Her.meneutics: Why I Can't Boycott Mel Gibson

back to Christianity Today

RSS Feed | Help

e-mail to a friend

twitter updates

Follow Her.meneutics on Twitter

What Is Her.meneutics?

The Christianity Today women's blog provides news and analysis from the perspective of evangelical women. We cover news stories and books related to international justice and evangelism, pregnancy and sexual ethics, marriage, parenting, and celibacy, pop culture, health and body image, raising girls, and women in the church and parachurch.

Her.meneutics is edited by associate editor Katelyn Beaty and online editor Sarah Pulliam Bailey.

interests

books and media

church life

justice and politics

relationships and family

sexuality and health

spirituality

theology

women of note

writers

More ...

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

« How Many Kids Should We Have? | Main | Grieving a Miscarriage »

July 22, 2010

Why I Can't Boycott Mel Gibson

And it's not because he is "too talented," as Salon wrote last week.

Anna Broadway, guest blogger

From Arizona’s controversial immigration law to Mel Gibson’s recorded rants, I’ve heard a lot about boycotts lately — and I can’t get over who’s encouraging them. For me, boycotts conjure up my childhood, when trips to K-mart were rare because of dubious dealings, and the Waldenbooks chain was shunned entirely for selling pornography. Those are just the boycotts I remember, but they always seemed religious in nature.

So it was strange to learn at Salon about a movement under way within Hollywood to boycott Gibson’s work over newly released taped “conversations” with his then-girlfriend, Oksana Grigorieva (don’t believe his rants were bad? Read the transcripts — then decide if you want to hear the recordings). Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams makes no reference to a particular moral or philosophical viewpoint as a context for her piece, but she nonetheless plunges into the moral and aesthetic quandary of shunning Gibson films altogether, musing that he might be “too talented” to boycott.

Yes, it was strange to see boycotts discussed in a mostly secular context, but not altogether surprising. If I were traveling abroad and asked for a summary of U.S. Christians’ view of The Passion of the Christ and Gibson — especially after some of the charges made against him — I’d say that generally speaking, he got a pass. When The Passion came out in 2004, a friend invited me to a talk by a scholarly Jew who persuasively argued why he saw anti-Semitism in the film. I didn’t know enough to confirm or disprove most of his points, but his argument seemed reasonable, without excessive reliance on emotional appeals. Yet among Christian friends, the buzz about the movie was unabashedly positive, often excited. We seemed too delighted that “our story” was getting major, positive play to engage the more troubling questions possibly raised by the film. It seemed disloyal to admit possible shortcomings, possible prejudice, possible . . . sin.

Gibson’s rant is not the main issue here. The issue is, what do our opinions of him and those like him — and our decisions of whether to support or shun them — say about our beliefs about humanity? If it were the case that The Passion were a praiseworthy film, and that Gibson were a racist, violent man, need acknowledging the one fact entail denial of the other?

It shouldn’t.

Christians serve a God who had no problem giving words of truth and blessing to Balaam, a man described as angry and abusive to an animal and later reported as among the slain when the Israelites sacked Midian (contrast this with the mercy shown to Rahab and her family). Balaam’s sin and inclusion in the subsequent judgment on the Midianites did not make his early words less true, but they do make an honest accounting of him more difficult.

Or, back to movies, take the 1997 Robert Duvall film, The Apostle, about a minister who discovers his wife has cheated on him, attacks her lover (leaving him in a coma), then starts a new ministry in a new town until his past is exposed. When I saw it in the theater, I was in college and at a place in my faith where I didn’t like seeing such a flawed man depicted as a passionate follower of God. In my mind, he couldn’t be so connected to God and so willfully disregard the basic tenets of his God’s character. Either he was “walking with the Lord” and seeking obedience, or had fallen away and, in all his fervent moments of the film, was in denial about his spiritual state.

Looking back on the movie, of course, I can see the parallels to King David much more clearly. But King David has somehow never made me wince as much as Duvall’s preacher did. The difference? In one man I see the Psalms; in the other, the sin. But in neither am I seeing much of the God who sees both, yet loves enough to pass the judgment of “death deserved” and run out to welcome home the prodigal son.

