Anybody See The New Ucc Commercial?

[des]

This one is banned from ABC, NBC, CBS AND Viacom (like MTV). It starts with a mom and crying baby and you see a finger pushing a button and the mom and baby are ejected from the church (follows a gay couple-- very pointedly gay, one man puts his arm around the other), etc. Then you see the words: God doesn't reject people, neither do we, etc.

The ads are in Quick Time and other formats at: http://www.stillspeaking.com/resources/indexvis.html (this one is called "Ejector").

 

 

All the ads are edgy but I don't see them as terribly controversial. Must be the gays, imo.

I thought this one was rather funny, in fact. From what I have read the last set of ads was also considered controversial, but touched many people. I think that some people thought it was in judgement of other faiths, but I definitely didn't read it that way.

 

UMC ran a sort of "inclusion" ad with a very light touch.

 

 

--des

[flowperson]

des

 

I don't think that the UCC ad is judgemental of other denominations per se. I believe all of the fuss erupted because there are even UCC churches where the button pushing episodes are more true than not true.

I believe that the reaction was more due to a fear of the exposure of hypocracy within the denomination's ranks, than due to an assumption of the UCC's judgementalism directed towards other denominations.

I make this observation as a person who was a member of several UCC churches over my lifetime until a few years ago.

 

flow....

[des]

Hmm, well that's not what I have been reading, and ime, it hasn't been true of UCC. However, there are many UCCs out there and I am sure that it is true of some of them. Actually I think the nominal head of UCC (I think that would be head of the synod) said something of it callign as much to other UCCs as to other churches. The other comment that I think is true is that many more evangelical churches are more racially integrated. That is true. I don't think it has as much to do with "welcoming" as that the demographic evangelicals appeal to most is somewhat the lower-- lower middle socioeconomic classes (except for the "black church"). I think there is a certain, what do say, kind of luxury in taking a liberal/progressive position.

 

However, what I have read is that some feel that the UCC ad is suggesting that "other churches" are not welcoming-- true. And also that everyone except UCC is not welcoming-- not implied, imo. The fact that they received praise from other progressive churches says that they don't feel singled out in some way. And in fact the UMC has run much tamer inclusive ads.

 

I aslo thought it was a bit funny that the current UCC synod head found the reaction surprising-- the first ad maybe, but this years??

 

BTW, I read somewhere someone suggesting that they do a much tamer but much more pointedly "gay inclusion" ad (leave out racial minorities, the elderly, etc.). See if they'd accept that one. My guess is that they would not. However, I think the point was to reach out to feeligns of alienation from churches, not specifically which group you are in.

 

 

--des

[October's Autumn]

I don't see it as being in judgement of other faiths, either. The intended audience is those who feel excluded. They can come from any faith or no faith at all.

 

 

The senior pastor of my church told the story of a muslim woman who came to him after her son had been diagnosed with a serious developmental disability. She was feeling very isolated. She had seen the ad and came to the local UCC just because she needed someone to talk to about what she was going through. She didn't abandon her faith or start coming to church there but she knew she would not be judged or rejected by him. She knew this because she saw the commerical.

[klm]

I'm confused! For those thoughtful people practicing the earlier Christianity (to use Marcus Borg's descriptive phrase of that theology), how could they not see this commercial is offensive?

 

Let me quote from yesterday's news release from the UCC:

 

LOGO channel rejects UCC ad

CLEVELAND, April 7 /U.S. Newswire/ -- LOGO, a TV channel catering to the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community, is among the cable networks rejecting the United Church of Christ's pro-gay ad.

 

...When asked for an official reason, MTV Networks [LOGO is operated by MTV] responded, "Our guidelines state we will not accept religious advertisements that may be deemed as disparaging to another religion."

 

For the many Christians who are in a relationship with God in congregations practicing the earlier theology, this ad appears to them to be a direct assault of their faith, and "...disparaging to [their] religion."

 

In that light, one can argue that this ad violates the 2nd point of TCPC's 8 points:

By calling ourselves Progressive, we mean that we are Christians who:

    Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us.

 

A more positive, less divisive ad is UCC's "All The People" ad.

[October's Autumn]

"another religion" If anything the ad recongizes that Christianity is rejecting. It is the same religion!

 

I do like the "all the people" ad, but it doesn't clearly show that the UCC is accepting of the GLBT community.

 

Earlier theology? No, a modern theology. The UCC and other similar denomations and people are practicing the same theology as Jesus. Others are practicing a much later theology!

 

I don't make excuses or sugar coat for those who think it is okay to be racist or homophobic! Call it was it is.

Edited April 8, 2006 by October's Autumn

[des]

>I'm confused! For those thoughtful people practicing the earlier Christianity (to use Marcus Borg's descriptive phrase of that theology), how could they not see this commercial is offensive?

 

Well I'm not sure that I buy into the concept that progressive Christianity is "earlier" Christianity. I think the only thing earlier about it is that early Christianity was VERY diverse!

No doubt some took what might have been a more progressive less literalist stance. I don't recall that Marcus Borg said that--not that he didn't just I don't recall it. Or perhaps he is speaking of recapturing mystical elements?

 

>...When asked for an official reason, MTV Networks [LOGO is operated by MTV] responded, "Our guidelines state we will not accept religious advertisements that may be deemed as disparaging to another religion."

 

But I don't see the ad as saying ANYTHING about basic faith issues-- rather about feelings of alienation and rejection. Except for the gay thing, it isn't even particularly a progressive statement. I'm sure, in fact, that some evangelical churches are very accepting. So I just don't see where there is an attack made on other faiths.

 

The only issue that is really dealt with in some ways uniquely is the gay and lesbian issue.

Yes, I think there is an "attack" that churches are not accepting of gays and lesbians. In fact, this is a statement that most of those churches would agree exists. Of course, you know they would say we love the sinner but hate the sin, and so forth. But churches that have an anti-gay and lesbian stance are very upfront about it. Most of the negative comments are not that the ad attacks any theology (except perhaps the theology of gay accceptance) but that it is saying that other churches discriminate against minorities, disabled people, etc. (and some still do).

 

Also a clarification, the LOGO network didn't make the decision, it was the decision of Viacom. Logo (or MTV, etc) aren't in a position to make that kind of decision).

 

>For the many Christians who are in a relationship with God in congregations practicing the earlier theology, this ad appears to them to be a direct assault of their faith, and "...disparaging to [their] religion."

 

But how does it disparage "religion". It disparages nonacceptance. Perhaps pokes fun at it.

Perhaps there is a subtle element of creedal freedom ("No matter.. where you are in your faith journey, you're welcome here.") But I don't think that "non-creedal freedom" is attacked-- just the nonacceptance.

 

>In that light, one can argue that this ad violates the 2nd point of TCPC's 8 points:

By calling ourselves Progressive, we mean that we are Christians who:

    Recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God's realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, as our ways are true for us.

 

I am totally comfortable with the ad and with that statement.

 

>A more positive, less divisive ad is UCC's "All The People" ad.

 

 

I was very drawn, perhaps even felt the Bouncer ad was healing to me. I am not gay but I felt the rejection in that ad, as I feel different from others being autistic. I felt really addressed for the first time. I'm not sure that I would have felt the same just from the "All the People" ad. I liked it but thought maybe it was a bit corny. (I also think it wasn't quite as hard hitting on the gay, lesbian issue. There are two women with arms around each other. They could be lesbian, you know they looked maybe like they could have been sisters though.) BTW, I like the Bouncer ad much more than the Ejector ad. It seemed that the end message was much more slowly delivered, and stronger.

 

--des

Edited April 9, 2006 by des