Watch What You’re Watching

[This was published earlier this year in the Student YMCA’s The Good News Magazine].

If you’re anything like me, you’re counting the days until the cinematic release of Katy Perry’s new biopic, ‘Part of Me’, in 3D. Exciting times.

Having seen the TV promo, I could relate to Katy-and-siblings’ reminiscences about their upbringing – how their Christian parents wouldn’t allow them to eat Lucky Charms (because ‘lucky’ comes from ‘Lucifer’, the Devil), or to watch The Smurfs. Back home my family had that attitude to luck and Smurfs too.

Katy’s brother and sister aren’t able to hide just how nuts they think their parents were, and over-protectiveness seems not to have done dear Katy much good. It’s easy to mock people for fearing The Smurfs, but how nuts were they? Now a parent myself, I want to protect my kids from a lot of things in this world, including morning cartoons. I think I’ll let them use the internet unsupervised around the same time they get a driver’s licence.

But it’s not just the emotional scarring of our kids that we have to worry about. All Christians are called to be holy and our consumption of entertainment media can be a threat to our holiness. But how do we determine when exactly we’ve crossed a line?

The extremes

There are two extreme approaches that you could adopt.


The first is to completely avoid everything ‘worldly’, to completely remove yourself from non-Christian culture. Certain groups of monks and nuns have taken this as far as it can go, and the Amish are extreme in their own quirky way. Perhaps Katy’s folks could be classed as moderate avoiders.

People in this category seemingly have the support of the Bible behind them:

Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable… think about such things. (Philippians 4:8)

For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret. (Ephesians 5:12)

If we’re supposed to think only pure thoughts and speak about only respectable things, it might mean that our entertainment choices are limited to Little House on the Prairie or movies starring Kirk Cameron.

But there are a number of problems with the avoidance strategy.

Incest, rape, sodomy, gruesome violence, death, deceit, child abuse, witchcraft. These are exactly the kinds of disgusting things that the Bible is full of, often in graphic detail. So when Paul says in Ephesians 5 that we must not even mention what people do in secret, he is also well aware that, among other horrors, the Bible mentions a husband cutting his dead wife into twelve chunks because men had gang-raped her to death, only after having been prevented from raping him. Whatever Paul means, it’s not that we are forbidden to think about and discuss sinful acts altogether, otherwise we would not be allowed to read the Bible.

Secondly, avoidance is virtually impossible to practice. It is easy to say ‘I won’t participate in anything too sexy or violent or vulgar,’ but how do you actually do that without being utterly arbitrary?

Let’s take dramatised violence for example. If one end of the continuum is kids playing The Three Little Pigs and the other end is, say, Ichi the Killer, how do we decide when we’ve crossed the line into morally corrupt territory? Is violence fine if there is no death, such as in the A-Team; or death but no blood, like in Narnia movies? Why?

Or what about nudity? Most find the nudity on the Sistine Chapel acceptable even for church, but nudity in movies wrong. Why?

So what about the other extreme? Can Christians completely immerse themselves in popular media?


When we consume entertainment media we’re usually passive; and we’re just engaging with ideas: stories, lyrics, images. They aren’t even our ideas. Does it matter what ideas we engage with as long as we do the right thing?

In the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21-32), Jesus teaches that even thoughts are open to judgment, because what we see can produce attitudes in us (such as lust) that are opposed to Godly relationships. Holiness is firstly an internal state before it ever becomes outward practice. So it does matter what we think and not merely what we do. Ideas have the power to influence our inner life, and that is as important to God as our behaviour. It’s what we are inside that makes us unclean (Mark 7:17-23).

Clearly, some forms of media are ruled out by Jesus’ words in the two passages mentioned above. But as soon as we try to become more moderate, we’re stuck with the same problem of making arbitrary decisions about where lines should be drawn.

Should we just follow our feelings? Is being slightly more moral than the average citizen good enough? Sometimes we just follow the rules of our preacher, which at least spares us having to think, but may mean an end to eating Lucky Charms while watching The Smurfs. Can we lay down rules, and if so, what is the principle according to which we do so?

