David DiSabbatino made the Frisbee movie and God blessed him richly for it.
I pray that one day he would attempt to tell the complex Brant Baker/Shekinah Fellowship story.
I figure that if enough of us share with him, he just might begin to see the picture...
David recently finished the Larry Norman story.
David does great work on controversial people.
Since the Phoenix Preacher interview with David can no longer be seen here:
http://phoenixpreacher.com/cms/?p=2927
I have located a public archive of it on the net at web.archive.
For some reason a script on the page keeps redirecting the readers to Adobe.com. So I installed noscript in my firefox browser and was able to copy the interview.
David does great work on controversial people.
Since the Phoenix Preacher interview with David can no longer be seen here:
http://phoenixpreacher.com/cms/?p=2927
I have located a public archive of it on the net at web.archive.
For some reason a script on the page keeps redirecting the readers to Adobe.com. So I installed noscript in my firefox browser and was able to copy the interview.
Here it is:
Phoenix Preacher
-->
I first heard about David Di Sabatino because of his research on the Jesus People Movement.
Since then he has created one of the most fascinating documentaries I've ever seen, "Frisbee: The Life and Death of a Hippie Preacher.
Now, he's back with a highly controversial new film about Christian music icon Larry Norman, "Fallen Angel".
The world premiere of the movie is at the Cinequest Film Festival in San Jose on March 1st, 2009. For more details, check the site at www.cinequest.org
PP : People keep bringing up "the motive" behind the films you make. What was the motive behind the Lonnie Frisbee film and the new Larry Norman documentary? Why Frisbee, why Norman?
DDS: Lonnie was a great story, and I was enticed by it by the nature of the way that people would speak about him, as if somehow they had walked with an apostle of faith. It was a story that seemed to have been ripped out of the pages of the Bible, the real Bible… not the one that has been utilized to promote the circus that purports to follow its lead.
I
think there is a huge disconnect between the people who say that they
are speaking on behalf of God and what I read in the Bible. When I look
at the story of Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard, I see this great figure
connecting them, someone that God would choose, but nobody else. God is
so far out ahead saying, “I am going to choose this kid that struggles
with what is going to become the most feared stigma in the near future.”
To me he is a much more interesting story than any of the other figures just because his life seems so biblically rich. For some reason, the powerbrokers don't like having a Rahab in their lineage. They'll say otherwise, but I am pretty sure that they felt the need to distance themselves from him and his influence. I think too many people can't step back from saluting the institution to see the grandeur of God in this story.
As for Larry, I have always been a fan of the man. His music has always been near and dear to my heart. In fact, I owe a great debt to him, as do a lot of people. His music provided the soundtrack to my early spiritual journey. For about 10 years that music was very important to me. I didn't really listen to him all that much after 1990, but when I started to turn my hand toward documentaries on this subject, he was a natural follow-up to Lonnie because of the degree of difficulty in telling the story.
I like difficult stories.
PP: Going back to the "Frisbee" documentary…in the time since you made the film are there things you have learned that change how you feel about Frisbees impact on the Vineyard and CC or how Frisbees legacy is handled by both organizations?
Things you would like to add?
DDS:
I don't think I would change anything about the Frisbee documentary. It
is always difficult to listen to some guy email who came to Calvary in
1980 and once had lunch with Chuck Smith tell me how wrong I got
everything. But that is the nature of the beast. People are entitled to
their opinion. I always tell them the same thing. Feel free to send me
your documentary, book, painting or piece of furniture that artistically
expresses your opinion.
Institutions are funny things. They are susceptible to things that have both positive and negative consequences. If you choose to align yourself with one, you might not be able to speak out loud lest ye come under the wrath of the henchmen that circle the king. There are a few guys I know that are like that character in the Lord of the Rings whose speeches are intended to vex and control the situation the way they see fit. Why the king can't see these people for what they are… one of life's mysteries. But I watched some honest guys come under extreme pressure because they wanted to be honest, but that kind of brutal honesty costs… and it costs big.
