WWJD – What Would James (Cameron) Do?

Posted by Osagie K. Obasogie March 6, 2007
Biopolitical Times
James Cameron is quite accustomed to casting big stars in his films. Leonardo DiCaprio made Cameron’s Titanic the single most profitable movie ever and the Terminator franchise he and Arnold Schwarzenegger built became so successful that the rising political star has been dubbed California’s “Governator.”

Yet many were surprised when Cameron took his legendary casting to the next level by setting his eyes on Jesus – yes, Jesus – as his next leading man. His latest film, “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” is a documentary claiming to find Jesus’ burial casket. Cameron and crew use DNA testing and statistical probabilities to argue that the woman’s ossuary found next to his with “Mary Magdalene” written on its side contained Jesus’ wife’s remains and that a third ossuary held their son Judah’s bones. Sound vaguely familiar? Well, let’s just say that Dan Brown may very well be looking into whether his copyright has been infringed.

Predictably, this has set off a firestorm about science and faith, and whether the former can confirm or disprove the latter. Using biotechnology and statistics to suggest that Jesus was married, procreated, and left bones behind is probably enough to make Pat Robertson’s head explode. But several other important issues have received less attention, such as whether Cameron’s use of DNA tests can be considered “science,” what kind of respect spiritual beliefs deserve in a pluralist society, and what might be in store now that some think Jesus’ DNA is among us.

DNA testing’s perceived certainty is having a growing cultural resonance, from the burgeoning C.S.I. franchise to real life prosecutors offering genetic tests as “slam dunk” evidence. But the “science” behind this film’s claims is far from dispositive. What’s most troubling is that Cameron and company know this, and apparently don’t care. When asked why their investigations did not lead to further DNA testing to confirm their claims, Simcha Jacobovici (the film’s director) said “We’re not scientists. At the end of the day we can’t wait till every ossuary is tested for DNA. We took the story that far. At some point you have to say, ‘I’ve done my job as a journalist.’”

Few find these claims any more credible than the Virgin Mary “appearing” in a grilled cheese sandwich. But, in many ways, the damage has already been done. The danger with society’s current relationship with biotechnology as reflected here is not simply that science might run amuck and cause harm. Rather, it also implicates the delicate balance that needs to be struck between science and faiths that, by definition, cannot be proved or disproved. For example, when given access to what they believe might be the remains of a key religious figure who many consider to be God’s physical incarnation, what do Cameron and company decide to do? They flippantly subject these remains to DNA testing as if they have the same social significance as finding out “Who’s the Baby’s Daddy” on Maury Povich’s show. Indigenous communities have been struggling for quite some time with biotechnology being used to belie deeply held traditions concerning who they are and their origins. Now, major religions like Christianity appear to be in the cross hairs.

What does this all mean? Surely, it’s too early to tell. But, a number of scenarios are possible. For example, if people like Cameron and Jacobovici are not above DNA testing what they believe to be Jesus’ remains, will they not also be tempted to use related technologies (if available) to see which persons living today are genetically linked to him? And, if a real life Sophie Neveu was putatively “found,” what are the implications? If David Geffen is concerned over what he calls the Clinton and Bush royal families in American electoral politics, what in the world would happen if a candidate claims to have DNA matching Christ? Are you going to oppose his tax cuts?