When I tell people this, they looked shocked, “How could you hate a show that builds homes for deserving families and individuals?!” Well, there’s a method to my madness and, of course, it has to do with some theological hangup about the show.
See, God’s grace is given to all without reservation for the taking. He doesn’t qualify his grace based on performance. But, like the show, neither does he qualify it on basis of need. What I can’t stand about “Extreme Makeover” is that fact that those who are given homes are those that the producers believe deserve those homes. Not only does kindness or sacrifice merit a home in that show, hardship and tragedy also becomes some kind of sick qualifier for benevolence. So, part of the show is dedicated to explaining the producers’ reasons for choosing a particular group on which to bestow grace…in this case, a new home. They play God.
I’ve had people tell me, “I just ‘see Jesus’ in that show” or “Isn’t that just how God is?” Luckily for me (and you), God is not like that. He extends grace to everyone regardless of economic status, race, gender, cultural relevance, or any other ridiculous qualifying criteria. He even extends grace to those who don’t think he exists or that his grace is in any way helpful to them. But that doesn’t matter – God extends it unconditionally. Without condition or reservation.
So what would “Extreme Makeover: God Edition” look like? Well, it would include a host of respectable and sordid characters. Philanthropists next to misers, Christians next to atheists, American soldiers next to radical jihadists, downtrodden tenants next to slum lords, and every other group of people you can think of. Yet, when the bus rolls back…they all receive houses beyond their wildest dreams. What’s more, they are all given the same blood red key. Each one, regardless of whether anyone else believes their lifestyle merits the gift. And you see the them all walking towards their houses, some cursing God and others thanking him, deciding whether or not to stick the key in the door. Repulsive idea, huh? Not to God.
Truthfully, “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition” is not about the people receiving the homes. It’s not even about the viewing audience or how much tugging on heartstrings translates into ratings. That show is solely for the benefit of those who create it. Ultimately, those who determine who deserves a home and who doesn’t aren’t concerned about anyone but validating their own criteria of worth. They are more concerned about feeling good about themselves and how such qualified giving seems charitable. But it’s really self-love. A “wrap-around” form of self love, but self-love nonetheless. Most charity in our world is for the giver rather than the receiver.
God works the other way around. He gives to overflowing first, then out of that overabundance, we are to give to others. If we give out of our own limited love, we will always run dry or expect something in return. But if we let God love others through us, we will never exhaust his love for others, even those we think they don’t deserve it. But more importantly, we’ll share unqualified love with those we do think deserve it. And that place everyone in the same category: unconditionally loved by God.
Are you suggesting that the world would be a better place without charity? Or that the recipients of charity would be better off without it?
If you had $100,000 to give away… would you just hand it out to the first people that you saw on the street? Or would you give it away based on a somewhat structured system where you determine the needs of the people or organizations that you could give it?
I realize what ABC is giving is about ratings… and selling advertising space… and making money. I won’t argue that… however… the network could put on another show like Moment of Truth… and get excellent ratings…. and make lots of money… AND… destroy human relationships and human dignity in the process. But no, ABC chooses to give away a home to people that could use a new home. But apparently that’s not good enough for you. It seems you’d rather see people suffer because of some silly self deluded ideal that… if we can’t give unconditional amounts of something… it’s better to not give anything at all.
Your god might have unlimited love to dole out to all… but in the real world… sharing what we do have it better than nothing.
I’m a Christian and appreciate your comments about how God’s grace is free & available to everyone. However, I have to disagree with the extreme dislike that you’ve expressed for the concept of helping those in need. Sometimes people really get doled out a lot of truly bad circumstances, and it’s good if those who are better off can help them. Also, I don’t think EHM is “playing God” by any means. They can’t give these homes to everyone, so by the nature of the show, they are forced to choose. It’s not playing God at all.
Interesting post.
Sure, most charity may be because it makes the giver feel good about themselves… But does that make the charity less worth, somehow?
Of course, extreme makeover: home edition is less about the charity and more about the entertainment.
lol
i see my comment wasn’t approved.
chillin’ –
Lose the profanity and you can say whatever you want.
Everybody else –
You seem to be addressing the same issue so let me try to do a blanket response. If it’s unsatisfatory, you can let me know and I’ll be more specific. I am not in the least saying that giving is wrong. Obviously we could use more charity and benevolence in the world. That’s not what I am addressing. As a Christian, I am concerned about matters of the heart. Jesus was pretty clear when he said that lust=adultery and hating your brother=murder. He used hyperbole to illustrate this point: all outward gestures of piety should reflect the inner state of the individual.
