logo

Complaint filed against Bishop Sprague
By Kathy L. Gilbert

A group of United Methodist clergy and laity has filed a complaint against Bishop C. Joseph Sprague of Chicago, calling for his removal based on comments that he made about Christ’s divinity last year.

Twenty-eight people from 11 annual conferences, including 6 of the 12 annual conferences in the North Central Jurisdiction, have signed the complaint. The Rev. Thomas Lambrecht, group spokesman and pastor of Faith Community United Methodist Church in Greenville, Wisconsin, announced the filing January 7.

The group cites comments made by Sprague in a Jan. 28, 2002, speech at United Methodist-related Iliff School of Theology in Denver and in his recent book, Affirmations of a Dissenter, published by Abingdon Press.

“In his address and book, Bishop Sprague appears to deny the apostolic, orthodox, and ecumenical Trinitarian understanding of Jesus as God in favor of a form of Unitarianism or ‘adoptionism’ that denies the virgin birth and full deity of Christ,” Lambrecht said. “He denies the physical resurrection of Christ’s body. He maintains that Jesus Christ is not the only way to salvation and appears to deny the substitutionary atonement of Christ through his sacrificial death on the cross.

“These positions of Bishop Sprague are all contrary to the standards of doctrine established by the United Methodist Church, particularly as stated in the Articles of Religion and the Confession of Faith,” Lambrecht said.

In his speech at Iliff, Sprague discussed “who Jesus the risen Christ is for me”—a fully human Jesus. The bishop admitted his comments would sound offensive to some, but he said he did not intend to offend anyone.

“My hope is to encourage confused believers or those who yearn to believe, especially those who want to affirm Jesus but find little meaning in the stilted Christological language of the ancient creeds,” he said then.

When reached for comment about the complaint, Sprague said: “There are many things that could be said, but my understanding is that the complaint process is supposed to be confidential. So, given the disciplinary procedures requiring confidentiality, I must choose to say nothing.”

Sprague’s views stirred debate within the church. One of the most widely circulated responses came from Bishop Timothy Whitaker of the Florida Area.

“I wrote a response to Bishop Sprague, and when I sent out the response I also sent a letter to members of Council of Bishops,” Whitaker told United Methodist News Service. “In the letter I rejected the suggestion that a complaint should be filed against Bishop Sprague.

“The reason I reject the suggestion is partly because I don’t think it is clear that he has violated the teaching of our church on the issue of the divinity of Christ. I certainly have been very tough on asking questions, and I think he said things that make people wonder what his view is, but I believe he should have the opportunity to answer those questions.”

The complaint alleges that Sprague committed two chargeable offenses as defined in Paragraph 2702 of the Book of Discipline: 1) dissemination of doctrines contrary to the established standards of doctrine of the United Methodist Church and 2) disobedience to the order and discipline of the church.

The bishop allegedly violated the order and discipline of the United Methodist Church by using his office “to undermine and overturn the apostolic faith and the theological traditions of the United Methodist Church.” The Book of Discipline requires bishops “to teach and uphold the theological traditions of The United Methodist Church.”

The 28 signers of the complaint are from the Detroit, Iowa, North Indiana, West Michigan, West Ohio, Wisconsin, Alaska Missionary, Central Pennsylvania, Holston, Kentucky, and North Central New York conferences.

Pat Miller, executive director of the Confessing Movement, said she has received numerous calls from regular “people in the pews” upset over Sprague’s comments. Her organization, with offices in Indianapolis, is an unofficial United Methodist group that describes itself as a renewal movement in the church.

Miller added that this has motivated many to become more active and involved in the future of the United Methodist Church. “In some ways it is strengthening the church in the classical biblical faith because now people are saying that is not what we believe. We do believe the Bible is the Word of God, that Jesus is the Son of God and that Jesus is the way to salvation.”

One of the signers, David Stanley of Muscatine, Iowa, is a member of the Confessing Movement’s board of directors. Three others—Lambrecht, the Rev. William Hines of Upper Sandusky, Ohio, and the Rev. Bradley Knepp of Mount Holly Springs, Pennsylvania—are on the board of directors of Good News, a United Methodist renewal movement with offices in Wilmore, Kentucky.

The complaint was filed with Bishop Bruce R. Ough, president of the College of Bishops for the North Central Jurisdiction. The complaint asks that this matter be brought to investigation, and if sustained, “that Bishop Sprague either (publicly) renounce his contrary teaching and maintain his teaching within the doctrinal standards of the United Methodist Church, or that he resign (or be removed) from his office and surrender his credentials of ordination.”