That’s probably the greatest loss of all, in our tendency to snap superficial judgments of friends and exes, pastors and celebrities alike. Not only are we missing part of the truth about them, we’re also missing a bigger picture of God revealed when we acknowledge the pain of seeing tremendous sinfulness and inordinate worth in the same dusty being. And, really, think of that — think of someone whose deeds you find repulsive, then ask yourself what future God would have for them. Is it a life at best lived in penance for his or her crimes to date? Or could even that debased, destructive life be transformed by God into something truly beautiful?

I don’t know about you, but if the pain of admitting a person whose films/books/projects I really like is a pretty foul human being in ways that cannot be whited out — if the pain of that could show me just a bit of God’s real beauty, I’d rather do the uncomfortable work than redo my shopping or entertainment plans — even knowing that divine beauty will make me give up far greater, harder things.

Anna Broadway is a writer and web editor living in the San Francisco Bay area. She is the author of Sexless in the City: A Memoir of Reluctant Chastity.

Comments

If you feel the same way about Polanski or Woody Allen, I guess it makes sense. Personally, while I think Polanski and Allen are geniuses, I can't stomach their personal exploits, and I can't stomach Mel Gibson's, either.

God can judge, but I can avoid.

I'm sorry, but I think this is just an excuse not to take an ethical stand on an issue. You add to Gibson's (and as another poster stated, Roman Polansky's and Woody Allen's)vast fortunes when you support their work. You are supporting the whole person, not just the film. It's fine to say you'd be polite to Gibson if you met him and that you're averse to holding a picket sign at the release of his next film, but to say you'll go to his movies because we shouldn't judge anyone is cowardly. We judge people every day. We choose who we accept as friends (rejecting others for far milder deeds than Gibson's) and our nation imprisons criminals daily. Some judgement is necessary. We must take a stand against what is wrong, even when committed by "one of our own (from a religious perspective)." A movie ticket purchased for a Mel Gibson film is a gesture of support for him. That makes it a gesture in support of racism and brutality against women. You can choose to pay to see his films because you like them, or because you're just not that committed, but please don't suggest it would be the Christian thing to do.

"Too talented to boycott"?? Isn't that the whole point of a boycott? You give up something that you may love and would normally eagerly consume precisely because the moral issue at hand is so much more important. Gibson's level of talent shouldn't even enter into the argument.

I would also add that Mel Gibson's claim to be a person of faith is all the more reason why we should boycott his work. Paul told the Corinthians to cast the incestuous man out from their community BECAUSE he claimed to be a believer. And if the prophet Nathan had never gotten in David's face and made it clear what a jerk he had been, David may never have repented and would have remained just another prideful, destructive ruler, like Saul before him. If even Hollywood can recognize Gibson's behavior as obscene and unacceptable, surely Christians should do likewise, and are free to express that disapproval through their actions. And perhaps, through God's grace, Mel Gibson will take these reproaches seriously, begin to see himself as others are seeing him, and repent - just like King David.

I’m tired of people talking about how she “blackmailed him”. That’s one messed up situation, but it does NOT change the fact that Mel used THOSE words to insult her. You could hate someone with all your might for all I care, but the choice to use THOSE words is what makes him what he is. A flat out racist. You cannot blame alcohol, anger, or anything else. Especially after he already faced very public scrutiny for that drunken arrest not too long ago.

He’s had a few good movie roles, but he does NOT deserve any special treatment because he is responsible for some HORRIBLE movies too.

Re: Boycotting. If I started boycotting anyone, I would be boycotting everyone. I do think that as time goes by my heart changes with regard to companies, athletes, movie starts, etc., and I lose interest in them. I don't intentionally boycott, I just lose interest.

