The Moral Obscenity Test For Christians Part 2: Multiplayer Edition

 In my last post, I address how a Christian on a personal basis can decide, from a moral standpoint, what media would be considered detrimental to their moral health.

However, when you are someone with moral responsibility for others, the rules change somewhat.

For starters, parents and legal guardians have both legal and moral authority over minors. They can and should use that power wisely to decide if their child until they reach the lawful age of majority, is fit to consume certain media.

In my own life, I was just shy of the age of majority when it came time to play Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater. I remember the Walmart I wanted to purchase it from requiring my parents' assent before I was allowed to get it. They assented, thankfully, because they knew I was mature enough to handle the themes.

Of course, parents, in this case, have veto power, and they should exercise it accordingly if they do not believe their children are mature enough to handle certain media.

The same rule applies in a more broad sense for pastors or anyone in the clergy. As someone ultimately in the employ of God, you have a moral responsibility to the multitude, and thus your own behavior should cleave to the standards of Christ even more than usual because as His representatives, it would lead others astray in a manner that would harm the whole community. In the Books of the Law, a leader of a community who sinned had to make a much more expensive sacrifice than a commoner because his sin could stain many more people than just himself, the expense was to remind them their moral authority had a double edge that would wound them if they wounded those under their charge with immoral conduct.

As for the conflict between believers on what is morally proper, the following verses should be the guide of everyone in the event of a dispute:

From Romans 14:13-19, on how one's moral conduct should not be a stumbling block for another:

13 Therefore let us not judge one another [a]anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.
The Law of Love

14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. 18 For he who serves Christ in [b]these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.

19 Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may [c]edify another.

1 Corinthians 8:9-12 also contains some sage advice for those who wish to be sure, even if their conscience is clear, how to be sure they do not compromise the conscience of their brother by proxy:

9 But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a [a]stumbling block to those who are weak. 10 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.

The Moral Obscenity Test for Christians

 A common canard among atheists is that Christians are uptight, cannot have fun, are terrified of nigh all things that can lead them astray, and live like monks afraid of all outside influence.

As a Christian, I can safely say this above canard is hogwash, but to a point they aren't entirely off. I find a lot of Christians have a huge fear that cannot look at certain things or even entertain the thought of looking at them without being led astray.

First off, let me just say I admire such willingness to not be led astray. You who are wary of this follow the admonition of 1 Peter 5:8 well:

8 Be [a]sober, be [b]vigilant; [c]because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.

That said, let me break something to my more paranoid Christian brethren. The only one who can break your faith in God is YOU. You can be tempted by so many things you see, hear, and experience to take that fateful step, but the only one who breaks that faith is you alone.

Just because you have possession of a firearm does not mean the gun makes you sin, your unlawful and immoral purpose of the gun is the sin. Just because you play a violent video game does not make you violent, you choose to make violent thoughts reality. Just because you see nudity in a movie, game, magazine, and so on does not make you unfaithful unless you choose to be unfaithful in your heart, and even worse, in real life.

So let's just make it clear right now all the temptations of this world do not make a Christian step over the line, the Christian makes the choice.

However, it helps to have moral boundaries, and while refraining from anything you deem potentially a temptation is still prudent, I refer everyone who has this so far to the Miller vs. California US court case of 1973's Miller test provisions:

1. Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion);

2. Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (i.e., ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals, or sado-masochistic sexual abuse); and

3. Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Legally speaking, a work of media must fail all three of the above to be considered obscene, devoid of any serious merit except to be obscene. In a moral context, Christians should use the following modified moral obscenity test.

1. Does the work, as applied to morals set out by the word of God in its whole, have no higher aim than to be a tempting influence to violate those morals?

2. Does the work describe and depict actions that would be anathema to the morals set out by God and those that spoke for Him in a manner that would be a glowing endorsement of their continuance. Specifically, do they glorify acts that are sinful not only by implication but by conscious effort?

3. Does the work lack any other purpose except to encourage sinful behavior and no reasonable argument can be made it has any other value of a political, artistic, scientific, or literary merit that has objective value.

Now, let's give some examples of works that would fail all three.

1. Pornography obviously fails all three prongs. Its primary aim is to encourage sexual immorality. Its very point is to glorify sexual immorality. It has no higher purpose than masturbation material, meaning it has no political, artistic, scientific, or literary merit.

Some works like say, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for example, are a bit more unclear.

1. On the first guideline, the game itself warns it is a fictional medium, not to be taken as anything but as such. The material depictions in the game, while allowing the player to simulate illegal acts, make clear that even in-universe they have consequences and ultimately have negative consequences in the short and long-term.

2. On the second prong, one could definitely argue despite the consequences shown in-game, the rewards of successful completion of what would be illegal and immoral acts undercuts any message against doing so in real life. Conversely, it cannot be argued every single thing you do is for the express purpose of evil or immorality in-game, so it is not, by its express purpose, a vehicle for advocacy of immorality in all aspects of its very intent.

3. On the third prong, it clearly tells a story. That story is in many ways an allegory of the real early nineties period of America including the gang warfare and drug problem aspects, so it has value as a reflection of the political and social circumstances of the time. So it at least has political and literary value.

Of course, the above moral obscenity test has an important Zeroth Law, or a law that goes above all else, no matter what.

0. If by exposure to the work in question you are in any way tempted to abandon your morals, it is to be assumed to have failed the moral obscenity test by default and one's exposure should be discontinued to avoid further temptation.

Now, with this all in mind, a Christian with a firm moral base can play the Doom games, watch horror movies, read murder thrillers, and consume a lot of other media (aside from obviously obscene things like porn) so long as they know it's not to be done in real life and that their actions are to be firmly guided by what God wants, not their own temptations. Otherwise, they should discontinue consumption of media if they are tempted regardless and so restrict their actions as they deem necessary in order to avoid the pitfalls of temptation.

In closing, I add the above is my take on the question of what is permissible and what is not. Ultimately, whether or not my own take on this question of moral stricture is used as a guide, ultimately, all who follow Christ should do the following if they are unclear as to what would be good for the body and soul and seek to petition Him for guidance, as stated in Philippians 4:6

6 Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; 7 and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.