Kathy L. Gilbert is a news writer for United Methodist News Service in Nashville, Tennessee.

 

Pro-life photography
by Gene Edward Veith

The most eloquent and unanswerable argument against abortion is surely an ultrasound picture of the baby in the womb.

This technology, using high-frequency sound waves that create a visual scan of the developing child, shows the unborn baby sucking his thumb, moving around, sneezing, making faces, and doing other things identical to what babies out of the womb do. No one who sees an ultrasound picture can deny in good faith that what she is seeing is not just a “fetus,” but a baby.

The first ultrasounds were primitive, producing a flat, grainy, black and white image. These were persuasive enough of the unborn baby’s humanity. But now a new generation of ultrasound scanners is giving highly realistic, photograph-quality images.

The new “3-D” machines give a three-dimensional image that can be rotated 360 degrees, letting doctors and parents see the baby from every angle. General Electric has just come out with a “4-D” ultrasound, showing the baby in motion, as in a home movie.

General Electric, in what The Wall Street Journal described as one of its largest ever marketing investments, went so far as to advertise the 4-D ultrasound in magazine ads and cable TV commercials. Highly technical medical devices seldom get this treatment, but G.E. realized that it had an invention with a distinct popular appeal.

Now, the new ultrasounds have moved outside of the doctor’s office and inside the shopping malls. This development is a persuasive new tool in the cultural battle, and it should help on the political side as well.

Fetal Fotos, Inc., a Salt Lake City company that has expanded into 10 locations across the country, has set up actual photo studios in shopping malls, where pregnant women can purchase early baby portraits. For $120, a new mom can receive two ultrasound sessions, a portrait of the baby’s face, and a video of the baby moving, set to the music of a lullaby.

Another company, Before the Stork, in Bloomington, Ind., offers a “trimester package,” allowing parents to watch the baby grow. Ultrasound movies have become popular gifts for grandparents and the entertainment-of-choice at baby showers.

The medical profession is huff-huffing at the nonmedical use of ultrasounds. Journal reporter Amy Dockser Marcus quotes Lawrence Platt, past president of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine: “Ultrasounds are a medical procedure and shouldn’t be used for entertainment purposes.”

In 1994, the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates medical products, issued a ruling that warned that using ultrasound equipment for “keepsake” videos is “an unapproved use of a medical device.” The FDA shut down some of the early studios and, according to Ms. Marcus, is investigating those that “appear to be cropping up again.”

Ironically, the initial use of ultrasound technology was to identify “birth defects,” such as Down syndrome and other physical problems. Often, this meant that the new technology was used as a pretext for abortion.

Many medical professionals still seem to be thinking in these terms, complaining that the commercial studios are not qualified to recognize medically pertinent information. But this misses the point.

Other doctors are realizing the benefits of letting parents see via ultrasound their developing baby. British physician Stuart Campbell, editor of the journal Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology, did a study showing that the photos encourage an early bonding of parents with their child. He also showed that a woman who can see her baby in her womb takes better care of herself during pregnancy and expresses a stronger attachment to her unborn child.

This latter point, of course, is the key. Ultrasound shows the humanity of someone easily dismissed as a “fetal growth” or as an abstraction whose status as a living being is said to be in doubt. The dehumanization of the developing child is a staple of the pro-abortion forces. But all of their arguments become meaningless when a mother can look her unborn baby in the face.

Pro-lifers would do well to encourage this new baby-portrait industry. This may include working for legislation, if necessary, to protect the industry from FDA restrictions.

As pro-lifers fight the political battles, they must also work in the culture, persuading women to choose life, convincing society that pre-born children are human beings, and making the case that abortion is child abuse. Politicians will eventually fall into line if pro-lifers can win over the culture.

It is thus good tactics to popularize ultrasound, showing the humanity and the cuteness of a baby at an age when it is legal to kill him.

Gene Edward Veith is professor of English at Concordia University-Wisconsin, and cultural editor for World Magazine, and author of numerous books. This piece is reprinted by permission of World Magazine.

 

Women’s Division meeting reflects need for reform
Commentary by James V. Heidinger II

Most United Methodist Women participating in local church units never get to a national meeting of the Women’s Division Directors. If they did, they would understand more readily why Good News and Renew have launched a Call for Reform of the national leadership of the Women’s Division of the General Board of Global Ministries.

