A particular thought pattern now permeates our civic discourse: “We” don’t have to believe what “they” say, because “they” are dishonest, unfair, speak in bad faith, etc. Meanwhile, “we” are virtuous and fair. Indeed, a lot of what passes for dialogue on social media often ends up with a self-selected group of people reinforcing comforting narratives and denigrating troubling ones.
But what if “they” are right?
Ponder a recent discussion concerning John MacArthur and his influential Grace Community Church (GCC) in Sun Valley, California.
A recent report by Christianity Today (CT), an outlet generally seen as centrist in the Christian world, casts MacArthur and GCC in a bad light, claiming GCC’s leaders ignored signs of abuse in their counseling sessions and attacked those who raised questions about this practice.
William Wolfe, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense in the Trump administration and self-described Christian nationalist (according both to his own definition and prominent academic definitions from critics) was aghast.
“If you can’t see that there’s a concerted effort by the woke mob to destroy John MacArthur’s reputation and legacy in his final years of ministry, you don’t have your eyes open,” Wolfe wrote on Twitter. He further explained his gratitude for MacArthur’s ministry and specifically critiqued the messenger. “I’m not going to trust the reporting from the likes of [Christianity Today], [David French] or [Kristin Du Mez], etc. for one second on this issue.”
Wolfe was hardly alone. Pastor Tom Buck of First Baptist Church of Lindale, Texas, echoed Wolfe’s sentiments almost precisely, saying this was “part of the bigger agenda” to “destroy those who stand against the social Justice movement.” Wolfe and Buck are just two examples.
Yet the accusations against GCC are almost certainly true. Wolfe is de facto dismissing a former elder at GCC, Hohn Cho, who is at the center of the story. CT’s report, authored by Kate Shellnutt, cites Cho, who is a lawyer, extensively. It details a case of church discipline against a woman for refusing to take back her husband, whom she accused of child abuse. It also details that there are other women in the church whose concerns were not heeded.
Cho, then an elder and lay pastor at GCC, was asked to review the issue after the woman’s husband was sent to prison for child molestation. Cho’s investigation found clear wrongdoing on the part of church leadership, and he urged them to make amends. When MacArthur dismissed Cho’s findings and Cho continued to press his case with the elders, Cho was asked to resign.
Since leaving GCC, Cho reports talking to many women who were also dismissed after complaining of spousal abuse and seeking church counseling. “At the end of the day I need to do what’s right, as the Spirit and my conscience and prayer and counsel and the Word all lead me, and let God take care of the results,” Cho said. “And the man who taught me that was John MacArthur.” Cho has confirmed on his own Facebook page that the article quotes him accurately and in context.
GCC has not taken kindly to Cho’s remarks, and the church has scrubbed its website of Cho’s sermons and postings. Cho, for his part, posted a lengthy Facebook post explaining the process he went through to decide to talk publicly and a humbly offering to talk to any friends at the church who still want to speak to him about anything, whether or not they agree with his stance.
Of course, Wolfe and Buck are not entirely wrong: Some people undoubtedly do want to damage MacArthur’s legacy, for reasons that have nothing to do with his handling of spousal or child abuse. Some also simply want to destroy him because he’s a prominent evangelical Christian. That alone is enough to some people, particularly the “woke mob” types Wolfe complains about. MacArthur’s defenders aren’t wrong about that.
The problem is, they want to stop there.
MacArthur is perhaps the most famous and strident “complementarian,” i.e., someone who believes men and women were each designed to “shine the spotlight on Christ’s relationship to the church” in ways that the opposite sex cannot. There is considerable nuance to debates on this issue, and some versions of complementarianism are mainstream. However, the more strident form of complementarianism, to which MacArthur subscribes, denies that women can be teachers of the gospel, or even speak at all on spiritual issues, and claims they should serve only in supporting roles in the church. Foes accuse MacArthur of sexism and misogyny, particularly for admonishing Beth Moore, a prominent female Christian speaker, to “go home” rather than continue speaking on biblical ideas, and they relate this directly to MacArthur’s theological beliefs. MacArthur also defied various pandemic-era rules in Los Angeles, preached sermons some have described as racist, and explicitly stated he doesn’t support religious freedom, which he contends “sends people to hell.” Needless to say, this has earned him powerful enemies, both within and without Christian circles.
Thus, Wolfe and Buck’s case is emotionally powerful. Many of MacArthur’s foes do have incentives to see him fail, and some hold ideas that Wolfe and Buck believe in. There is a concerted effort by some to oppose MacArthur and his legacy. Several prominent institutions and individuals Wolfe frequently has significant differences with, theologically and politically, are amplifying this story.
