Here’s the latest from the crossroads of faith, media & culture: 10/06/24

In a divided world is it still possible to disagree and still be good neighbors? That’s the question put forth in the latest documentary from Nicholas Ma. The son of the famed cellist Y0-Yo Ma gained notoriety for producing the award-winning 2018 film Won’t You Be My Neighbor? about the life and philosophy of the late Fred Rogers (aka Mister Rogers). In Leap of Faith (in theaters now), which he directs, he essentially spent a year posing the question put forth in the title of that previous film to twelve Christian pastors with very diverse on several core issues involving faith, democracy, love, sexuality, and human connection.

JWK: How did the idea for this movie come about?

Nicholas Ma: After I did Won’t You Be My Neighbor? about Fred Rogers and his wonderful attitude that embraced everyone, people would come up to me ask “Where’s the Fred Rogers of today? Have we lost that in this divisive time?” This film explores that.

Maybe when we think about what it means to be like Fred Rogers we’re drawing too narrow of a circle because what (Rev.) Michael (Gulker) (who leads the gathering of pastors in Leap of Faith) is doing (at The Colossion Forum) seems remarkable. He has a similar kind of universal idea to say “No matter where we come from, can we love each other?” Can we take that love command very seriously and what would it require of us to do that?

So, Michael and I started chatting. It was in the middle of Covid so there wasn’t a lot of filmmaking going on – but a lot of thinking. In the year that we spent talking, once a month, things seemed to get worse. Michael hit upon something really beautiful which is to say that the work he had been doing at the congregation level he wanted to elevate beyond that…to the level of the city, to the level of our country. So, he decided to bring twelve pastors together to ask those questions – or to use a scriptural term to test Colossions 1:17. Do all things hold together in Christ? I said “Well,that’s something I don’t know the answer to – and, if I don’t know the answer to it, that makes it an interesting question to explore.” That began the journey.

JWK: The idea of gathering twelve pastors, was that related to the twelve apostles?

NM: You know, it was Michael’s choice. I think we had some pastors drop out and some pastors drop in but perhaps there was a kind of providentialness that it ended up being twelve.

JWK: What would you say surprised you the most when you got them all together?

NM: I was wrong every time. The first time they got together I thought they were going to immediately disagree but they all were so tentative because they didn’t want to ruin the relationships that they were building. The second time they got together I thought “Oh, gosh, we’re just gonna get more of that tentative stuff.” Instead, real pain was experienced by a number of the pastors – a real sense of dislocation and hurt. Then, when the third meeting came, I figured they were gonna just try to paper it over and sort of move past it and get through to the other side. Instead, they found an answer that was more beautiful, more unanticipated, more hopeful than anything I could have dreamed of. I think, perhaps, part of the lesson for me is how do we stay in a relationship one day at a time? How do we leave space for the Spirit to be at work between us rather than saying “No, I know exactly what’s coming next. I know how this is gonna go. It’s a foregone conclusion.”?

JWK: What divided them the most?

NM: There are a lot of things that divide them. I think the issue that they were worried they wouldn’t be able to come back from was the issue of sexuality. I think probably because that’s the issue that a lot of denominations aren’t coming back from, right? You see the Methodists splitting. You see the Mennonites splitting. The Christian Reform Church splitting. You see all of these Christian identities fracturing because of sexuality. I think they were afraid that they wouldn’t be able to find a path through that where they could respect their own biblical interpretation and respect each other, to love God and love neighbor. I thought that watching them do that – watching them discuss the undiscussable, tackle the hardest topic for them – is part of what makes it the universal story. All of us know we can talk about the huge topic but how do we talk about the topics where we don’t know what the answer might be, where we don’t know whether we’re going to be able to come back from it. How do we have the courage to do that genuinely with sort of a kind of faithfulness?

JWK: Were there any particular dialogues or perspectives that stood out to you?

NM: Yeah. I think there are two things. Ashlee Eiland, a beautiful, beautiful thinker, scholar, preacher and human talks about love as being “more than intact.” She says “If a baloney sandwich can be intact and it can still be kind of gross, I think there’s something better than intact.” I really appreciate that idea that, okay, we may need to go through pressure to reach repair but we have to strive for something “more than intact.”

Second, is what Michael says toward the end where he says “I used to sort of appease the fear. Now, I want to say ‘Take courage.’ You be who you are, I’ll be who I am and we’ll get through this together.” I think right now we really only ever believe two of those things. We kind of believe “I have to change or you have to change or we need to go our separate ways.” I think there’s something really beautiful that all three of those things can be true. We need stories like that. Things that are hard and beautiful need to be reinforced. Having children is hard and beautiful. When you have a child everyone who has had a child comes around you and says “It’s hard. It’s sleepless nights but it’s very beautiful. You’re gonna get it! The days are long but the years are short. Enjoy it!” I (like) this notion of loving people across difference. We don’t have enough stories of people saying “You got this! It’s hard but it’s worth it! It’s beautiful! What’s on the other side is something that you can’t experience any other way – to be loved by someone who you thought was unlovable and thought could not love you.” That is worth it! That is something that may require pain, effort, care and patience – but it’s worth it because it’s beautiful!”

JWK: I guess that idea could be carried over into politics too, right?

NM: Yes, I think that’s right. I think that’s why the movie has this uncanny power. A number of people that are on the left have watched this movie and said “I realize I discount anyone who wears a MAGA hat – and that’s a problem. I can’t do that. I can’t discount a person because of a hat. That’s just wrong.” And a number of people on the right have said to me “I (must not) discount the importance of love. I have clear scriptural beliefs but to think that I can discard the importance of love because of my scriptural beliefs doesn’t feel right.” These are different types of realizations that people have. I have my own. I hope viewers will have their own ways in which they watch it and discover something new about themselves and the world that they live in.

JWK: I was just about to ask you what you hope people take from this film – and what you took away.

NM: I think for all of us as an audience we ask ourselves “How could we love better?” Because I think, frankly, we want to. No one likes feeling angry. No one likes feeling lonely. No one likes feeling cynical. These are emotions that we have to protect ourselves from disappointment – the disappointment that maybe what we wish was possible isn’t. But I think what these pastors demonstrate over the course of the year is that with a kind of endurance – doing the hard work – there is something on the other side that’s possible, that’s rendered possible. I think the pastors would say it’s the work of the Spirit.

John W. Kennedy is a writer, producer and media development consultant specializing in television and movie projects that uphold positive timeless values, including trust in God.