The ease with which so many high-profile Christians have begun making a handsome living off habitually and publicly castigating, criticizing, and otherwise condemning the church of Jesus is more than off-putting and unproductive. It's contemptuous and at times sinful.
I know how the world works. There is great money to be made for a former Republican willing to go before Democrat audiences and bad-mouth the right. Amanda Carpenter, Jennifer Rubin, David Frum, Michael Steele, Alyssa Farah-Griffin, all the court jesters over at the Lincoln Project, and so many others have found the exchange of conviction for profit a deal totally worth making. That's their worldly prerogative.
But the church of Jesus isn't supposed to be like the world. Christians aren't to mimic the world in our words, habits, deeds, or treatment of one another. Christ Himself said that it would be our love for one another (fellow believers) that would convince the world that we belonged to Him. Unfortunately, it seems as though an entire class of prominent Christians see disagreements they have with "less-enlightened" believers as a chance to get rich by ridiculing and disparaging them before worldly audiences.
Take New York Times columnist and professing Christian, David French. Once an outspoken advocate for Christian witness in the public square, French has found that berating the church, punching only towards the redeemed, would garner him far more attention, far better pay, and far more worldly prestige than what he'd been doing.
The most recent example of this disappointing behavior started with the complaint of an individual who, though anonymous, claims to have been a victim of unspecified "church abuse." She wrote,
Most of the time, though not always, this common argument originates from people who have little interaction, affiliation, or regular contact with a local congregation of believers. What they know of Christianity and its adherents is what they see on social media. Therefore, this woman's post provided a Christian with a large platform like French an excellent opportunity to defend the integrity of the church, illuminate the true focus of blood-bought saints, and provide a gentle encouragement for the confused woman to re-engage with a local body of sinners saved by grace in her community.
Instead, he saw an opportunity to break out the boxing gloves, ally himself with the world, and pummel the church of Jesus.
Though French uses the phrase "we're much more eager" it's important to note what the rest of his thread makes clear – he isn't talking about himself. In fact, his entire analysis reeks of a self-righteousness that scoffs, "if only those bigoted church goers could act more like me, they'd be much better Christians." As someone who has followed him for years, it's jarring how much this haughtiness has come to define his approach to the church.
Come again? Lying and cruelty are "excused or overlooked" in the church? In what church? Not the thousands and thousands that preach the doctrines of Jesus each week. What kind of demonic representation of Christ's bride is this, and why would a professing Christian's first impulse be to affirm such misplaced slander?
Skip ahead a couple tweets and somehow it got worse:
French may be intelligent, but his apparent desperation to generate worldly favor by publicly dragging the church has clearly invited clumsiness.
Simply compare the number of Christian sermons you can readily find that discuss the sin of pornography versus ones that discuss the sin of transgenderism. Or look through church history and weigh the quantity of theological material on the topic of lust against the quantity of material on "trans issues." It is beyond comical to pretend that the church's collective voice is louder on the latter than it is on the former.
And what congregation in America is "acting like [porn] is just fine?" This is sloppy rhetoric. What French is trying to say is that there are many churchgoers who are addicted to pornography. But is he suggesting that they flaunt that addiction? And with pride? Do they demand others affirm it as holy?
The secrecy of porn is one of the things that makes it most dangerous, and precisely why churches attempt to provide their members accountability. Many churches have pornography recovery groups, as well as anonymous access to resources for those who are too ashamed to admit their sinful addiction.
And note that the reason they hide it in shame is because they know it's not okay. And they know that because that's what Christ's doctrine, explained lovingly by a faithful church, has taught them.
Yet when that same church tries to lovingly explain the same thing to those committing the sin of transgenderism, it now must dodge the flaming arrows of a loveless world that have been ignorantly lit and kindled by church-sabotaging Christians who write for The New York Times.
The accuser of the brethren is always looking for willing accomplices to reinforce his deception about Christ's church. It is a tragedy when he finds them sitting in the pews. Mr. French should repent.
