OVER AT DOMINIUM
by David Beilstein
On dominium (my other blog) I continued my analysis of so-called “Christian” movies and laid out my objection to such language. I did my able best to suggest my objections are rooted in the nature of Christianity and the nature of storytelling alike.
I realise my position is controversial. Many evangelicals are offended by such a suggestion. I have met them and debated them. I cannot say they have ever offered me convincing argumentation I am either Biblically, confessionally, or cinematic incorrect. It is not always my intention to ruffle feathers. Some times, yes. It does boil down to the simple equation that I cannot write what I do not believe – not in terms of blogging or opinion journalism.
What is most readily apparent [I pray] on dominium is my love and confessional fidelity with Christ’s instituted Church. My opinions about cinema and Christian faith are an effort to preserve Biblical faith and not attack it. But it’s counterintuitive because of how ahistorical and non-Protestant Biblical Christianity has become in American life. This has been a large consequence I have seen in those who have mentored me within the Presbyterian Church.
I have focused on several Christians who wrote secular work in my latest posts. I have done this in an effort to explicate men and women of my opinion – [who confess Christ as Lord] – do exist. If there is a weakness to my argument (and I am sure there is) it could be such thoughts about cinema and Christianity are quixotic in our current cultural context. Christian faith has been expressed outside the church [outside ecclesial polity] for so long it is not unlike the horse skirting the proverbial barn.
But if Christian one realises something important. The Church and Christian faith are not the ideas of men but experienced by men in actual life. The Christian saint is not relying on anthropological insight or perfection to get the Church right.
She is secured for the Lord’s perfect design and decree.