Indeed, Wolfe’s attack on Trump-skeptic writer David French and controversial author Kristin Du Mez, is instructive. Beyond the fact that both tweeted CT’s article with brief comments, they have no obvious connection to the story. However, French, “woke” mobs, and other Christians deemed insufficiently opposed to Black Lives Matter, LGBT, and related cultural issues are frequent targets of MacArthur’s fans.
It could be absolutely true that a “woke mob” is out to get MacArthur and GCC, but that doesn’t mean he’s innocent of the charges leveled at him. The testimony of Cho and many women of MacArthur’s own church confirm this.
The unspoken question in all this is: Do Wolfe, Buck, and other defenders of GCC really believe this is simply a matter of a “woke mob” and that no other information or context is important, or do they know better? It’s hard to know for certain. Cognitive dissonance and motivated reasoning are powerful and can warp the perception of even intelligent, well-meaning people. And maybe these defenders didn’t even read the story, just dismissing the messenger without really realizing what was being communicated.
Perhaps, however, it’s simpler than that. Perhaps GCC’s defenders view MacArthur’s message as so crucial and the threat from the “woke mob” as so existential that the message’s truth or falsity is essentially irrelevant. It matters only that the larger truth is correct: that in the broad scheme of things, GCC and MacArthur are right, and their critics are evil. When the issue is framed this way, it’s very easy to convince yourself that defending GCC and MacArthur is desirable, obligatory even.
The problem with this view is that it is far too charitable—not just toward MacArthur’s own tribe but toward human nature. No man, no group of people, can be so sure that evil is on the other side alone. Our corrupt human nature will naturally lead us to mistakes, and denying that, ironically, denies the very universal truths people like Wolfe and Buck believe themselves to be championing. It is human nature to give the benefit of the doubt to people whom you know deserve it, and it is not smart to ignore critics’ motives, which may not be pure. However, it is also wrong to assume our own motives or the motives of our own tribe are pure, and it is downright foolish to ignore even voices from within our own tribe when they point to serious flaws.
This lesson obviously goes beyond the church. There is an epidemic in our time of refusing to believe bad things about our side, simply because we deem truth too inconvenient or detest our opponents too much. But this is not a foundation on which anything lasting can be built.
“By seeking the counsel of those around us, we learn to get outside of ourselves. It teaches us to see our issues from another perspective… It requires humility to open yourself up to another person, to give another person the opportunity to say something that could potentially change our plans or challenge our pride.” Those are words written by Cho, and, ironically, they seem to be one of his last posts on GCC’s website that was not scrubbed.
Cho’s words are powerful and true, whether or not GCC, MacArthur, and their defenders choose to abide by them.
Comment by Al on February 23, 2023 at 3:49 pm
For those interested in getting into getting a little closer to the issues than this article does, I suggest Protestia.com and Jon Harris’ “Conversations that Matter” on YouTube.
Comment by Jeff on February 25, 2023 at 1:03 am
>> I suggest Protestia.com
From the Protestia.com ABOUT webpage:
“Protestia is polemical news site…”
‘Polemical”. Hey, at least they say so up front! Reader beware. And I say that agreeing with a small bit (but not most) of what they insist… and their “Things We Like” links are even more polemical than the Protestia site itself! Here’s an example (from disntr.com):
“Let’s be clear: Heidi Baker is not a Christian. She is a demonic spirit-filled false prophet who is intent on deceiving people. ”
No, sorry, Heidi Baker has done more for the Kingdom of CHRIST in Africa and elsewhere, than these poseurs will ever DREAM of doing. Unless they repent.
Hint: Very, VERY reformed… very, VERY “that kind of baptist”… very, VERY cessationist.
Again, reader beware!
Blessings,
Jeff
Comment by Pastor Charlotte Barrett on February 25, 2023 at 7:12 pm
As a prophet of God, and a pastor of God, for over 40 years, I find it the most offensive that this man has been allowed to pastor women with the restrictions that he has in his heart and his prejudiced against us, as if he has never read the Bible, and he does not understand the word of God when Paul told the women to be quiet, he was talking about them, talking to their husbands during services that women were to be quiet and obey their spouses But if you look at Paul’s ministry, you’ll find all the women and not one man by the way, that’s important Paul even Timothy had to be reminded to stir up his gifts and to be a man in the church and not a mouse but the women never let go of Paul they carried his letters And financially supported him and Lydia was his administrator or assistant pastor that he left in charge of his entire ministry. What in the world is wrong with MacArthur and why are you all letting him get away with this nonsense women why aren’t you speaking up and standing up the Bible says there’s neither male nor female no bond no free , also Mary Magdalene was the one who discovered the Christ had risen, and she went to tell the men who were hiding upstairs in the upper room that he had risen even as she gave them the word they didn’t believe her and God upbraided them. the Bible says what does it mean to be upbraided , it needs to be told to get your butt out of the chair and your feet off the table and go preach the gospel and do it now and that is the great commission. Somebody better read their Bible and get an understanding and you make out that you need to repent.