All I’m saying is that I don’t see that in EHM. I see the opposite. I see giving for other reasons other than simply giving. Otherwise they would give to those who didn’t “qualify” in some way. It’s giving with conditions. That show is a reflection of our national approach to benevolence, which is one of self-promotion and comfort. It’s why we donate $5 a month to the Red Cross or tariff-free coffee and think we’re helping someone out. It’s the reason, pro-life believers vote in a election booth but never interact with someone who is actually putting a baby up for adoption. It help, but it’s CONVENIENT help. EHM merely reflects that. People love to watch that show because it makes us feel good that someone got helped out today. But we didn’t do anything but press a button on a remote.
Is pragmatic, practical giving okay? Sure. But from what I can tell, heart motives should matter. Jesus was concerned not only about the fact that we give but our motives for that giving. Will that stop anyone from taking the key to their new house because the motives for charity may be mixed? I doubt it.
But it’s still worth exposing the double standard.
Hope that helps.
Sam
Very thought provoking. I’d never really thought about it other than “I wish that were mine”
Nathan –
Well, yeah, that was my first thought too. The whole Jesus/theological thing is a diversion tactic.
Sam
I have personal experience with the show. They built a house in Camden, NJ when I was working at UrbanPromise over the past summer. UrbanPromise gave them the land to build the house, but ABC forced out all the summer camp stuff that we were doing around the block. We had to take the kids other places for a week on our dime. Sure, one family got a house, but the kids lost out of summer camp and urbanpromise had to pick up the bill. I have much to say about it, but I will say here that the show is interesting, but there are A LOT of problems with the show as well!
Alright, I’ll play by your rules. lol
Well, I think this post is a joke.
Here’s why…
You seem to be complaining about how the show’s producers
give poor or crippled (parent dies, gets crippled, etc.) something to help them out.
Which is just ridiculous.
Helping someone in need doesn’t mean you’re “playing god.” It means you’re helping someone.
And, of course, the show is probably more about ratings than helping, but it does help. That’s the show’s entire subject matter.
Whatever.
P.S. Are you saying that the producers should give nice houses to families that already have nice houses?
chillin’ –
I’m glad you came back – thanks for being willing to jettison the language – all kinds of people read this blog and, though I’m not, a lot of them might be offended by cursing.
“You seem to be complaining about how the show’s producers
give poor or crippled (parent dies, gets crippled, etc.) something to help them out.”
No. I’m glad people get helped. What I am concerned about is how the show, in using criteria to evaluate “need,” is going beyond compassion. It’s REWARDING suffering and tragedy. I hope we can agree that suffering should not be revered. It should be hated. However, by focusing on extreme need, the producers are implicitly teaching us that only REALLY miserable or REALLY good people deserve our attention and blessing. That’s not true – as a Christian, I believe everyone deserves unconditional love.
“Helping someone in need doesn’t mean you’re “playing god.” It means you’re helping someone.”
In some cases that’s certainly true. But like you said, the show is more about ratings and not about true compassion. Furthermore, those who watch it gain a sense of well-doing by doing nothing but staring at a screen. It promotes inactivity. It’s like saying that if you can win a football game with USC on PS2 that you are qualified to try out for quarterback. It’s not real. Similarly a lot of times, our giving is only in moments of convenience and ultimately so we can feel good about ourselves.
“Are you saying that the producers should give nice houses to families that already have nice houses?”
No. That wouldn’t meet the producers’ standards of what consititutes extreme suffering or valiant heroism. And that’s the point.
Thanks for this post. You pose some good questions and thoughts, which I appreciate. I did a couple of posts on questions I have as I wrestle with what it means to care about the poor and suffering. I have more questions than answers, and I have seen how wrestling with the questions often is heard as being against helping those with needs. It’s not. But starting from an agenda of “helping the poor and needy” instead of a place of loving people, in general, causes us to miss needs right under our noses, if people don’t meet certain criteria.
Here is part of what I said in one of those posts: “I want my children to have eyes that see suffering and need in the lives of people whose paths they cross, regardless of the degree of the lack of wealth or even the presence of great wealth. Yes, I hope my children have a part in alleviating the suffering in the world. But, mainly I hope that they make a difference by caring for specific people who suffer, by loving people where they are, and by communicating the love, peace and salvation Jesus offers, in the place of suffering, whether or not they effectively relieve suffering or knock down poverty. If my son were to take in a homeless family, and my daughter were to show kindness to Britney Spears, is only one helping a truly needy person?”
eclexia –
Thanks for commenting.
“But starting from an agenda of “helping the poor and needy” instead of a place of loving people, in general, causes us to miss needs right under our noses, if people don’t meet certain criteria.”