OK....here we go. Mel is a reflection of all of us.
He is human and like all of us he has his faults.
But, there is also very deep personal pain in this man
that many times comes across in his work. As an artist
he has been able to transform these high personal emotions
into amazing work and in many ways that is what makes
him so talented. Mel will get it together and find
what he needs to make it right. If anything, all of this
will function as a big lesson for all of us and for
MG. We love MG as an artist and we hope that he can help
himself. I think he will and he will be forgiven as we
forgive ourselves for our human frailties. However, personal
improvement comes from within and a genuine desire to
want to change and make it better. If he can go there,
all will be well. Long road ahead. God be with him and
with all of us.

Do you think many of the people who produce our entertainment--movies,books,etc.--would stand up to scrutiny?

In fact, although we may not be guilty of using the language that Mr. Gibson used, we, ourselves, probably have done and will do things that God would find equally abhorrent.

This case is just one that the media has chosen to highlight, but it appears that sin abounds in the entertainment industry.

If we ever hope to carry out the Great Commission, we have to somehow demonstrate the love of God. "They'll know we are Christians by our love." We can pray for Mr. Gibson as we pray for God to forgive our own sinfulness.

Let's not make the mistake of thinking we have the right to "cast the first stone."

Well, the first thing that comes to my mind is this: The bible says not to gossip or slander- so when Hollywood decides to gossip (and slander with possible false allegations) about Mel Gibson, do I want to join in on their party?

I work in the entertainment industry and it pains me when people of religious influence name names of celebrities from the pulipit or from a magazine article to "make an example out of" celebrities' behavior. As if celebrities are exempt from the "do not gossip or slander" rule. Are celebrities fair game? Jesus loves Mel Gibson. I am not better than Mel Gibson.

If you want to boycott a movie based on moral principles- fine, but don't name names. You can stand up for a principle without adding to the destruction of a person's reputation. A person we are supposed to love with the love of Christ.

I listened to the whole tape and there is no question that he was angry and out of control. His behavior is inexcusable. However, doesn't anyone notice that the girlfriend is totally and unrealistically calm? She obviously planned to tape this and staying calm makes her look like a sweet and innocent victim and makes him look just awful (and he was). What we haven't heard is how she would have behaved and what she would have said if she were not doing the taping for her own benefit. I don't feel sorry for her at all. She had an affair with a man who was married for a long time and had a big family and she thought nothing of taking him away from another woman and children. They are now paying the price, him for his foolishness, and her for taking another woman's husband. The chickens have come home to roost. For both of them.

I'm a Christian and I think it's embarrassing you can't say "The way he treated a woman is so vile, no Christian should support him." And he also hates blacks, Jewish people, and many others. "Why I CAN boycott Mel Gibson" should be the real title to this article. God tells us to do what's right and not stick our head in the sand, so it's ridiculous as a woman to read that Christianity Today can't "boycott" Mel even though he's an abuser.

Maryann it's true Oksana had an affair - but it takes two and you are ignoring Mel's role in it. And no matter what kind of person she is, for me there is ZERO TOLERANCE for using the C word and threatening the lives of someone, and possibly beating the woman and her child, and threatening her son. So why are you supporting monster Mel, is the better question?

Count Jerzy Potocki, the Polish Ambassador in Washington, in a report to the Polish Foreign Office in January 1939, is quoted approvingly by the highly respected British military historian Major-General JFC Fuller. Concerning public opinion in America he says "Above all, propaganda here is entirely in Jewish hands…when bearing public ignorance in mind, their propaganda is so effective that people have no real knowledge of the true state of affairs in Europe… It is interesting to observe that in this carefully thought-out campaign… no reference at all is made to Soviet Russia. If that country is mentioned, it is referred to in a friendly manner and people are given the impression that Soviet Russia is part of the democratic group of countries… Jewry was able not only to establish a dangerous centre in the New World for the dissemination of hatred and enmity, but it also succeeded in dividing the world into two warlike camps. President Roosevelt has been given the power.. to create huge reserves in armaments for a future war which the Jews are deliberately heading for." (Fuller, JFC: The Decisive Battles of the Western World vol 3 pp 372-374.) Google 'Neocons Jews Iraq war', 'Palestinian Nakba', 'USS Liberty Israeli attack'. The truth cannot be 'anti-Semitic'.
This is what Mel is condemned for referring to.

