http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/5/152006a.asp

 
A Blunted Spear? Controversy Over Film Challenges Evangelical Community

Analysis by Ed Vitagliano
May 15, 2006

(AgapePress) - It must have seemed like a slam-dunk, a no-brainer. Take
what is arguably the most famous -- even iconic -- missionary story of
the last century and make it into a major motion picture. It could
inspire Christians and perhaps even reach unbelievers with the Gospel.

That was the intent of the producers of the movie End of the Spear,
released in theaters in January. The film tells the true story of five
men -- Nate Saint, Jim Elliot, Ed McCully, Pete Fleming and Roger
Youderian -- who were speared to death in 1956 while trying to make
contact with the Waodani Indians in the Amazon rain forests of eastern
Ecuador.

Also known as Aucas, the tribe was impacted by the Gospel through the
ministry of Rachel Saint, Nate's sister, and Elisabeth Elliot, Jim's
wife, who went to live with the Indians following the murders.

The movie is also based on the book by the same name, written by Nate
Saint's son, Steve, who had lived with his aunt among the Waodani during
several summers of his childhood. Later, as an adult, Steve moved his
own family to Ecuador and continued Rachel's work after she died.

End of the Spear, produced by Every Tribe Entertainment (ETE), became
the passion of Steve Saint and three other Christian men: Mart Green,
founder and CEO of the company; Bill Ewing, ETE president; and Jim
Hanon, who directed the film.

A Homosexual in the Woodpile
In the opinion of some, however, the distance between a no-brainer and a
boneheaded decision is as short as the distance between hero and goat.
That's what Saint and the others soon discovered as their dream of
retelling the story became something of a nightmare.

That's because they cast actor Chad Allen in the film roles of Nate
Saint and the adult Steve Saint.

Allen is a homosexual activist whose professional résumé would make even
the most tolerant Christian wince. He has not only played explicitly
homosexual characters in movies, but has also publicly promoted same-sex
marriage.

When the producers found out about Allen's sexual orientation, it was
after they had offered him the part, but before they had begun shooting
Allen's parts in the film. They began to wrestle with what they should do.

To his credit, when he learned that evangelicals were not happy to
discover that a homosexual man would be one of the lead actors in the
missionary movie, Allen offered to back out. But Green, Saint, Ewing and
Hanon all asked the actor to stay on.

In Christianity Today, Green said that although they "disagreed with
Chad on the issue of homosexuality," they told Allen "that we still
loved him, and he was welcome to the cast."

Nevertheless, ETE did not -- and still has not -- mentioned anything on
the End of the Spear website about Allen's homosexuality, his
homosexual-themed films, or his activism.

A Problem With the Messenger
More frustrating for many evangelicals, however, is that ETE has never
admitted that casting Chad Allen was a mistake. In fact, the company has
continually defended its decision.

Green, for example, has emphasized Allen's quality as an actor. "After
someone told me that Chad appeared on the cover of the gay and lesbian
magazine The Advocate, we just felt, 'Hey, he's still the best actor,'"
Green explained.

In fact, Green actually claims -- as has Saint -- that it was God's
will. "I have total peace Chad Allen was the man God intended to act in
the movie," Green told Christianity Today.

The private life of actors -- Allen in particular -- thus became a
central point of contention among Christians who were debating ETE's
casting decision. The conflict revealed a profound disparity in the
manner in which believers approach their consumption of films and their
attitudes toward the actors who play in them.

As one Christian commented online, how many evangelicals criticized the
decision to cast actor Liam Neeson as the voice of the Christ-figure
Aslan in the The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the
Wardrobe? After all, in 2004 Neeson starred in Kinsey, a film that
trumpeted the work of debauched sex researcher Alfred Kinsey.

Still other Christians give a pass to Ian Charleson, who played runner
Eric Liddell in the Academy-Award-winning film Chariots of Fire (1981).
Charleson, who was a homosexual but not an activist, died of AIDS in 1990.

Or how about homosexual actor Ian McKellen, who played Gandalf in the
Lord of the Rings trilogy -- films which were hugely popular among
Christians? McKellen is an outspoken homosexual activist who stated
publicly that, when he stays in a hotel, he pulls out the room's copy of
the Bible and rips out the pages that condemn homosexuality.

Can Movies Preach?
ETE has made it abundantly clear, however, that the private lives of
those who work on its films are not as critical as the message of the
films themselves.

Saint says, "I had been informed that Every Tribe Entertainment did not
require that all the cast and crew of End of the Spear would be required
to be Christians. They wanted to make a good movie that would tell this
story God has written ...." (emphasis in original)

In the film company's public statement, the filmmakers say: "The story
is greater than the storytellers and it would be an enormous disservice
if great stories of faith like this one were reduced to the human
shortcomings of the filmmakers. We invite you to experience End of the
Spear and then judge for yourself the message you are left with."