Exactly! That level of love and service should motivate us without having some external factor like poverty or suffering move us to action. Of course, those make a difference, but what about the people who suffer quietly? They need encouragement too.
“But, mainly I hope that they make a difference by caring for specific people who suffer, by loving people where they are, and by communicating the love, peace and salvation Jesus offers, in the place of suffering, whether or not they effectively relieve suffering or knock down poverty. If my son were to take in a homeless family, and my daughter were to show kindness to Britney Spears, is only one helping a truly needy person?”
Gee…you should’ve written this post for me!
I couldn’t agree more. Qualified love and merit-based giving is not God’s type of love. Thanks for the input.
Anyone who attempts to extrapolate their theology from a TV show produces a quandary at best. The people you quote as saying, “I just ’see Jesus’ in that show” or “Isn’t that just how God is?” would raise my interest into their reasoning as well. Since we know that theology isn’t based on ABC’s methodology for choosing need, arguing against it seems like an exercise in futility.
You said that God doesn’t give grace on the basis of performance, ok… but need, which you also say isn’t a qualifier, is the most basic of reasons for his grace. It is a universal need. That is where your argument detours in comparisons. You argue that because God doesn’t give grace on the basis of need, then it should follow that we don’t give charity on the basis of need. Unfortunately charity isn’t a universal need.
In Webster’s Dictionary 3 of the 6 definitions given for Charity relate to soothing pain or relieving need.
You argument that “Not only does kindness or sacrifice merit a home in that show, hardship and tragedy also becomes some kind of sick qualifier for benevolence” seems to be distinctly contrary to the definition of charity, as well as benevolence, which also according to Websters is “The disposition to do good; good will; charitableness; love of mankind, accompanied with a desire to promote their happiness.” If hardship and tragedy isn’t a motivator for general charity and benevolence, then what is.
Again, I’m not arguing any theological point, because the theological doesn’t belong here. These company’s and the show, give to relieve a need or soothe a hurt. Yes they get air time, and a pat on the back for doing it I think that their giving, much like the pray-ers in Matthew 6:5, has seen its reward.
Tim –
Thanks for commenting. It’s fine to assume that charity (an older expression for love) must be qualified in order to matter. My point was that, where God’s love is concerned, qualifiers are unneccesary since his love isn’t based on merit.
“Again, I’m not arguing any theological point, because the theological doesn’t belong here.”
Actually, the point of this post was to convey the exactly that: distinct contrast between human love and divine love. They are nothing alike. If people derive their understanding of God’s love from natural expressions of human love, then their assumptions are incorrect. This brings about a skewed picture of God’s true nature: love. That is what I am concerned about here and have addressed in the comments above.
Thanks again,
Sam
I hate the show because the host seems to have way too much energy, he needs an adderall, also, he is a flaming homosexual, the show is sappy, and way to focused on sympathy, it reminds me of rob and big, also a flaming white homosexual and a heterosexual black male who rob is obsessed with having sex with, both shows are brainwashing politically correct homo erotic programs.
Thanks for the post.
This show is about product placement. Sears, Ford, and many others. It is a marketing gravy train.
It is not true charity. It is emotionalism and sensationalism taken to the limit. Local well-meaning people actually provide much of the labor and materials – they are used for a commercial venture in my opinion. We have this show in our area now – I know.
The homes built are excessive and inappropriate. I would not want such a home as I would not be able to heat it, maintain it, or pay taxes on it. And I make a good income!
Want a true charity? Habitat for Humanity. They build modest homes for needy people. No fanfare, no shirtless Ty, no tears. Just a good work. If you like the concept of helping folks in need, look up or google Habitat for Humanity – they always can use some helping hands or contributions.
All excellent points Mike – I agree with you. Habitat for Humanity is a wonderful program – thanks for bringing them up.
Thanks for your insight. I couldn’t agree more! The show is awful and I am disgusted that so many people watch it.
I just discovered this blog, and I agree with it totally except for your explanation of the show’s producers’ motives. They do the show for profits, not to make themselves feel better. Here is another blogger’s take on the nature of corporate greed and exploitation of the poor that I would direct you to: http://blogcritics.org/video/article/extreme-makeover-home-edition-charity-or/
The show raises disturbing questions for me that go beyond the show itself:
How do the recipient families continue to live in their neighborhoods, alongside families they have always lived near who are probably in much the same financial boat as before the monstrous House that ABC Built went up? Do their kids still play together? How do the kids handle their friends’ jealousy? Do they start hanging out with different kids who don’t have to deal with the same level of poverty as they themselves knew before?
