Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Spouting Thomas's avatar

Joel, congrats on the single. I sent you a message.

Also thoughtful piece, even if I don't fully agree with it. This is the first time I heard the phrase "Machen's Warrior Children", and I get it.

But I think there's something missing here, that is not symmetric between right and left in the context of the church, which I think I might have voiced here before, and if you've addressed it, I apologize.

And I hate to say it, because I try to be charitable, and I appreciate your efforts to be charitable. But: THE LEFT LIES. And I think this poisons the entire well, and it's the root of much of the problem. Machen himself observed that the left lies, it's in his book: he describes clergymen who solemnly affirm the whole of the WCF and then turn around two seconds later and start chipping away at it. And to this day you can find any number of examples of this type of behavior. One high profile example that comes to mind is the whole way Du Mez coyly danced around her opinions on LGBT for the longest time, which I picked up from Dreher around the time her book came out.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/jesus-and-elton-john-kristin-kobes-du-mez-denny-burk-evangelicalism-homosexuality/

Let me be clear, in the context of politics, maybe the right lies more. Trump certainly has a relationship with the truth that's as strained as any I can think of.

But in the context of the church, there's no contest. A conservative clergyman may lie to save his own skin, when it turns out he has engaged in, or covered for, horrific abuse. He may be coy or silent about how much he supports Trump or this or that conservative POLITICAL idea -- Chris Hodges of Church of the Highlands got in trouble for this. But when it comes to doctrine and theology, there's no conservative equivalent to the way that the left lies. There's no conservative pastor in a Mainline church who vows to support women's ordination and LGBT marriage, who claims to approve of higher criticism, and then immediately begins undermining those ideas, it turns out he believes in inerrancy. The closest equivalent I've ever heard of is Redeemed Zoomer out there, who is very open about his intentions and in any case hasn't accomplished anything to my knowledge.

But the left lies, and this means that anytime we catch a whiff of someone inside the church being significantly to our left, it's prudent to wonder for a second. Is that really his leftmost opinion? Or -- sorry for the mixed metaphor -- did he just let the mask slip, and it's the tip of the iceberg? If we give this guy an entry point, is our church about to be subverted, to become the next example of Mainline decay?

Anyway, maybe the argument is that people need to be given more of the benefit of the doubt. I don't think all this suspicion is a good thing! I think people should be able to voice ideas that are perceived as somewhere to the left of any given theological consensus without being instantly treated as heretics. But whatever the solution is, it needs to be offered in the context that, unfortunately, the left lies in a way the right does not, and real churches have been undermined and usurped as a result.

Expand full comment
TJ Espinoza's avatar

"arguably theologically orthodox, ***but*** [emphasis mine] sympathetic to Side B, celibate, gay Christians"... Is being theological orthodox and having sympathy towards Side B Christians in opposition?

Anyway, I would love to talk with you about this video sometime (both the original with Ms. Childers and Mr. Yuan as well as the response by Preston Sprinkle). I really did not like the original video especially with the accusations that the Side B theological framework and sensibility is "heresy" / "false teaching" as well as the odd straw men arguments at play and Yuan's no-platforming perspective. Side B obviously has differences with Side Y, but we both do hold the same basic points of the gospel of Jesus the Messiah, even if we differ in implications, aspects of human anthropology, and maybe the larger narrative of the gospel. Also, the idea that Side B does not think that people should repent of lust was shocking for me, I have never heard anyone say this, even if we have a more nuanced take on the dynamics of attraction compared to Side Y thinkers. Also, I appreciated your Frame and Machen examples, those dynamics are so common among some US evangelical traditions, sadly....

That said, I also did not really like how Preston engaged the discussion. In my opinion, he was too focused on what they implicated about him rather than defending Side B from gross mischaracterizations, and this episode also exposed some of his misunderstandings about the current Side B conversation around topics such as forms of committed kinship beyond marriage, among others. But he is definitely the one I would rather than a conversation with compared too Ms. Childers and Mr. Yuan - he is willing to approach conversations with hermeneutic of charity and engage publicly with perspectives that he actually disagrees. He seems open to complexity and nuance as well as learning in a way that I wonder if Ms. Childers and Mr. Yuan are.

I appreciate your sensibilities in all of this - pursuing virtuous engagement through sailing between the Charybdis of uncritical adoption and thoughtlessness and Scylla of purity spirals, tribalism, and "righteous" perfectionism.

Congratulations on the new band! Please share your first single with us a Communion & Shalom. We would happily give it a listen!

Expand full comment
8 more comments...

No posts