Too… how many people got so bent out of shape because the doc said that both Chuck Smith and John Wimber pushed Lonnie out of their lives. With Wimber it is obvious. With Chuck, Sr., I think he protests that because he allowed Lonnie to come back later on. While I don’t think it was as grievous as Wimber’s dismissal, I think there was a clear message sent to Lonnie that he was never going to fit in. Why, for instance, was Lonnie never ordained by Calvary Chapel but had to seek ordination from another organization someone else? But having said that… what is the big deal about saying that a guy that was shepherd over thousands of people coming to him dropped the ball with one? If that is the worst that is said about any pastor, I’m not sure that is such a bad mark against them.
PP: We got some comments claiming that you were not a believer, even one calling you an "enemy of the Gospel".
While I think it's irrelevant to the merit of your films would you be willing to tell us about your faith?
DDS: This is the interesting thing about your site, Michael, and even some of the comments that you make. I go in to www.phoenixpreacher.com on occasion and read this tendency to anathematize anyone who has a different take on things. Mark Driscoll is not a Christian because he speaks openly about oral sex. Todd Bentley isn't a Christian because he does what he does. On and on. You have your favorites and as long as everyone lines up with them, they are okay. If not… too bad, so sad, thanks for playing. Now depart, ye cursed…
That's a tough room.
I think that if you or I met the prophet Ezekiel or Hosea brought his whore wife over for dinner or John the Baptist sat at your table and demanded to be fed locusts and honey, we'd call the cops never mind anathematize them. I always ask people when they start parsing the life of Elvis or Bono or some lesser mortals and whether they are heaven bound what their reaction would be if the Apostle Paul showed up a few years after his conversion to speak in your hometown church, and he had been responsible for killing your parents. Not likely you’d be dropping a bundle in the offering that night.
God uses some of the most screwed up people to do his bidding. I think that story is sometimes tough to deal with. I sure don't like it at times, but nobody left me in charge.
As for me and my journey, I am not one to give in easily to tests of spirituality. I have the same reaction as Seinfeld's George Constanza to his father's testing his mettle during "the feats of strength" at Festivus. But I will say three things. First, I am not sure what the word "Christian" even means anymore. The word has been so abused by people claiming to be one and others slapping that label on products, it has lost its flavor, if it had any to begin with. (If memory serves, it was a term of derogation in its original use.)
Second, only people who know and interact with you in your daily lives have any right to answer that question. So, my wife, my step-kids, my friends. Some woman who emails me looking for clues on whether I measure up to her image of what Christianity means. Probably not. Finally, if someone has to explain their faith because it will assuage some sort of need for people to categorize, then I am all for obfuscation. Not just to be a pain, but with the hopes that the wrestling will cause people to explore and discover the wideness of God’s mercy that seems challenged by someone like me or someone much more important and visible.
PP:In recent days Charles Norman (Larry Norman's brother) has become more visibly active in denouncing you and questioning your integrity and trust worthiness.Why is he doing so and what is your response? Did you send him the movie?
DDS: Part of Larry's dysfunction was that in order to hide some of his bad behavior, he would threaten and bully anyone who was threatening or questioning his created reality. He used a form of "Christian guilt," pushing the person back by speaking about forgiveness and not lapsing over into bitterness. If you’ve ever heard the song “Shot Down,” that was a perfect example. If that didn't work, Larry would then use smear tactics to ruin that person's reputation.
This happened over and over and over again.
When
he came after me, all I did was decide to shine a light. It wasn’t done
in revenge, like he has claimed, but had been planned well before I
even started talking to him. (In fact, when Matt Coker of the OC Weekly came by to do that cover story,
he mentioned that I was telling him about Larry and following up the
Lonnie doc with Larry. And that was BEFORE I even spoke with Larry.)
Ever since the day I told Larry that Randy Stonehill sat in my living room to give me a four hour interview, Larry started a smear campaign. He was deathly afraid of the truth coming to the surface. His closest friends say this fear was worse to him than the threat of hell itself. I am sure that this is going to get worse before it blows over. That is what was modeled.
Larry was a brilliant student of human psychology, and he knew what buttons to push to elicit responses. For years I'd watch him throw the first punch then run into the corner, put ashes on his face and claim the other guy started it. I think over time people began to see he was the boy who cried wolf, and most discerning types in the CCM industry left him alone.
I don't think that any of this poor behavior takes away from what he sewed to the good, because I think there was a complex set of circumstances that contributed to him being that way. None of that takes away from his personal responsibility, but it does make the behavior a little more understandable.