How do recipient families pay the property taxes and insurance on these houses? With their welfare check, which I am sure they have to give up, or with Social Security/Disability income? I imagine most of these houses are sold at some point when the parents realize their incomes can’t support the taxes, insurance and consumption in energy from the sheer square footage that these homes encompass.
How do these families deal with crime? I can’t imagine all their neighbors are happy for them, or that they don’t try to steal from them.
How do the adults who receive these homes deal with greedy family members or friends who want “their share”?
And most of all, I would like to know how the families feel about their most private pain being publicly purged for millions of viewers’ voyeuristic indulgence. Do they feel like whores for ABC and Sears?
I would like to see a follow-up show titled “Five Years Following My Extreme Make-Over, Home Edition, and How it REALLY Affected My Life”. Of course, the families probably sign away their legal right to criticize ABC in perpetuity, so we’ll probably never know the answers to my questions.
Those are all great questions Julie – from the attitudes of neighbors to the reality of property taxes. I don’t know that we’ll ever see the “Five years later” special on ABC, but it would make for some interesting viewing!
I just answered one of my own questions: http://tv.yahoo.com/blog/another-extreme-makeover-home-edition-family-facing-foreclosure–834
Here’s a good look at what REALLY goes on behind the scenes of this show: http://shiveredsky.blogspot.com/2009/01/extreme-makeover-home-edition-hits.html
Here’s a satirical look at the show from someone who apparently has many of the same questions as I do. Funny!http://www.citizenofthemonth.com/2006/03/15/really-extreme-makeover-home-edition/
Hate is a strong word that God uses only sparingly. According to Prov. 6:16-19, God hates a proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that plots evil plans, feet hurrying to run to mischief, a false witness who breathes lies, and he who causes strife among brothers. God doesn’t hate a television show that does altruistic deeds for people you deem unworthy. I don’t think I’d like to visit your church. By the way, I don’t like the show either but only because I find it calculatingly schmaltzy. I don’t hate it though, I just change the channel.
Hi Alexis –
I used the word hate in the title for dramatic effect, not because I hate anyone. And I think you may have been missing the point of the post. Of course, God doesn’t hate a television show based on altruism. But the point is not that I don’t deem those on the show unworthy. The point was that everyone is worthy according to the gospel. That’s why I included the vainglorious and affluent as well as the downtrodden and needy in my examples. Both the slumlord and the tennant receive grace. In that show, only the human understanding of sympathy gets a vote. Luckily for us, God loves us regardless of our station in life.
I’m sorry you don’t think you would like visiting my church. It’s got lots of great people in it. And I’m actually a pretty nice person myself.
You sound like a caring and compassionate person as well. I apologize if I offended you. I hope your artisitic endeavors work out well for you.
Sam
Thanks for the feedback, Sam. I only responded to what you wrote. You used the word hate, which I felt was misapplied. There is no need for an apology. I am not offended.
Based on what you wrote, your objections to the show are 1. those who are given homes are those that the producers believe deserve those homes, which causes me to infer that what the producers deem worthy and what you deem worthy are different. 2. The producers are playing God, which suggests only God should play God (agreed). I appreciate your premise that in Extreme Makeover: God Edition, grace would be extended to all regardless of socioeconomic status or belief system.
You might consider this: in Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, when the bus rolls back it’s true that only the chosen receive houses. But how is that any different than in the kingdom of God? Grace may be extended to all here on earth including the “American soldier and the radical jihadist”, which I believe is a metaphor for the believer and unbeliever. But at the Judgment Seat of Christ, the rewards only go to the chosen–that is to those who accepted the gift of grace.
Thank you for your kind wishes towards my art practice. Things are going well.
Tonight’s Extreme Home Makeover was about 2 “artists” with 4 children. Charity is beautiful. God asks us to give of ourselves. But I have to question whether God would want want us to allow our children to live in a rat feces infested home because Mom & Dad have chosen to do charity work. These are 2 able bodied parents – why isn’t one working? Why aren’t they placing their family first? It truly troubles me as here it appears more that Mom & Dad want to “live their dream” at the expense of their kids. I had to turn it off and walk away.
This last are is where I live, bastrop county. The fires destroyed my property values. I am selling my beautiful home in the middle of a burnt crap hole. Did extreme home makeover buy my home, hell no! They built honestly, I know, white uneducated slow paying white trash welfare ppl a million dollar home, good damn job! What jerks, gotta million dollar home for sale in the same school district, at a bargain! No, I worked four jobs to get thru college and pay my bills and taxes so I’m screwed, but if ihad a bunch of kids I couldn’t afford and lived in an RV, holy shit, build u a million dollar home! Screw them! Why I hate extreme home makeover!