Good News/Renew’s representatives, Carolyn Elias and Katy Kiser, attended the Women’s Division’s fall meeting in Stamford, Connecticut, last October.  While acknowledging a more cordial attitude toward them by staff and directors, the two reported on a continuation of the same themes heard in the fall of 2001: attacks on the Bush Administration and its policies, continued criticisms of Attorney General John Ashcroft, attacks on evangelical Christians and a distortion of their views, and a simplistic blaming of the United States for the animosity of the Muslim world toward America.

The items noted below from the reports of Elias and Kiser are 1) not representative of the views of most United Methodist women; and 2) not at all fair in presenting a balanced view of social and political issues facing the United States. Carolyn Elias admits in her report that there is much we would agree with in Women’s Division activities, such as its concern for women and children, its pride in the work of local UMW units that are doing prison ministry, and helping the needy and those in crises. Yet speakers at last October’s meeting indicate serious problems continue. Consider:

• Judy Nutter, Chair of the Section on Christian Social Responsibility, stated that “the U.S. has…virtually opposed every international effort to control and limit war, protect the environment and reduce poverty…” and has been the aggressor in five times as many invasions and assaults on other countries as Iraq in the last 22 years. For Ms. Nutter, when the America’s record is compared with Iraq, it appears Iraq comes out ahead. Unbelievable!

• In an address by Victor W.C. Hsu, senior advisor to the Church World Service of the World Council of Churches, criticized the U.S. as a “Hegemon.” He said, “What kind of world will this become if the U.S. government has a blank check to drop commandos, assassins, and bombs wherever it wants? It has created separate classes of people within the U.S. through racial profiling. It has brought down a pall of repression in several societies.” [One is struck by the depth of alienation toward all things American found in speakers invited to address the Women’s Division.]

• Ethel W. Born, a former vice president of the Women’s Division presented an address on the “Unholy Alliance Between the Christian Right and Israel.” Ms. Born railed at what she called the frightening presence of the “cult” of the Christian Right, Evangelical, Fundamentalist, and Dispensationalists who have aligned themselves with Israel in a political relationship so that [are you ready for this] Jesus will have a “landing base” when he returns. Her outlandish claims went so far as to accuse the “Christian Right” of “calling for nuclear war as a perverse fulfillment of divine prophecy.” Mrs. Elias observed that this borders on being a “hate crime,” with its vicious, false portrayal of evangelical Christians. Elias pointed out rightly in her report, “Evangelical, mainstream Christians are not a cult—are not always right wing—are not necessarily fundamentalists—and almost never dispensationalists. These are not interchangeable terms, and she [Ms. Born] should know that and recant her charges.”

• Another offensive remark came from Deputy General Secretary of the Women’s Division, Joyce Sohl, who said in her report, “We thanked God that a snow storm prevented a seller of War Bonds to make it to an Assembly during World War II.” This statement is insulting to those members of what Tom Brokaw calls the “Great Generation,” who sacrificed so much to free the world of the madman, Adolph Hitler. Mrs. Elias notes, “Those of us old enough to remember saving our dimes and quarters to buy War Bonds…are insulted by such insensitivity. Would Ms. Sohl and others have had the U.S. (and our allies) let the holocaust continue?”

Mrs. Elias summarizes, “The continued biased political agenda called ‘mission’ by the Women’s Division grinds on. There were, of course, still no flags, no patriotic songs or prayers for our military. (Elias had complained about that in her coverage of the October, 2001 WD meeting, just after the 9/11 attacks.) The only change was a shift from opposition to the war on terrorist attacks to opposition to war against Iraq.”

Guinevere P. Gregory remarked in her committee report that one of our official UM seminaries was teaching the Trinity, “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” A professor at this seminary had told his students that the UM Church could only ordain and baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Mrs. Gregory said she was very concerned and would have to keep an eye on this. (Women across the church should be shocked to learn that the teaching and use of the Trinitarian formula is somehow an item of “concern” to be watched by UMW leaders.) When questioned personally by Ms. Kiser after her report, Ms. Gregory remarked, “You know yourself that no one can tell you what to call God.” She went on to say that everyone has the right to call God what she chooses. She added, “It is the same with marriage vows. Today, we write our own vows. We decide what we will vow in marriage. No one tells us what to vow.” One wonders what other theological traditions the women may wish to change.