But documentary films aren't about what might be or how forgiveness overrides all that stuff… it is about the truth of what happened. And the film is about the manner in which three people who were closest and were hurt the most by Larry forgave him. This story is very different than the Lonnie one because I honestly went looking for another King David story, but what I found was King Saul. People are going to go mental when they read that because, apparently, you’re not supposed to say stuff like that. I’m not sure why. It is the truth.
As for the motivation of the story, the Bible records the adulteress affair of the King who had concubines a plenty, and yet wanted what he wanted because he could reach out and make it happen. It also tells of the dastardly deed he did to cover it up, and the punishment that was meted out upon him for doing these things. And yet, he was called a man after God’s own heart, however hard that is sometimes to understand.
I am a fan of the guy who took his life into his own hands to tell that story. I would imagine that he came under terrific pressure to not tell it. He may have even lost his life. I wouldn't imagine that the King's relatives would be too happy for that story emerging in the Jerusalem Times. And yet, we take great spiritual insight from that story. Those that say they follow this man Jesus, they above all people should be honest, even if it is difficult, even if it hurts in the telling.
PP :You've seen things and spoken to people in the church that most haven't. What has surprised you the most?
DDS: I am not sure the word "surprise" is a word I would use to describe about myself in many situations. What bothers me is the disconnect between the raw honesty of the Bible and the manner in which the institutional church conducts itself. I get the sense that the biblical writers didn't have an eye on political correctness when they wrote. The graphic sexuality of Song of Songs to the harsh statements of the prophets to the holistic nature of Jesus.
All of this reveals to me a much more fully-orbed worldview than I see reflected when I find myself perusing what is coming down the pipeline of the evangelical community. I am not saying that there aren't things to cheer about. The church is not a monolithic entity. But there is always the need to reform.
PP: Finally…you have the floor. What do you want us to know about you and your work?
DDS: If you ask me about what I am doing with my work, I would say that when I created the Frisbee I decided that what I didn’t want to do was create something that was similar to a Thomas Kinkade painting; these wonderful otherworldly landscapes where life is bathed in this cascade of light and fluorescent greens and yellows. I don’t like movies that tie up all the loose ends or music that has taken all the mystery out of life. If you ask me why I think so much artistic creation from the church falls flat, I would say that it isn’t honest. There is something in being brutally honest that is compelling. It is the reason that I was drawn to both Larry and Lonnie, because at certain levels there was an honesty to them that was far deeper than most, even if that didn’t always continue. People do not naturally like honesty. Heck, I don’t like it either some times. But I am not sure we can take much more of the alternatives.
PP: Thank you very much for sharing some time and your thoughts with us, David.
Since then he has created one of the most fascinating documentaries I've ever seen, "Frisbee: The Life and Death of a Hippie Preacher.
Now, he's back with a highly controversial new film about Christian music icon Larry Norman, "Fallen Angel".The world premiere of the movie is at the Cinequest Film Festival in San Jose on March 1st, 2009. For more details, check the site at www.cinequest.org
PP : People keep bringing up "the motive" behind the films you make. What was the motive behind the Lonnie Frisbee film and the new Larry Norman documentary? Why Frisbee, why Norman?
DDS: Lonnie was a great story, and I was enticed by it by the nature of the way that people would speak about him, as if somehow they had walked with an apostle of faith. It was a story that seemed to have been ripped out of the pages of the Bible, the real Bible… not the one that has been utilized to promote the circus that purports to follow its lead.
I
think there is a huge disconnect between the people who say that they
are speaking on behalf of God and what I read in the Bible. When I look
at the story of Calvary Chapel and the Vineyard, I see this great figure
connecting them, someone that God would choose, but nobody else. God is
so far out ahead saying, “I am going to choose this kid that struggles
with what is going to become the most feared stigma in the near future.”To me he is a much more interesting story than any of the other figures just because his life seems so biblically rich. For some reason, the powerbrokers don't like having a Rahab in their lineage. They'll say otherwise, but I am pretty sure that they felt the need to distance themselves from him and his influence. I think too many people can't step back from saluting the institution to see the grandeur of God in this story.
