Consequence-Something that logically or naturally follows from an action or condition.
There's a consequence to everything we do. Whether that consequence is positive or negative depends on our action and context in which that action takes place.
I want to look at two areas of entertainment in our world and how people within those contexts' are awarded or punished for moral failure.
Example #1
Hollywood and it's "employees"
Lindsay LohanLindsay has a long history of drug and alcohol abuse. She has been in and out of rehab. What was the consequence she faced? Yeah sure she spent some time in rehab...didn't help much but she did her time. The consequence of her actions was more fame. Her bad girl reputation landed her the #1 spot on Maxim's top 100 hottest women in 2007. As far as face time...we saw more of her. You could say that Lohan became more famous and more glamorized because of her actions.
Paris HiltonParis Hilton entered the scene with a reputation. A spoiled reputation. A girl that had been given everything and paid for nothing. She also has had some recent trouble with alcohol and has tried to wiggle her way out of jail time (in a way she's been successful...good behavior...what does that even mean?) But the action that put her on the map was the ever famous "sex video". It was everywhere. And what was the consequence of her actions? More fame! More glamour! More money! Her sex appeal was used in commercials, magazines and all over the Internet. How did the entertainment industry deal with Hilton's actions...that gave her more face time.
Here's another interesting thing about Lohan and Hilton and how the entertainment world dealt with them...or you could say used them: They became role models for teenage girls. Teenage girls look up to them, read about them, dress like them and what to be them. Interesting consequence for an action.
Example #2
The NFL and it's employees
Ricky WilliamsRicky Williams had a fairly clean record until a couple years ago. Sure, he dressed like a woman in public, but nothing too earth shattering. And then came the drug test. Williams tested positive for Marijuana. What was the consequence for his actions? His career was all but over. The NFL suspended from playing for a whole year. Now here's the thing...the mistake that Ricky Williams made had nothing to do with his job. It was off the field. But the NFL felt they needed to respond aggressively and harshly.
Michael VickVick has been an interesting character since entering the NFL. He has a good reputation some Sunday's and a rough around edges reputation on others. But now his name is all over the news. He's been accused of being involved with dog fighting which is very illegal, violent and sick. But I must note that Vick's involvement with this activity is outside of his job. What could be the consequence for his actions? Well judging from how the NFL commissioner has taken care of other off the field issues up to this point Vick doesn't stand much of a chance of getting off easy. Most likely his name will be dragged through the mud, he'll be fined, and will face a long suspension.
The Question
Based on the information above, involving two types of entertainment in our world and the consequences the members of those entertainment businesses face...
Should there be a punishment for moral failure within the entertainment world?
Do you agree with how the NFL deals with players and their off the field actions?
Or do you agree with Hollywood and how they deal with the actions of actors?
And just for good measure let me throw this out there...when a pastor fails morally while pastoring a church...he or she faces very harsh consequence's. Most likely the pastors career will be over and their name and reputation forever ruined. Is this the right way to deal with moral failure? Or should second and third chances be extended?
4 comments:
VERY interesting topic...specifically with the "added" questions regarding pastors at the end. Because, I think that hollywood stars and sports stars and anyone with a general level of celebrity should most certainly be held to higher moral standards. Not only should they be higher, they should extend further. We often ask our leaders to be "above reproach" or whatever words you want to use. Whether we like it or agree with it or not, these people are leaders and role models Little kids wear Michael Vick jerseys and little girls want to be Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan. They may all pull a Charles Barkley and say, "I never wanted to be a role model," but THAT was not a choice they get to make. When they are a part of the spotlight, they are automatically role models. It comes with the territory.
If they are at this level of exposure and adulation, they should face the same consequences....
now....
what about grace....
The idea that only the religious, famous, or influential are required be “above reproach” has always bugged me.
Not because I think it’s a faulty ideal. Actually, I think it’s a wonderful ideal. What bugs me is that by setting benchmarks for a few, it then must logically follow that there must be some who don’t need to worry so much about being above reproach.
Just because a man is in office, on tv, or mentioned in print doesn’t mean he should be more a man of integrity than the guy who unloads the egg crates down at the Piggly Wiggly. Granted, moral failure on the part of a celebrity pastor affects a wider range of people, and that’s not to be ignored, but when we start ranking sin (or valuing morality) based on the number of people a person affects, we are looking at sin through the eyes of man, not God.
