Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
Donate to Christianity Today
November 22, 2009
Free Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2007 > July (Web-only)Christianity Today, July (Web-only), 2007  |   |  
Will Tomorrow's Evangelicals Remember Tammy Faye?
She was an icon of a changing movement, but didn't actually change it, say experts.



ADVERTISEMENT

The 1980s downfall of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker shook evangelicalism and Pentecostalism and made televangelism a national mockery. But scholars doubt that her mascara-colored mark will be a lasting one in the history of the conservative Protestant movements.

"American Christianity isn't really that different for her having been there. Erase Jim and Tammy and PTL from the record and I don't think anything really changes," said Michael Hamilton, chair of the history department at Seattle Pacific University. "I suppose if you're a preacher you can get a lot of good sermons out of the whole PTL thing."

Quentin Schultze, professor of communication at Calvin College, agreed. "Younger evangelicals such as my college students already have no idea who she was."

But as an icon and symbol, they said, Messner provides a spectacular representation of religious trends in the late 20th century.

Tammy Faye and Jim Bakker "helped mediate Pentecostal worship forms, Pentecostal ideas, and Pentecostal spirituality to broader groups of Christians," Hamilton said. "That's what we now call the charismatic movement, this mediation of Pentecostal spirituality to other Christians. They were clearly at the forefront of that."

But Tammy Faye, who divorced Bakker while he was serving prison time and married Roe Messner, was a new kind of charismatic, said Larry Eskridge, associate director of the Institute for the Study of American Evangelicals at Wheaton College.

"She embodied the new style of charismatic female personages, being such a change from the old traditional stay at home Pentecostal image," he said. "It was reflective of the larger changes going on in the Pentecostal charismatic world—sort of jettisoning this whole ascetic mindset that they'd had."

She later recalled one very specific moment of casting off that ascetic mindset. When she tried putting on eye makeup for the first time, she immediately wiped it off, fearing she had sinned. Then she put it on again. "Why can't I do this?" she asked herself. "If it makes me look prettier, why can't I do this?" She didn't take makeup off again—even for her cancer surgery.

In a 2000 interview with Larry King, Jay Bakker said, "I actually really look up to my mom for her makeup because so many people have made fun of her, and given her such a hard time. And she's just said basically, 'Screw it, I'm going to be me.' … For some reason, we've made people believe that they have to take off their makeup, change their hair color and comb their hair before they come to church. And that's just a lie and it's a lie from hell."

The chief critics of her makeup, however, were not from within the church, Schultze noted. "She was a lightning rod for critics of evangelicalism and especially TV evangelism. To them, she seemed to be anti-intellectual, superficial, and more concerned with her looks than her biblical insight," he said. "But some of this criticism was social-class-based, because she had her following especially among Pentecostal women who wanted to believe that it was acceptable to be a bit worldly when it came to physical appearance."

It wasn't just her appearance that drew the Pentecostal women, Hamilton said. "She really represented a particularly female version of charismatic Christianity. It's a version of Christianity where women basically saw themselves as victims of all kinds of life circumstances—problematic marriages, problems with their kids, problems with weight, you name it—and so women identify with this sense of their life isn't like it ought to be but this larger sense that God can help them overcome it."

share this pageshare this page



E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 7 comments.See all comments
Eddie Francisco   Posted: August 03, 2007 3:42 PM
I'm not one to campaign for plain, unadorned faces on evangelical women. But this phrase jumped out at me as I read: "women who wanted to believe that it was acceptable to be a bit worldly." So how much is "a bit worldy"? And once we become comfortable with that "bit worldly," will we then start justifying being a little "bit [more] worldly"? At the same time, I would suggest that Tammy Faye's makeup style was more than "a bit." It was extreme, and to many even comical.

Chaplain Mary Murphy Veteransjustice@aol.com   Posted: July 31, 2007 6:22 PM
The daughter of parents who used the dust bowl in Okahoma to Live The Social Gospel - and to encounter "The Prosperity Gospel" (sic) Powers and Principalities used Tammy to introduce; i.e., it was the PTL Electric CHurch translated into Middle East Languages that birthed THE WAR ON TERROR

m   Posted: July 28, 2007 11:52 PM
As for Tammy Fae and the fact that evangelical Christianity not being changed for her being there...C'mon honor her in her death honorably fo God's sake!!! She was placed on the earth for her time and with God's purpose. Many who have come to the Lord Jesus Christ would disagree that she did nothing to change evangelical Christianity. Conservative Protestant Movements they were not part of...Pentecostals and Charasmatics aren't known for conservatism so maybe the scholars have that right, but Her Existence was not for no avail.People may have critisized her haor make-up, but I take note that she most likely had fruit before God as spoken in John as God was her Vine and she was of the branches. That's the issue I would take with this article.

The allotted time for commenting has ended.

sponsors 








[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search






















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Kyria.com
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com