The moral principle

The trouble with describing a Christian approach to entertainment media is that we tend to demand rules to govern our behaviour, and in the case of something as broad as the arts, it simply isn’t possible to make practical rules that will do for every situation, or that can be the same for every person. So although the following isn’t as comfortingly defined as rules, here’s what I’d suggest:

The basic principle, I think, is to avoid content that provokes immorality within you. This idea is derived from Matthew 5:27-29, in which Jesus teaches us to recognise whatever causes us to sin and cut it out of our lives. We don’t have to avoid the content on screen that would be sinful if we were doing it; we have to avoid the content that produces sinful attitude or behaviour in us by watching it.

Being violent is generally immoral, but watching someone on screen be violent is not necessarily so, because you are not always thereby being caused to sin. Sex and nudity are different, however, because they usually only work if there is audience participation on some level. They are meant to cause lust.

This principle places some responsibilities upon us as media consumers:

#1. Know your weaknesses

You have a responsibility to know your own weaknesses. One of my favourite films is The Big Lebowski. It contains a breath-taking amount of swearing, none of which affects me in the least. But there is also about 10 seconds of toplessness, which is much more of a stumbling block. I can’t therefore decide that you also shouldn’t be bothered by swearing, or that everyone must avoid all nudity always. You need to know the gaps in your own armour, not mine.

If fashion magazines or shopping malls or the latest Apple brochure provoke envy or covetousness in you, you should be ruthless; avoid the things that cause you to sin. If your girlfriend is easily susceptible to bogus views of romance in movies, then you have a godly reason not to ever let her make you watch Twilight.

We need to be self-critical and honest about our weaknesses, and courageous enough to avoid problem-content.

#2. Know the purpose

Be aware of purpose, the function of media content. For example, violence is bad behaviour, but in stories it can perform a valid role, such as symbolising justice or judgement or evil. But some violence may intend for the audience to enjoy the cruelty or goriness of it. Enjoying cruelty is an attitude that crosses a line, in my opinion, even if the viewer doesn’t leave the cinema and actually hit someone for fun.

#3. Know the threat

Finally, it is important to know what is truly threatening about the content you are consuming. I find Christians to be remarkably bad at analysing their entertainment. We tend to look out for the censor’s big categories (SLVNP) as if those markers of offensiveness-to-children are the only possible moral categories. Twilight has no explicit sex in it, but it has a terribly warped view of love and romance. Harry Potter is accused of glorifying witchcraft, but far more people will learn rebellion and distrust of authority from its main characters than magic.

We often forget that our entertainment is communicating ideas and attitudes to us, and some of these can be far more threatening than the means by which they are communicated. We’re often outraged by gritty content but asleep to the messages that have far more influence.

Entertainment shapes the way that all of us think. It tells us all sorts of ways to find hope and happiness and salvation and prosperity. But how will we avoid the dangers to our thinking in the media if we are unthinking consumers? And how will we help our friends away from those dead-ends and towards Christ if we fail to notice those ideas and attitudes for ourselves? If we’re to become God-honouring consumers of entertainment, we need to be more awake and really watch what we’re watching.


14 thoughts on “Watch What You’re Watching

  1. sacredstruggler says:

    I love this! My family are, no joke, the Little House on the prairie and Kirk Cameron only avoiders. You articulate well to decide what you are and aren’t capable of watching.
    Remember with everything else in Phil 4:8 there is honesty. Whatsoever is honest. Honest and true things are not always pretty.

    • Jordan Pickering says:

      And so is your favourite blog’s favourite commenter! Thanks, as ever, Lesang.


  2. Ingrid says:

    Interesting article Jordan. Indeed you pinpoint the problem of making steadfast rules without thinking about what the real issue might be. Also, I’m sorry you couldn’t watch the smurfs when you were little ;-)

    • Jordan Pickering says:

      Or the Gummibears. You clearly have to be a kid to appreciate them too, because I’ve seen a few lately and they are pretty lousy.

      • Richard says:

        Well, you take the classic risk of destroying your childhood memories whenever you re-watch anything from your childhood. Knight Rider, MacGyver, A-Team… (sigh) little had survived the years. I never want to ruin my cherished Toadie moments, so I’ll keep a wide berth as far as possible.

  3. Richard says:

    Your picture reminds me of this clip that you may enjoy:

    Have been listening to a series of talks on radical Christian counter-culture and the speaker, Steve Gregg, makes an interesting point that everything of ours belongs to God. Our money, our posessions… our time. And we should not waste our time (God’s time). While it’s difficult to know what God would consider a waste of our time, I think it’s helpful to ask the question of if we’re using our time wisely. I doubt that God has particular issue with movie watching in general, but mindless watching of TV/Movies (you know the whole vegging state, watching “whatever is on”) is not wise use of the resources given us. I think this adds quantity to the quality dimension that forms the main thrust of your post. I think both need to be kept in mind.