As for Larry, I have always been a fan of the man. His music has always been near and dear to my heart. In fact, I owe a great debt to him, as do a lot of people. His music provided the soundtrack to my early spiritual journey. For about 10 years that music was very important to me. I didn't really listen to him all that much after 1990, but when I started to turn my hand toward documentaries on this subject, he was a natural follow-up to Lonnie because of the degree of difficulty in telling the story.
I like difficult stories.
PP: Going back to the "Frisbee" documentary…in the time since you made the film are there things you have learned that change how you feel about Frisbees impact on the Vineyard and CC or how Frisbees legacy is handled by both organizations?
Things you would like to add?
DDS:
I don't think I would change anything about the Frisbee documentary. It
is always difficult to listen to some guy email who came to Calvary in
1980 and once had lunch with Chuck Smith tell me how wrong I got
everything. But that is the nature of the beast. People are entitled to
their opinion. I always tell them the same thing. Feel free to send me
your documentary, book, painting or piece of furniture that artistically
expresses your opinion.Institutions are funny things. They are susceptible to things that have both positive and negative consequences. If you choose to align yourself with one, you might not be able to speak out loud lest ye come under the wrath of the henchmen that circle the king. There are a few guys I know that are like that character in the Lord of the Rings whose speeches are intended to vex and control the situation the way they see fit. Why the king can't see these people for what they are… one of life's mysteries. But I watched some honest guys come under extreme pressure because they wanted to be honest, but that kind of brutal honesty costs… and it costs big.
Too… how many people got so bent out of shape because the doc said that both Chuck Smith and John Wimber pushed Lonnie out of their lives. With Wimber it is obvious. With Chuck, Sr., I think he protests that because he allowed Lonnie to come back later on. While I don’t think it was as grievous as Wimber’s dismissal, I think there was a clear message sent to Lonnie that he was never going to fit in. Why, for instance, was Lonnie never ordained by Calvary Chapel but had to seek ordination from another organization someone else? But having said that… what is the big deal about saying that a guy that was shepherd over thousands of people coming to him dropped the ball with one? If that is the worst that is said about any pastor, I’m not sure that is such a bad mark against them.
PP: We got some comments claiming that you were not a believer, even one calling you an "enemy of the Gospel".
While I think it's irrelevant to the merit of your films would you be willing to tell us about your faith?
DDS: This is the interesting thing about your site, Michael, and even some of the comments that you make. I go in to www.phoenixpreacher.com on occasion and read this tendency to anathematize anyone who has a different take on things. Mark Driscoll is not a Christian because he speaks openly about oral sex. Todd Bentley isn't a Christian because he does what he does. On and on. You have your favorites and as long as everyone lines up with them, they are okay. If not… too bad, so sad, thanks for playing. Now depart, ye cursed…
That's a tough room.
I think that if you or I met the prophet Ezekiel or Hosea brought his whore wife over for dinner or John the Baptist sat at your table and demanded to be fed locusts and honey, we'd call the cops never mind anathematize them. I always ask people when they start parsing the life of Elvis or Bono or some lesser mortals and whether they are heaven bound what their reaction would be if the Apostle Paul showed up a few years after his conversion to speak in your hometown church, and he had been responsible for killing your parents. Not likely you’d be dropping a bundle in the offering that night.
God uses some of the most screwed up people to do his bidding. I think that story is sometimes tough to deal with. I sure don't like it at times, but nobody left me in charge.
As for me and my journey, I am not one to give in easily to tests of spirituality. I have the same reaction as Seinfeld's George Constanza to his father's testing his mettle during "the feats of strength" at Festivus. But I will say three things. First, I am not sure what the word "Christian" even means anymore. The word has been so abused by people claiming to be one and others slapping that label on products, it has lost its flavor, if it had any to begin with. (If memory serves, it was a term of derogation in its original use.)
Second, only people who know and interact with you in your daily lives have any right to answer that question. So, my wife, my step-kids, my friends. Some woman who emails me looking for clues on whether I measure up to her image of what Christianity means. Probably not. Finally, if someone has to explain their faith because it will assuage some sort of need for people to categorize, then I am all for obfuscation. Not just to be a pain, but with the hopes that the wrestling will cause people to explore and discover the wideness of God’s mercy that seems challenged by someone like me or someone much more important and visible.
PP:In recent days Charles Norman (Larry Norman's brother) has become more visibly active in denouncing you and questioning your integrity and trust worthiness.Why is he doing so and what is your response? Did you send him the movie?