Mrs. Kiser summarized her report saying, “There is a multicultural bias that seems to pervade all the issues taken up by the Women’s Division. They seem to champion all points of view, political and religious, save that of support for Israel, capitalism (free market systems), and traditional Christian perspectives. As Americans, they indulge themselves in self-hate, finding the United States and its economic and political success the underlying cause of oppression and want in other countries. For all their talk of oppression around the world, there is a conspicuous absence of concern for oppressed Christian minorities in Muslim and totalitarian countries.”

She concluded with these troubling words: “For years the Division has been radically pro-abortion, affirming former President Clinton’s veto of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban. Where are the programs for abstinence and sexual purity? I believe it is just a matter of time before we will see the Women’s Division endorse an expanded definition of marriage.”

We are grateful for the careful reporting of Mrs. Elias and Mrs. Kiser. The glimpses we see from their reports reflect a Women’s Division that is hopelessly mired in radical, left-wing, only-blame-America, social and political views. In no way do these views and attitudes expressed at this Women’s Division meeting represent the views of United Methodist women in our local churches, who believe that the funds sent by their units to New York are helping in the cause of missions.

The Women’s Division’s un-abashed, radical, ideological pattern continues. And so does our Call for Reform.

James V. Heidinger II is the president of Good News. The Good News web site, www.goodnewsmag.org, has the full texts of the Elias and Kiser reports.

 

Good News honors Heidinger;
plans agenda for General conference

The board of directors of Good News, meeting in Wilmore, Kentucky, January 29-31, honored Dr. James V. Heidinger II as the recipient of the third annual Edmund W. Robb Jr. United Methodist Renewal Award. The award presented to Heidinger was in recognition of his years of service to the United Methodist Church and his leadership as the president and publisher of Good News magazine.

“Though Jim Heidinger is always the first to nominate others for recognition and encouragement, the board of directors, by unanimous vote, has chosen to present the Robb Award to him because of his outstanding contribution to the cause of renewal within and beyond the United Methodist Church,” said Dr. Scott Field, chairman of the Good News board of directors. “We find him to be a leader with a keen mind, a servant spirit, and a pastor’s heart. If there were more like Jim Heidinger in the leadership of the church, then perhaps the hope of a vital, compassionate, articulate United Methodism would not seem so far off.”

The award was presented at a banquet for board members, staff, friends, and colleagues from Asbury Theological Seminary, Asbury College, and Lexington, Kentucky.

Heidinger is an ordained United Methodist clergyman, has been the president/publisher of Good News since 1981, and is the author of United Methodist Renewal: What will it take? as well as Theological Malpractice: Essays in the Struggle for United Methodist Renewal. In addition to his work with Good News, Heidinger is also the chairman of the Association of Church Renewal, a network of renewal ministries within mainline denominations in North America.

Good News presents the Robb Award annually to a person or persons whose life and ministry have made a significant contribution to renewal within the United Methodist Church.

The Good News board also spent time refining plans and agenda for the 2004 General Conference. Dr. Scott Field, pastor of Wheatland-Salem UM Church in Naperville, Illinois, will again be leading the Good News team for 11 days on site in Pittsburgh, with a legislative agenda focusing on Episcopal accountability, doctrinal integrity, the continuation of the Call to Reform which seeks accountability from national leaders of the Women’s Division, and petitions strengthening the church’s stance on sexuality, marriage, and divorce.

Good News directors also affirmed, though with sadness, the action by 28 United Methodists who have joined in a complaint against Bishop C. Joseph Sprague (Chicago Area). The board agreed with those filing the complaint that Bishop Sprague’s denials of major doctrinal tenets such as the Virgin Birth, the full deity of Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus, and the atoning death of Christ are egregious denials by a United Methodist episcopal leader that, indeed, threaten “to undermine and overturn the apostolic faith and the theological traditions of The United Methodist Church.” Such teachings, the directors agreed, amounted to the “disseminaton of doctrines contrary to the established standards of doctrine of The United Methodist Church,” which is listed in The Book of Discipline as a chargeable offense (Par. 2702 1f).

The board also heard first hand reports of revitalized women’s ministries across the church and was heartened to learn of the growing strength of the Good News/RENEW Call for Reform effort. Increasing numbers of women are getting involved in seeking change at the New York office of the Women’s Division, the office which oversees the ministry of United Methodist Women.

