that God had told him that 'everyone is saved.'
Now while many of my fellow religiously conservative Christians correctly challenge Pearson's new beliefs, they should first stop and look in the mirror. For as they correctly charge that Pearson's new beliefs are heretical, they overlook the fact that some of them lack Pearson's great compassion for people. In fact, some of them need to ask whether they have a heretical lack of compassion for others.
How is Pearson the same now as he was before? He still has a great deal of compassion for people. He still feels a great burden for helping people. And much of the gospel he believes focuses a lot on people. Only now, the gospel Pearson preaches focuses on people even more than before. For while in the past, Pearson's gospel focused much on the evangelist, it now puts much focus on all others as well. And, according to the movie, this leads Pearson's new preaching to into making an obvious contradiction. That contradiction consists of Pearson telling his parishioners that God loves them unconditionally while emphasizing that all people deserve God's love.
When we think about how much the same Pearson is after his conversion as he was before, we should note that it was only some of Pearson's beliefs that changed, not Pearson himself. So the new Pearson is simply the result of catalytic events drawing attention to the fact that the same old Pearson thought that he needed to change some of his religious beliefs, not himself, to find peace. And isn't that what many of us do anyway?
No comments:
Post a Comment