To some of the ardent boycotters here, please do not use your superfluous moral arguments and especially quote the Scriptures in order to "support boycotting" Mel Gibson's work. That's just hypocrisy. If you're going to be boycotting Gibson on moral and religious principles, please go ahead and boycott all of Hollywood. Do you think most of the filth Hollywood puts out every month should even be before the eyes of a Christian?

At least Mel is not hiding behind the guise of Christianity and his faults and weaknesses are for all to see. Whether his heart is good or bad, the Lord is the judge of that. Yeah, the deeds we can observe, but we know nothing of whether he has repented. And to those quoting Corinthians, wow, you are ready to elevate yourself to the status of St. Paul. At least St. Paul had the authority to put away the adulterous Christian for a while so Satan may not take his soul. Do you belong to Gibson's church? Do you claim to have the authority over his soul? Why, you are not even a member of his church. At least, Paul was talking to those given to be shepherded in his fold. Are you ready for all Christians to be one and are you willing to give up your differences when it comes to unity? By boycotting Gibson's work just for this reason alone, will you be saving his soul?

G: Your comments on my post make me wonder if you even read it. I said that he was angry and out of control, that he looked awful for his behavior and that his behavior was inexcusable. How does that support him in any way? You also said that I was ignoring Mel's role in the affair, that it "takes two." REad my post again. I said that they are BOTH paying, "he for his foolishness" and her for taking another woman's husband. Doesn't that indicate that I named him as being part of what they created? That they were both culpable? I said "both," didn't I? You asked me, "Why are supporting Monster Mel?" I'm not. I never said I was, and I DID criticize them "both," didn't I? So here's my question for you: "Why can't you read?"

Can I just broach a topic that comes to mind?

On many posts on this blog, I have noticed that some of the comments border on mean-spirited. I don't know anyone who comments here, so I can't judge whether they are mean-spirited people, having a bad day, or simply so passionate about their opinion that they don't realize how their comments come across.

Often, it leaves a bitter aftertaste in my mouth. The opinions themselves aren't the problem; it's the tone with which they are said that is. Christians are to be known for their love. This doesn't preclude having strong opinions and moral stances on issues, having arguments, etc.

But please remember that people who are outside the Christian faith will read these blogs/comments, too, and will see how we treat each other. Please remember that we are to be representing Christ in our treatment of others, even when we disagree with their opinions, and that the wording of the comments does matter. Think hard before you click "post".

Our words have the power to kill: this can range from Mel Gibson's rants to gossip to slandering brothers and sisters in Christ. Churches have split over divisive, accusatory words; I personally almost walked away from my faith after seeing how so-called "Christians" spoke/treated one another and witnessing a church split as a young child.

I'm not calling out specific people--I don't even remember who said what and how they said it--but this was a general observation of what I have seen on this blog in the months that I have been reading it.

I am afraid that Mel Gibson is mentally ill. His actions and words are just too extreme, and seem to have come on in recent years. All his recent actions point to it. The divorce, the cheating and new girlfriend, his outbursts and rants. I have seen this kind of behavior firsthand, but luckily not this extreme.
Why hasn't anyone thought of this?????
It is sad to realize this and see that his girlfriend has not helped him, but has exposed him. How awful.
I personally think he needs REAL HELP ~ instead of all this bashing and boycotting.

Laura Droege:

I agree with you. I like posting on certain subjects, but almost every posting devolves into accusations and hatred. Somewhere else on I here posted a similar post to your post (using my REAL name, BTW), and I was backhandedly attacked by another Christian brother or sister and called weak and cowardly, or something like that. Oh, and did I mention that this individual, while claiming to be BOLD, was NOT using their real name?

The Bible does call for believers to always use grace in our conversations. I THINK that counts for stuff you post on the web too, which by the way, will always be available for someone somewhere to pull up and call you into account for.