The board also heard plans for its 2003 Summer Celebration which is a national convocation set for the Adam’s Mark Hotel in Columbus, Ohio July 24-26, 2003. Under the theme “A Healthy Church: Called to Congregational Health; Caring for Spiritual Health; and Committed to Connectional Health,” the Celebration will feature as major speakers Dr. George Hunter, Rev. Joy Moore, Dr. Robert Gagnon, Mr. George Mitrovich, Rev. Dick McClain, and Dr. Scott Field. Youth, children’s programs and nursery facilities will be provided making the Celebration an event for the entire family.

Good News Media Service

Mel Gibson attempts to capture
the passion of Christ
By Holly McClure

Mel Gibson has played a series of fervent men. William Wallace in “Braveheart” had a passion for freedom that revolutionized Scotland. Benjamin Martin in “The Patriot” heroically defended his family and the rights of Americans to live freely. Lt. Col. Hal Moore in “We Were Soldiers” was fiercely dedicated to bringing every soldier home from Vietnam. Heck, even Rocky Rhodes, his Claymation rooster in “Chicken Run,” was desperate to free his flightless flock.

But Gibson’s latest project promises to be the most urgent and heartfelt — and the riskiest— of them all.

The director of 1993’s “The Man Without a Face” and 1995’s Oscar-winning “Braveheart” has chosen to direct a story about the final 12 hours of Jesus’ suffering for mankind. “The Passion,” now in production, will primarily focus on the betrayal, trial and death of Christ, culminating with his graphic crucifixion and resurrection in the tomb. The movie will be spoken entirely in Aramaic and Latin, the languages spoken in Jerusalem in Jesus’ time.

For those of us who haven’t mastered Aramaic but enjoy films with subtitles, we’re out of luck. There won’t be any subtitles. Whether this is a stroke of genius or an attempt to commit career suicide, it’s an eye-opening example of a major Hollywood star defying Hollywood logic.

Why would Mel Gibson make a movie about Jesus in languages few can understand or read? “It will lend even more authenticity and realism to the film,” he says. “Subtitles would somehow spoil the effect that I want to achieve. It would alienate you and you’d be very aware that you were watching a film if you saw lettering coming up on the bottom of it. Hopefully, I’ll be able to transcend the language barriers with my visual storytelling. If I fail, I fail, but at least it’ll be a monumental failure.”

According to Entertainment Weekly, Gibson, 47, is the third most powerful man in the business (behind Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg). That leads to the natural assumption that the studios would line up to distribute whatever project he wants to do. But “The Passion” has met with little enthusiasm in Hollywood.

“My partners and I went searching for a studio to attach to the project, but no one would touch it,” he says with a smile. “They all said, ‘Are you crazy? Why are you doing a Jesus movie in Aramaic?’ Obviously, nobody wants to touch something filmed in two dead languages, but I understand, because I would have rejected me too if I heard my pitch.”

Ten years in gestation, the project is a “labor of love” for Gibson. The script he wrote with Benedict Fitzgerald (“Wise Blood”) is taken directly from the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John or, as Gibson likes to refer to them, “four obscure writers.” It also draws on an old book Gibson found in his library, “The Dolorous Passion,” by Anne Catherine Emmerich. He says he didn’t know he had it until it literally fell into his hands when he was reaching for another book. After years of writing, reworking the script and waiting for the right moment, Gibson was ready to make his ode to Christ.

“The Passion” stars Jim Caviezel as Jesus, Romanian actress Maia Morgenstern as his mother, Mary, and Italian star Monica Bellucci as Mary Magdalene. The cast and crew is comprised of an international group from Romania, Algeria, Tunisia, Bulgaria and Israel, as well as Italy, the U.S. and other countries.

“We have Muslims, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, even agnostics,” says Gibson, “and all are working together on this thing in perfect harmony. And they’re all getting something out of it — people have been touched. They ought to let us run the United Nations.”

Working miracles?
“There is an interesting power in the script,” he adds. “A lot of unusual things have been happening — good things, like people being healed of diseases. A guy who was struck by lightning while we were filming the crucifixion scene just got up and walked away.”

Francesco De Vito, who plays the disciple Peter, says “I talk with Judas [Luca Lionello] and with John [Hristo Jivkov] about this movie and about faith on the set, and there is something going on with many of us. We’ve become very focused — it has changed us.”

“There’s a pride that all of us have because we realize we are working on an important movie that could change a lot of lives,” says Vera Mitchell, Caviezel’s personal stylist on the film.