    Great post. Really enjoyed it.

  4. Taryn says:

    Jordan, what a helpful article! You’ve articulated the heart of this matter incredibly well. It’s one for the FB share!

      • Taryn Hayes says:

        ah! Thumbs up for adaptations of adaptations – gives us the crystallised version which is always good. And refreshing for a blog post (I’m too quick on the publish button. This post was not only clear and direct, but also free of the clumsy language and typos that infiltrate my rambling thoughts. You set a good standard! Must’ve been all those books you read as a kid when you were avoiding Gummy Bears ..?!)

  5. Hephaestion says:

    But there is also about 10 seconds of toplessness, which is much more of a stumbling block.

    So what is it that is truly threatening about seeing a pair of breasts?

    In Victorian England it was positively scandalous for women to bare even their ankles. In Japan, the nape of a woman’s neck is the salaciously delicious part to see. In Afghanistan a woman typically has to cover everything but her eyes. If you can’t see an ankle, a neck, a breast, or any part of a woman’s body for that matter, without sniggering in the corner, getting offended or getting all hot ‘n bothered then perhaps it’s time to have a good look in the mirror. Is that really the kind of person you want to be..?

    …but far more people will learn rebellion and distrust of authority from its main characters than magic.

    Rebellion and distrust of authority were fundamental to the Enlightenment. It was a rebellion against authority in regard to knowledge, and is a necessary condition for progress. It gave us a tradition of criticism, of being allowed to test ideas. Before the Enlightenment, it was simply accepted that everything important was enshrined in authoritative sources and traditional assumptions. We are no longer shackled in that way. Knowledge cannot be sought without rebelling from authority. If you accept progress as something desirable then you must accept this rebellion.

    But how will we avoid the dangers to our thinking in the media if we are unthinking consumers?

    If you think the world is less than 10,000 years old, that Adam and Eve were real, that Jesus rose from the dead, that looking at breasts is sinful, then you are already an unthinking consumer. You have turned your back on the Enlightenment, preferring authority over reason, dogma over doubt, myth over science, feeling over rationality, stagnation over progress. You have no way of discerning good explanations over poor explanations.

    Good explanations lead to knowledge and progress. Poor explanations give us dogmatism, stagnation and tyranny. Good explanations recognise their own limitations, their own degree of error. Poor explanations admit no such error. Religion gives us poor explanations, calling ignorance “faith” and then decreeing faith to be a virtue. Poor explanations actively prevent us from developing good explanations. How can you avoid the dangers of poor ideas if you cannot recognise them as such? Religions propagate through, and encourage the development of, unthinking consumers.

    • screamer42 says:

      @Hephaestion, sorry for the late reply but was clearing my inbox and came across this which I’d missed. From your reply it sounds like you don’t realise that was writing a Christian blog post to Christian readers (or interested non-Christian readers). As such, he can rely on certain things (like a shared value system) that unifies his Christian readers. Since you reject Christian values, your arguments against a post assuming Chrisitian values are invalid (why seeing breasts would be a stumbling block, anti-authoritarianism, role of faith).

      For the record, Christ tells us that what we think is important and can be considered sinful. And so, seeing breasts (or ankles or anything that might inspire lust) is a battle half won simply by avoiding the chance to see them. It’s not sinful to see them but seeing them can make it hard not to sin. Now if you disagree that these thoughts ARE sinful/God is unreasonable/Faith in God is stupid, then the argument is whether we can or should trust in God and his judgements of what is right. Likewise for authority – Christianity tells it’s followers to submit to the authorities since they’re placed there by God (let’s leave issues of evil authorities to another debate). That is God’s commandment given in the Bible – it’s not a negotiable for Christians. You can’t reason it out without trying to look at whether the Bible should be trusted first.

      You might have plenty of your own good explanations for understanding the world but you can’t call Christian answers “bad explanations” simply because you disagree that the Bible is God’s Word. You would have to argue on a point-by-point basis and prove the “goodness” of your own explanation over the “badness” of the Christian counter-point, rather than make sweeping and dismissive statements about religion as a whole.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s