Re: the comment tone on this blog: A few weeks ago, when I wrote about my family's struggle with church attendance, several friends who don't read this blog regularly other than my posts asked me how I managed all the "mean" comments without getting really upset. The majority of comments were not mean: They were either in agreement, or they questioned what I was saying in a way that made clear the commenters respected my opinion/experience, even if they didn't agree. A few, though, made some pretty hurtful (and inaccurate) assumptions about my character and motivations. I found it interesting that, even though those negative comments were a clear minority, my friends came away with the impression that I had been pounded by "mean" comments. Unfortunately, the negative comments make a bigger impression.

In general, I find blog comment boards to be a great place to examine issues and get a sense of where other people stand. I've actually "met" some writing colleagues through reading and commenting on blogs in my field of interest. On the best comment boards (the ones where the discussions are mostly characterized by good manners and helpful insights), there seems to be a critical mass of commenters who work hard at maintaining a generous tone even when disagreeing, while also being willing to politely but firmly call out commenters who are rude, mean, offensive, or just plain wrong. No comment board is immune from occasionally being sabotaged by negativity, but some manage to avoid the problem more than others.

I agree with you. However, what I have noticed is when there is any blog post regarding politics, abortion, or homosexuality here on CT.com or almost any other Christian website, many/most of the comments because a shouting match. I love it too when people can engage in spirited debate online, but like you said there are always a few troublemakers out there looking to prove themselves (I should know..I was one of them!)

Re-reading my comment, I realize I didn't make clear that I was actually agreeing with Laura and Dan: I get frustrated by the negative tone of some comments on this blog. Even if the majority of comments are not negative, it doesn't take many of the sarcastic/biting/judgmental/dismissive variety to alter the tone altogether. And now I'm intrigued by Dan's comment that he used to be "one of them." What changed?

I think Mel needs our prayers and our help. Obviously the man has gone off the deep end mentally. Perhaps there is a demonic reason. He said himself during the Passion that the devil was after him. The Enemy especially targets the highest among us, and who has done more in Hollywood to assert Christ than Mel? He was married for decades, had many children, was devoted to Christ, and then suddenly gets divorced and knocks up a Russian gold digger? Something doesn't add up here. He's either deranged or some demon has taken control of him.

Our family boycotted Jane Fonda for the same reason we are boycotting Mel Gibson: we don't want either our money or personal time spent supporting his behavior.

Mel doesn't want anything to do with US, either. He built a private church and does not worship with a true community, therefore, the free opinions in this very blog would likely annoy him. We worship with a community, where there is discussion and sometimes disagreement, but we do so together.

Lastly, some crazy people are using the Mel case as a "symptom" of some sort of wider, sinister cabal to control public relations and make him a scapegoat. PLEASE! No one forced him to behave this way.

Even though Oksana wouldn't get the award for the most credible of people, seems like Mel definitely has gotten himself into some more trouble. Its disappointing to see someone with such great acting talent self-destruct and destroy his reputation again and again with these violent and racist outbursts. If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it at all! Think it would do Mel good to apply that cliche!

I will watch Mel Gibson in films I like. He is an actor. His personal life has no effect on a good story or acting job. As long as he does a good job on screen why would I boycott that screen or film? Many people live messed up lives and yes they need help but unless you have them in your personal life their work is not them and stands alone. Should we boycott a cure for cancer if it comes from an adulterer researcher? If God can make a donkey speak his words then he can make any sinner do his work. The point is the work the art not the man who will soon die and face his Maker as we all must.

Ellen: I was rebuked by a bro-in-Christ on another site for some horrible comments I made. I am a recovering "online Christian Jerk" - to paraphrase a blog posting at stuffchristianslike.net. It is VERY difficult to practice restraint in leaving comments online. Somehow alot of us think that leaving a comment online exempts us from accountability for said comments, but I (in my opinion) don't think it is any different from the words we say to one another, and that we will be called to account for them. Besides, I get kind of tired of how pompus and arrogant I can become when I post comments.

Regarding Mel Gibson, I don't think his public/personal life need my attention nor does my opinion need to be made known, or even formulated.