DDS: Part of Larry's dysfunction was that in order to hide some of his bad behavior, he would threaten and bully anyone who was threatening or questioning his created reality. He used a form of "Christian guilt," pushing the person back by speaking about forgiveness and not lapsing over into bitterness. If you’ve ever heard the song “Shot Down,” that was a perfect example. If that didn't work, Larry would then use smear tactics to ruin that person's reputation.
This happened over and over and over again.
When
he came after me, all I did was decide to shine a light. It wasn’t done
in revenge, like he has claimed, but had been planned well before I
even started talking to him. (In fact, when Matt Coker of the OC Weekly came by to do that cover story,
he mentioned that I was telling him about Larry and following up the
Lonnie doc with Larry. And that was BEFORE I even spoke with Larry.)Ever since the day I told Larry that Randy Stonehill sat in my living room to give me a four hour interview, Larry started a smear campaign. He was deathly afraid of the truth coming to the surface. His closest friends say this fear was worse to him than the threat of hell itself. I am sure that this is going to get worse before it blows over. That is what was modeled.
Larry was a brilliant student of human psychology, and he knew what buttons to push to elicit responses. For years I'd watch him throw the first punch then run into the corner, put ashes on his face and claim the other guy started it. I think over time people began to see he was the boy who cried wolf, and most discerning types in the CCM industry left him alone.
I don't think that any of this poor behavior takes away from what he sewed to the good, because I think there was a complex set of circumstances that contributed to him being that way. None of that takes away from his personal responsibility, but it does make the behavior a little more understandable.
But documentary films aren't about what might be or how forgiveness overrides all that stuff… it is about the truth of what happened. And the film is about the manner in which three people who were closest and were hurt the most by Larry forgave him. This story is very different than the Lonnie one because I honestly went looking for another King David story, but what I found was King Saul. People are going to go mental when they read that because, apparently, you’re not supposed to say stuff like that. I’m not sure why. It is the truth.
As for the motivation of the story, the Bible records the adulteress affair of the King who had concubines a plenty, and yet wanted what he wanted because he could reach out and make it happen. It also tells of the dastardly deed he did to cover it up, and the punishment that was meted out upon him for doing these things. And yet, he was called a man after God’s own heart, however hard that is sometimes to understand.
I am a fan of the guy who took his life into his own hands to tell that story. I would imagine that he came under terrific pressure to not tell it. He may have even lost his life. I wouldn't imagine that the King's relatives would be too happy for that story emerging in the Jerusalem Times. And yet, we take great spiritual insight from that story. Those that say they follow this man Jesus, they above all people should be honest, even if it is difficult, even if it hurts in the telling.
PP :You've seen things and spoken to people in the church that most haven't. What has surprised you the most?
DDS: I am not sure the word "surprise" is a word I would use to describe about myself in many situations. What bothers me is the disconnect between the raw honesty of the Bible and the manner in which the institutional church conducts itself. I get the sense that the biblical writers didn't have an eye on political correctness when they wrote. The graphic sexuality of Song of Songs to the harsh statements of the prophets to the holistic nature of Jesus.
All of this reveals to me a much more fully-orbed worldview than I see reflected when I find myself perusing what is coming down the pipeline of the evangelical community. I am not saying that there aren't things to cheer about. The church is not a monolithic entity. But there is always the need to reform.
PP: Finally…you have the floor. What do you want us to know about you and your work?
DDS: If you ask me about what I am doing with my work, I would say that when I created the Frisbee I decided that what I didn’t want to do was create something that was similar to a Thomas Kinkade painting; these wonderful otherworldly landscapes where life is bathed in this cascade of light and fluorescent greens and yellows. I don’t like movies that tie up all the loose ends or music that has taken all the mystery out of life. If you ask me why I think so much artistic creation from the church falls flat, I would say that it isn’t honest. There is something in being brutally honest that is compelling. It is the reason that I was drawn to both Larry and Lonnie, because at certain levels there was an honesty to them that was far deeper than most, even if that didn’t always continue. People do not naturally like honesty. Heck, I don’t like it either some times. But I am not sure we can take much more of the alternatives.
PP: Thank you very much for sharing some time and your thoughts with us, David.
No comments:
Post a Comment