To portray the most famous man who ever lived requires a confident, controlled actor who can radiate mercy, love and forgiveness without opening his mouth.

Caviezel recalls that when Gibson offered him the part, he said to him, “Do you realize I’m 33 years old, the same age Jesus was when he went through all of this?” He believes his performance is divinely inspired.

“Truthfully, it was never up to me,” he says. “I’m interested in letting God work through me to play this role. I believe the Holy Spirit has been leading me in the right direction and to get away from my own physical flesh and allow the character of Jesus to be played out the way God wants it — that’s all I can do.”

He has found Aramaic an intimidating language to learn and speak on camera.

“But I asked God to help me and I was able to learn it in a quick amount of time, more than I normally am able to learn things,” he says.

The devoutly Catholic Caviezel takes his role seriously, often praying and softly quoting Scripture while in character. But he has a lighter side (he does a dead-on imitation of Bing Crosby) as well as a stoic one.

“I endured freezing winds that almost blew my cross off the cliff while I was on it,” he says. “I felt it sway back and forth and I knew it was going to blow over.”

This went on for a couple of weeks. “To make matters worse,” he continues, “we were there without a heater and, of course, I don’t have many clothes on the cross, so my body was going numb. I was spit on and beaten and carried my cross for days over and over the same road — it was brutal.”

When asked about the makeup and special effects for his crucifixion scenes he winces, “I have a 2 a.m. call time to get skin put on for the flagellation and crucifixion scenes. But I consider all of it worth it to play this role.”

“I know Jim suffered,” Gibson says. “He separated his left shoulder and was in a lot of pain and discomfort, but he was very patient during the whole thing.”

Not only did Caviezel spend 15 days on the cross, he endured days in ropes and chains, being scourged and whipped.

“Mel likes to put violence in his movies,” the actor says, “but all he cares about is making it look true to the text. Never before has a film of our Lord been shown like this one. By the time [audiences] get to the crucifixion scene, I believe there will be many who can’t take it and will have to walk out — I guarantee it. And I believe there will be many who will stay and be drawn to the truth.”

Keith Vanderlaan, the film’s special-effects makeup producer, did extensive research on crucifixions, then improvised to show nails being hammered into Jesus’ hands, ribs protruding from his chest and blood spurting from his side. Audience members — at least, those who stay — will feel as if they are watching an actual crucifixion.

Personal vision
Gibson is best known for action heroes and romantic leads, but it’s his recent role as a minister in “Signs” that may subliminally prepare audiences to accept his spiritual side. He was raised in the Catholic faith and considers himself a traditionalist who loves the Latin Mass. He has a priest on the set who offers a Latin Mass and hears confessions from whomever wishes to take part.

“When I was growing up, the whole story of the Passion was very sanitized,” he says. “It seemed to me very much like a fairy tale. Then from about the age of 15 to age 35, I kind of did my own thing, not that I didn’t believe in God — I just didn’t practice faith or give it much consideration. I went through that period in my life where you put a lot of other things first. I was a pretty wild boy, quite frankly. Even now, when I’m trying more than I was before, I still fail every day at some level, but that’s being human.”

Coming back to the story of Jesus nearly 20 years later was difficult, he says. “It seemed so distant, you know? I had to reconsider and say to myself, ‘Now hang on a minute, this isn’t a fairy tale — this actually happened, this is real.’ And that started me thinking about what it must have been like, what Christ went through, and I started seeing it in film terms.”

He accepts that making a movie about Jesus is risky “because it’s very personal for everyone. Every nation and creed has been influenced by Christ in some way or another, and everyone has differing opinions about who he is, what he is and why, or whether they even believe in him or not. And that’s the point of my film, really: to show all that turmoil around him politically because he is who he is.”

Holly McClure is a multimedia personality who hosts her own radio talk show at KPRZ in San Diego, California, called Holly McClure Live and has made numerous television appearances where she speaks out on various social, political and entertainment issues. Her movie reviews are featured in the Orange County Register and syndicated across the country in more than 360 newspapers. They can also be found at Crosswalk.com and iBelieve.com.



Click here to send your response plus the title of this article to us at Good News.

Good News | 308 East Main St. | P.O. Box 150 | Wilmore, KY 40390 | 859-858-4661 | 1-800-487-7784
info@goodnewsmag.org | About Us | ©2007 Good News magazine