This raises fundamental questions concerning Christian involvement in
the production of mass media, especially if the product is
Gospel-oriented. What does it mean to speak God's truth through means
other than traditional preaching of Scripture? Can movies effectively
communicate the Gospel, especially when, in our celebrity-centered
culture, the actor is almost as important as the character he plays?

In his fine article on the End of the Spear controversy, writer Randy
Alcorn appears to agree with ETE's defense of their decision to cast
Allen. But after stating that he can excuse the private life of an actor
and simply enjoy the actor's portrayal in a film, Alcorn adds a caveat.

"This doesn't apply to the man bringing sermons on Sunday mornings in a
church," he said. "His personal life very much matters, and his words
lose all credibility if he has no credibility."

But why are movies any different than preaching from the pulpit? Don't
movies -- and, in fact, virtually every art form -- attempt to
communicate truth? And shouldn't such a truth claim subject the
messenger to as rigorous a spiritual interrogation as the one a preacher
undergoes?

After all, if actors aren't perfect messengers, neither are preachers.
Is it biblical to say, then, as Green and Saint do, that the message is
what is important, not the messenger? Is this a defensible New Testament
position?

Absolutely not, says Doug Phillips, president of Vision Forum and
founder of the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival and the
Christian Filmmakers Academy. He insists that there is a difference
between End of the Spear -- produced by Christians with a
Christ-centered message -- and movies like Lord of the Rings or Chariots
of Fire, "both of which were secular productions from beginning to end
that cast homosexuals in lead roles."

Among the mistakes made by the men at ETE, Phillips says, was "knowingly
and willingly closely yoking in a Gospel effort with a man in a state of
moral reprobation and at war with the Gospel, contrary to the Bible's
prohibition against such ...."

In his online commentary about the controversy, Phillips insists that he
is not questioning the motives of the men behind the End of the Spear
production. In fact, Phillips explicitly states that ETE's goal was "to
honor the Lord Jesus Christ by bringing a Gospel message to a broad
audience."

However, that's not the issue, Phillips says. "The issue is ETE's
objectively unbiblical behavior. ETE had a clear opportunity to do what
was right by releasing Chad Allen from the project or even canceling the
project for the honor of the Lord Jesus Christ," he says.

"Not only did they knowingly and wholeheartedly embrace this homosexual
activist as their lead actor, but they are now telling the world that
their decision was loving, correct and biblical," Phillips added. "For
this reason, I believe we can objectively describe their actions as
reprehensible."

Learning From the Controversy
Those are strong words, but Phillips believes that Christian filmmakers
must have strong standards guiding their projects.

In fact, those standards drive his Christian Filmmakers Academy. For
example, at the 2005 filmmakers gathering, Phillips says the faculty was
asked this question at a panel discussion: "How important is it that
Christian producers draw from a distinctively Christian talent base when
casting their films?"

The answer: "The more significant the role, the more critical it is that
there is philosophical and ethical unity. The idea that actors are
neutral agents -- mere aesthetic technicians in a Christian production
-- is a myth. Primary actors represent the film to the world .... Few
things could be as devastating to a Christian production than to release
a film to the public where the producer has a reasonable basis to
believe that his lead actor is a God-hater who could mislead thousands
and disgrace the name of Christ by communicating -- through his words or
lifestyle -- disdain for Jesus Christ and the true message of the film."

It is obvious that Green, Saint and the others connected with End of the
Spear had not thoroughly thought through these types of issues in
advance of the casting controversy over Allen. From their own statements
they admit to great confusion and anguish as they wrestled with the
implications of their actions.

And as with most spiritual crises, they wrestled with these issues under
tremendous pressure -- from the ordinary tension of producing and
distributing a major motion picture to the strains within the Christian
community when the Chad Allen controversy became public.

Sadly, the result has been a blunted Spear, reducing the impact of the
film, not only on many of the Christians who saw the movie, but also on
those who refused to see it, and on unbelievers who observed the confusion.

The fact is that our culture is changing rapidly, and Christians are, in
many respects, being overwhelmed by the choices such changes create.

At least for those believers who do not reject the appropriateness of
entertainment in and of itself, navigating through the creative
whirlwind which is our pop culture can pose serious challenges.

It is therefore apparent that, if Christians intend to continue using
the arts as a means of communicating the Gospel, they must begin by
carefully thinking through the Scriptural principles involved. Everyone
might not agree with Phillips' position, but at least he has thought it
through.

To not come to grips with these matters in a biblical manner will only
run the risk of blunting the impact of further efforts in the future.
Ed Vitagliano, a regular contributor to AgapePress, is news editor of
AFA Journal, a monthly publication of the American Family Association.
This article, printed with permission, appears in the May 2006 issue.

© 2006 AgapePress all rights reserved.