I really like Mr. Gibson and his frailities aren't unough
to pass any real judgement. There is much more then meets
the eye here. The law will take care of things as they
unfold. For now, all we can do is hold back any opinions.
It's ever so easy to throw stones when we do not really
know the true matter of things. I hope this whole thing
gets cleaned and Mel is back doing what is really important.
And, that is sharing his art with all of us. Nobody is
perfect. As long as he realizes that he gets support and
help in his deeply troubled life. I will not boycott his
films or boycott Mel. I love MB and thank him very much
for all the entertainment he has provided us in the past
35 years. I really hope it all works out for him and
his family. He needs our love and our support because he
is deeply troubled individual. But then again, he's
human and that can never be forgotten. Still, there is
no excuse for his behavior and language. What a lesson
to see this reflection come through in all of us.

"Edge of Darkness", very dark and brilliant movie.
Vintage Mel all the way, and maybe a bit of a reflection
of how troubled his life really is. However, art has a
way of unfolding true colors of the individual and how
he gets it across. For anyone out there, that hasn't
decided to boycott MG's movies see it. And maybe, you
can understand why this man is truly is on the edge of
darkness. None of us are perfect, and we can always make
amends.

Mel Gibson was out of line in his rant to his wife/girfriend. However, I've personally seen that men are often set-up or manipulated by the mothers of their children, because laws generally support women in any abuse or custodial issues involving the fathers of their children(although there are excpetions).
She knew how to push his explosive buttons. They were both in the wrong. Mel Gibson's public displays of his faith should prompt him to publicly 'confess' the sin of leaving his wife and family and getting his girfriend pregant with his child and then getting out of control with his anger, regardless of how she may have manipulated and taped him to expose him. Shame on her, too.
God forgives; sometimes we humans don't.

um... this is a sad situation and a little embarrasing to watch. i think thats because its such a private problem that most ppl deal with. i know that if ppl saw all of the worst of me on the news 24/7 i would have alot less friends. its obivous that he has been going through something in the last few years and perhaps he DOES need medication... what do we really know other than what we have from professionally recorded and spliced conversations (according to goodmorning america) but i guess what i am really saying is that shouldnt we, as christians, just be praying for him? This isnt a social stand he's taken on something and i dont think it can be compared to polanksi's druging and raping of a 13 year old child. Why are we even talking about a boycott? go see a movie if you want to... or dont. I probably wouldnt because it would be difficult to enjoy, but if you are boycotting because you disapprove of a persons internal issues it really does feel like judgement, doesnt it?

Yes, Amy, it does feel like judgement. We are not called to judge one another, but we do need to use discernment, especially since Mel has been so open with his faith,particularly through the Movie - The Passion of the Christ. He is flawed like the rest of us, and this very private situation is, as you say, embarrassing. I know men who have gone through this type of situation at the whim of women who hate them. But, the breakup of Mel's highly thought-of first marriage and all those children from that marriage is wrong, esp. since he hooked up with someone else who had his 'love-child.' Confession, public and private, is in order. I wonder if he has already privately confessed.....I hope so.

From reading these comments and the original article I see that some people have forgotten several verses of scripture orrefuse to apply it to those they dislike even thugh God and Jesus does not allow for such action.

1. ye who are without sin cast the first stone

2. do good to those who do evil

3. pray for them

4. do unto others as ye would have them do unto you

5 and so many more.

since you all and the author are not privy to all the details of their married life and courtship it woul dbe best to refrain from commenting as I am sure most of you would fail to meet your own standards.

The only relationship with Mel Gibson I will ever have is one where I pay money to see his films. And while I don't think I would ever picket a theater showing his films, I have to be honest when I say that, for me, his behavior has tainted his art. So, while I can pray that he finds healing through Christ, I don't think I am being anti-Christian if I choose not to support him financially. Rejecting the behavior is not rejecting the man. If we never feel consequences to our actions, we are not motivated to change. It's only through our dollars that we can tell Mel that we accept or reject his behavior since most of us will never know him.

