Michael Spencer is defending his laudatory review of Frank Schaeffer’s hatchet-job on his own parents. Both men make a virtue of betrayal.
“If we want to honor our parents, we will be truthful about them, applying all the categories of the Biblical story to them: honor, love, mercy and sinfulness.”
http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/humiliation-humanity-and-the-fourth-commandment-can-we-tell-the-truth-about-those-whose-sin-affects-us
Notice how Spencer sets up a false dichotomy: we either have to tell the truth about someone else or lie about him.
This disregards the obvious alternative: we’re under no standing obligation to volunteer everything we know about someone else. There’s no duty, in general, to talk about other people—especially in ways harmful to their reputation.
Indeed, the Bible has a category for that behavior: gossip. And it’s a sin.
There are, of course, exceptions. But Spencer isn’t dwelling on the exceptions.
“These are some of the stories I’ve heard in counseling over the years. All true, and many of them in multiple editions. Because of the particular population I minister to, these kinds of life-stories are common. They are the wall-paper of the rooms I inhabit. There is not a moment of the day I’m not surrounded by these stories and the people they belong to.”
I have just one question: given Spencer’s defense of Frank Schaeffer’s hit piece, how could Spencer ever be a trustworthy confidant?
What if Spencer penned his memoirs tomorrow, and went public with the sins which numerous named individuals had confessed to him in private, after they sought him out for pastoral counseling?
Would you confide in Spencer? Is that what you’d want in a pastor? Is that what you’d want in a friend? Or would you suspect that he’s taking notes for his tell-all exposé?
Years ago, the late Truman Capote wrote a dishy, fictionalized novel (Answered Prayers) about his friends and benefactors.
When a “post-evangelical” pastor mutates into Truman Capote, that tells you everything you need to know about the destination of post-evangelical theology.
Would it also be fitting to ask whether Spencer would welcome comparable public candor from his wife and children?
ReplyDeleteBoth men make a virtue of betrayal.
ReplyDeleteThat's sad. Should Judas be held up as an exemplar of virtue too then?
Notice how Spencer sets up a false dichotomy
He does that often. And he oftentimes doesn't realize it. And when someone points it out to him, he turns rather nasty and vicious, not to mention prideful and unthankful.
Would you confide in Spencer?
No. He's untrustworthy.
Is that what you’d want in a pastor?
No. Obviously not.
Is that what you’d want in a friend?
No. Definitely not.
Or would you suspect that he’s taking notes for his tell-all exposé?
I don't know if I'd go that far, but your point is well-established.
When a “post-evangelical” pastor mutates into Truman Capote, that tells you everything you need to know about the destination of post-evangelical theology.
I actually knew before I-Monk's post defending sinful gossip that the destination AND journey of post-evangelical theology is a bad ride away from God.