“Be holy, for I am holy.”
It sure sounds like God was talkin’ to me right there.
Celebrities haven't ceased to be people, despite what advertisers and celebrity bloggers say. They have the unfortunate reality of being scrutinized at every turn. The consequence of moral failure is distance from the heart of the Father. That is hell.
We are all of us role models.
All of us.
For a religion supposedly based on the ultimate act of forgiveness, I find it dubious that the notion would not be extended to its clergy. If another congregation want the services of a paster who was kicked out of another church, they should have that option.
As for the moral actions of those in our entertainment culture: I hate the idea of a morality police; I also hate the idea that we have such an entertainment culture that people care more about Brad/Jen than whats going on in the world or within our country. If Hollywood were held to the same standards as other things, it might destroy itself, which might not be so horrible, heh.
First of all, the two Hollywood girls...the true consequence of their behavior is probably a life full of pain, confusion, being used, and feeling worthless. I wonder if anyone has shown these two women real, unconditional love in their entire lives.
Second of all, the NFL is not enforcing "moral" law on it's employee's; it's enforcing the Law of the United States of America. Any corporation should fire it's employee's for breaking the laws created by a democratic society. I appreciate the NFL for not brushing these situations under the carpet just because their players may have a certain amount of fame.
Psalm 73 speaks very much to my heart in these situations..."For I envied the proud when they prospered despite their wickedness" and "Did I keep my heart pure for no reason?" until "Then I went into your sanctuary, O LORD, and I finally understood the destiny of the wicked".
If young children are looking up to these people as role models, then that is a call to us Christ-followers, to be REAL role models in their lives. So I wholeheartedly agree that ALL those who claim the name of Christ should be held to the standard of "Be Holy, as I am Holy" (and if that doesn't just make you humble and so dependent on Christ that you can't move without Him, go pray with someone).
Third and final point: Christians in leadership who fail morally. Luke 12:48 "When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required." This is Jesus talking to the Pharisees. Ezekiel 34 shows a very clear picture of what the Holy One of Israel thinks about leaders who morally fail HIS standards. Praise our Lord in heaven that we have the blood of Jesus Christ to cover our failings. I think the more responsibility, the more leadership you as a Christ-follower has, yes, the consequences of your moral failure grows, and is not only devastating to you, but to those who have trusted you and looked up to you. Being brought low and closer to God as a result of your moral failings is no bad thing for a Christ-follower. But it is devastating for those who "followed them as they followed Christ."(1 Cor. 11:1).
Being a true leader means that you have gained the confidence and the trust of those around you and they have decided to follow your example as you follow Christ. Sin, moreover, PRIDE, destroys that confidence. I have had many of my leaders morally fail me. But the leaders I still follow and trust despite that failure are the ones who have openly and humbly admitted their failure, begged forgiveness from both God and man, and have been dogged in their pursuit of Christ in spite of themselves and their failures. After all, that is all any of us "humans" can ever hope to do. Only through Christ and His blessed sacrifice are any of us "made Holy". The leaders who hurt me through their failure are those who kept it a secret, or refused to repent.
I think many of us have people in authority over us that we would not necessarily follow. Romans 13:1 says that we should submit to authority, because it comes from God. But showing respect and submitting to those in authority does not make them our leaders. That I think is a choice you yourself makes; is that person one that you would follow as they follow Christ? Is that person someone you have confidence in and trust? That makes them a leader to you; otherwise they are just someone in authority, whom you should treat respectfully and submit to.
If a leader of a church or a ministry has morally failed, and still manages to keep the confidence and trust of those he/she ministers to, then by all means, let them stay in authority. But that is a choice for those people at that time. The leader may not keep the trust of those people, but later go on to gain the confidence and trust of someone else. Past failure should not keep them from redemption in the eyes of man, since it did not keep them from redemption in the eyes of God.
The hard part is when the leader is SO famous, SO well known, that their moral failure damages the reputation of Christians everywhere, and/or of the ministry they serve. A consequence of that moral failure most probably ends in a termination of their employment. Should they be given a second chance by someone else? That is for those people at those times to decide.
Ask yourselves what you would do if your leader failed you. Ask yourselves what you would do if you failed those who looked up to you. Start with a clear picture of you, and of the Holy One you serve, and grace and humility cannot but overflow.
Post a Comment