If you love God and people, then pray for Mel Gibson. It will make more of an eternal difference if you pray for him than to buy a ticket to see one of his movies. Instead of spending a hour and a half watching one of his movies, spend an hour and a half praying for him, the man needs all the prays he can get.

It would be one thing if Mel Gibson hasn't portrayed himself as "moral" authority, I read once that he thought and stated so that his wife(whom he was married to at the time) and the mother of his children, was going to hell because she was some other religion, besides "Catholic" the "Chosen" religion of God...... what a bunch of crap... it's usually the ones who shout the loudest are the ones who are indeed hiding something about themselves and it usually comes back to bite them in the butt and thats exactly the way it works, it all comes out in the wash in the end. So we don't need to judge Mel Gibson, he has totally ruined any crediblity he might have falsely given us.. a fine upstanding, father of seven kids,(now eight-illegitimate) Oh what a joke, he has turned out to be.

Passion of the Christ................. what a hypocrite!!!!

Uh... I hate to say it, but I think you are judging him, in spite of your pseudonym...

I'd like to say, Anna, good post. I'm always struck by how often articles and blogs on Christianity Today turn negative and how one person's opinion is viewed as the "liberal" nature of Christianity Today as an organization (though your views aren't liberal, they're just honest).

I've also seen quite a few boycotts, even in my short life (I'm just in college). I remember Pokemon, Harry Potter, and lately Twilight among others such as late-90s Disney movies, all of which had varying degrees of validity. But because of that I'm always very skeptical of what Christians "should" boycott. I could go on for a while, but to me, while Mel Gibson's actions are terrible, and while I would be obligated to confront his sin if I knew him personally, I don't know that it's me responsibility to boycott his films simply because he needs the Christ he claims to know.

God help him, and God help us to see our own hypocrisy.

As Mel is a professing Christian, absent a public confession and repentance over his 1)apparent adultery in divorcing and remarrying and 2) shameful abusive behavior caught on tape and 3)apparent physical abuse - Scripture says we should admonish such a person and, if unrepentant, the we are to shun/shame them. See Thessalonians 3:6 "Now we command you, brethren,in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from every brother who leads an unruly life and not according to the tradition which you received from us." and Thessalonians 3: 14:"If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that person and do not associate with him, so that he will be put to shame."

Philip, don't you think that command was framed with the local congregation in mind? I'm not sure it extends to the relationship between a public figure and his or her sizable audience. Surely church discipline should be a local, communal response, and carried out carefully and thoughtfully by those with the sort of intimate, extended knowledge of and commitment to a person that mere "fans" could never have. Whether or not any given boycott is right or wrong, justifications like the one outlined here strike me as a misapplication of instructions to local, and probably fairly small (at least in Paul's day), congregations.

Many of the comments here are trying too hard to be "nice" saying that Mel Gibson's racist and threatening language is "embarassing", "shameful" and a "private problem". It's sloppy thinking that really gets Christians in trouble with other Christians and with non-believers. I think Christian people need to carefully distinguish between his personal anguish, his sins as a Christian member of the Church, and his illegal behaviour.

To call illegal behaviour like threatening violence (which is an assault legally) "a private problem" or "embarassing" is to really really mislead yourself and others and to really make Jesus look like a spineless middle class boy-man and to make Christianity look like a hiding place for "nice" dinosaurs. The tapes seem to show that Mel threatened to have his girlfriend killed and he used discriminatory language when he said that she deserved to be raped by black men: these are criminal matters - they are NOT private matters. Jesus never advocated breaking the law of the land.

What used to be private matters, killing your spouse, stoning your daughters, beating your slaves, are no longer private in America and certainly no longer private matters in Christianity.

I think that we're called to use our intelligence by God: use your judgement to describe what he's done accurately - as illegal in American law, as illegal in church law and as a sin against God and the wife of his child in his behaviour.
Then use your judgement to determine what the penalties are - how can you ensure that Mel obeys the law? Write the District Attorney in the jurisdiction where the custody and criminal charges are being considered and demand that he be charged/prosecuted.
How can you ensure that Mel gets the spiritual discipline and help he needs? - write the BIshop in his home church and ask for the Church to intervene - ask your religious leader (Bishop, etc.) to offer his/her time directly to Mel to help him
How can you ensure that Mel feels the pain enough commercially to take his audience's criticisms and worries seriously? Write him, tell him the above, and tell him you're going to have to boycott his films because Mel Gibson cannot worship two masters - he can't worship Mel and God, or power and God, or the empowering money from films and God.

