Should Christians watch, or promote, media that features violence, sex or other immoral acts? Some say no, and in recent weeks the Christian rising star of the hit Amazon series “Reacher”, Alan Ritchson, has faced criticism for taking over the role.
Ever for the reason that moving picture first entered our homes, Christians have been concerned in regards to the content. In the UK a bunch of Christians led by Mary Whitehouse valiantly campaigned to make TV more healthful from the Sixties onwards. Some of their concerns now seem quaint, reminiscent of single co-habiting couples or swearing, problems that appear mild in comparison with what we’re used to today. Whitehouse became a figure of fun within the UK, and her campaigns mostly failed. Now even the secular press acknowledges that on the very least, she got some things right.
Whitehouse, who passed away in 2001, would turn in her grave if she saw the sort of obscenity that’s now freely available through the web. The explicit content of TV series and flicks is bad enough. Much worse, the web makes horrors reminiscent of real ‘snuff’ movies – real videos of individuals being killed – available to anyone with a little bit of tech knowledge, in addition to extreme pornography that features bestiality, paedophilia, fetishes and violence.
This repulsive context makes the hit Prime Video series “Reacher” and its “good vs bad guy” morality seem almost saintly. Yes, there are sex scenes, uncommitted sexual relationships, and numerous violence. But not less than there is a sense of righting wrongs, stopping evil, and the virtues of courage, sacrifice and valour.
Still, Ritchson’s decision to play Jack Reacher generated enough criticism to prompt him to reply in a YouTube video that had 1.4m views on the time of writing. “I like playing Reacher,” he said within the video. “I like playing a personality who creates a sort of moral ambiguity that we must always struggle against, as we consider whether or not what he’s doing is sweet on a regular basis or morally right.”
He points out that the Bible has many stories of “morally ambiguous” people, paganism, war, bloodshed and magic. He has a degree. Christians accept that the dubious actions of a few of the Bible’s heroes usually are not meant to be imitated – King David’s adultery, pre-conversion St Paul’s murders or Joshua’s warmongering, for instance. We can still learn from their lives and the ups and downs of their relationship with God.
In the identical way, we will watch Reacher while doubting the morality of his actions. His determination to kill all of the bad guys would land him in prison in real life, yet might evoke sympathy from a public disillusioned with our creaking justice system that seems to permit many to get away with evil. What is the proper thing to do when justice breaks down? How should wrongs be righted? What is our own responsibility and where should we draw the road? They’re essential questions. Reacher’s gung-ho vigilantism is one answer.
The difference with Biblical stories is that God is the central character, and the lead role is One with the proper behaviour and morality: Jesus Christ. This provides a framework that makes it clear that the violence and bad behaviour in Scripture is flawed.
Mainstream media doesn’t have this, so shows like Reacher cannot teach us much on their very own. Maybe Ritchson senses this, and it’s why he usually posts reflections on the Bible and faith on his YouTube channel Instachurch? He says his high profile role is a way he can encourage people to have faith.
“God has built a platform for this reason show,” he said within the video. Concerns about whether we must always act in violent TV shows are only distractions. “It’s funny to me how numerous people criticize me, supposed Christians especially criticize me, for taking part in Reacher as if the one TV that that ought to exist is seeing people silently folding their hands within the pew of a church.”
He seems sincere in his faith and wanting to succeed in individuals with the Gospel. In a culture that’s so hostile to Christianity, it requires the center and courage of Reacher to talk so openly. And when watched through the proper lens, Reacher can assist us to think about essential issues. We cannot turn back the clock and ignore the proven fact that sex and violence are in all places. Any voices within the media that rise above to proclaim the Gospel and the love of God are welcome.
But still, if we could change the culture, we must always. When violence was first shown on TV and cinema and the Pandora’s box of media obscenity had not yet been opened, there was evidence that it did affect the behaviour of its viewers, especially children.
For example, Albert Bandura’s Bobo doll experiments showed that toddlers who observed an adult being violent would copy and mimic the behaviour themselves. This took place within the Sixties when today’s ubiquitous screen violence didn’t exist. Perhaps today’s children are desensitised, but that is hardly a very good thing. There’s loads of evidence that the overwhelming temptations of pornography are having a nasty effect on society, too.
Therefore, while we do should live and proclaim the excellent news using every means at our disposal, including popular TV and media – the large compromise this involves ought to be recognised. It could be difficult to assume a society where TV violence will not be the norm, but we will hope and pray for a world where love and goodness is the priority for each individuals and the media.