Archeologist: I know that you aren't referring to my post because I made NO judgement on Mr. Gibson in my post, and I went out of my way to state that. Please don't lump everyone together.

Thank you.

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 5:12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you." For me that pretty sums up this situation. I look at Mr. Gibson's behavior and think, "There by the grace of God, go I." . This debate reminds me of the Pharisee who said, 'God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector.' God will deal with Mr. Gibson not I. As believers, we should be praying for this man, for God is the only one who can change the heart of a man.

Sorry for the numerous comments saying the same thing. I'm new at this so I'm not sure what happened. I've tried to delete them but with no success. If anyone knows how this happened please let me know.

Boycotting Mel Gibson would be useless. He's got too many fans who are willing to turn a blind eye to his shenanigans. However, just because birds fly overhead it doesn't mean one has to let them make a nest in one's hair. I'd say don't like Mel? Then don't go to his movies. I certainly don't...because to me he is not talented, but also he's a total hypocrite.

I believe that in Luther/Melanchthon's writings regarding 'the two kingdoms' Jesus tells us not to make personal judgements. The job of judgement is left to those who either hold a secular position and the authority that comes with it or to God.

There's seems to be more than a faith/church issue happening here. In interviews in 2002 and 2006, Mel Gibson acknowledged he'd been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. In the rants cited, his girlfriend repeatedly tells him he needs medication. Refusing treatment and denying that one is ill are symptomatic of both bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

I wouldn't want to boycott someone's movies because he's mentally ill. Mel Gibson and everyone around him need prayers. We can hope they'll connect with NAMI or another organization that provides good support for the families of those with mental illnesses until such time as he agrees to be treated.

Archeologist: I know that you aren't referring to my post because I made NO judgement on Mr. Gibson in my post, and I went out of my way to state that. Please don't lump everyone together.

Thank you.

To me, the important thing is that we pray for him. Whether you watch his movies or not is a personal choice; but I strongly feel that we shouldn't stop loving him and praying for him as a person that desperately needs God's intervention in his life. I am really sad at a lot of the comments going around (not on this site), that Mel 'will always be a hateful person', completely writing him off as never having known God, or never being able to change. A lot of us were very praising of what Mel did with "Passion of the Christ", and now that he seems to be in a bad place, I personally feel compelled to not give up on him, but to keep praying for his restoration.
ps I'm not criticising anyone on this, I just feel very passionate about it :)

My comments briefly. A consistent Christian does eventually "walk the walk of holyness and change".

The path from sin and inconsistency may be bumpy with setbacks, but the whole meaning of Christian conversion is that a person IS transformed and that person however slowly, conforms during his/her lifetime to the character of God, Christ, little by little.

Another way to put it, is to ask the question: in which direction is the person facing? Are they facing toward God, or is their back toward God?

If this supposed Christian is NOT transformed, then the question is: do we have a fraud, a person, who is self deceived, is "faking it"?

All people do not go to heaven. If you disagree with that, ask yourself if Adolf Hitler will be there.

When we apply all this to Mel Gibson, yes he needs non judgemental friends. Yes, he also needs Christian friends to speak the truth to him firmly with love and acceptance.

Alcohol may be a demon. But lets not miss the important destination, Mell!

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29

Hermenuetics

twitter updates

What Is Her.meneutics?

interests

writers

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

Why I Can't Boycott Mel Gibson

Comments

recent posts

Archives

Hermenuetics

twitter updates

What Is Her.meneutics?

interests

writers

Free Newsletters

books we're reading

blogs we're watching

Why I Can't Boycott Mel Gibson

Comments

recent posts

tags

Archives