Comment by Dan on February 26, 2023 at 5:21 pm
First, Christianity Today is no longer a “centrist” publication. It has leaned more and more towards cultural accommodation. Quite a few in the evangelical world have, in the words of one commentator, purchased indulgences from the cancel culture to validate their virtue, mostly social virtue associated with things like LGBT+ affirmation and the new religion of climate change. What is needed on both sides is a good dose of orthodox Lutheran theology regarding being simultaneously both sinner and saint. That being said, many of the the ills besetting the American Christian scene are the direct result of tolerating all manner of poor theology and outright heresy, all in the name of inclusion, gracious conversation, loving the other, etc. And if all else fails there is always the very real fear of being labeled a MAGA, white Christian nationalist, neo-nazi, LGBT+phobic, racist. BTW, I am not a John MacArther fan!
Comment by Terrence Linden on February 27, 2023 at 1:42 am
Clifford Smith is right on the money in his evaluation of the controversy surrounding John MacArthur.
In view of that, I find it sad that in the course of making that very astute argument, Mr. Smith takes his own gratuitous, pejorative swipe at other unrelated parties when he says, “the more strident form of complementarianism, to which MacArthur subscribes…claims they [women] should serve only in supporting roles in the church.” Thus he condemns the entire worldwide Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and most of the worldwide Anglican Communion (especially in the Global South) as “strident”–since they do not allow women to serve as priests, and only priests can be Bishops or Rectors. All other ministry leadership roles are thus definitionally and logically “supporting roles” in the vast majority of historical world Christianity. Was it necessary for Mr. Smith to snipe at Catholicism, Orthodoxy, and conservative Anglicanism in order to make his case against John MacArthur?
Comment by David Gingrich on February 27, 2023 at 7:15 am
‘Christianity Today (CT)’ long ago stopped being a centrist evangelical publication. It is as woke as they come.
Comment by Thomas on February 27, 2023 at 8:50 am
if “Christianity Today” wants to be taken seriously as an Evangelical pro-life magazine they shouldn`t be giving covers to religious fakes like pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality singer Bono. I`m not a John MacArthur fan either, because he is a religious fundamentalist.
Comment by Sandra Johnson on February 27, 2023 at 11:13 am
I think you buried the lede:
“It could be absolutely true that a “woke mob” is out to get MacArthur and GCC, but that doesn’t mean he’s innocent of the charges leveled at him. The testimony of Cho and many women of MacArthur’s own church confirm this.”
Comment by Carol Tatum on February 27, 2023 at 11:17 am
CT has become non-centrist; how sad. John MacArthur was following orthodox scripture in his actions at the time with the information he had available at that time.
Following traditional scripture in today’s world inevitably results in cultural clashes with those who are less faithful. John MacArthur should be commended for following what the Bible says at all costs, even when doing so caused him to be attacked. As for his detractors, they are minions of the kingdom of darkness. No surprise there that they would want to go after one of the most faithful pastors living in the world today.
Comment by Cliff on February 27, 2023 at 2:28 pm
Carol and Dan:
So, is Hong Cho “less faithful” than John MacArthur? And even assuming he was acting correctly based on the information at he time (I’m skeptical) is it “more faithful” of him to refuse to admit a mistake and make amends *now* when he has the information?
At best, saying so is prizing the letter of the law over the spirit of the law. In my view, Jesus had a lot to say on the topic of prizing the letter over the spirit.
Everyone else in the comments here who is taking swipes at CT are completely making my point. Even if I were to buy your uncharitable descriptions of CT…so what?
Cho, an elder at MacArthur’s own Church has confirmed they quoted him accurately and in context, and his testimony, and the testimony of the women he’s spoken with and their friends, family etc. are incredibly damning.
Terrance:
“Thus he condemns the entire worldwide Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, and most of the worldwide Anglican Communion (especially in the Global South) as “strident”–since they do not allow women to serve as priests, and only priests can be Bishops or Rectors.”
I did not.
First, *I didn’t even say MacArthur’s version was wrong.* I merely pointed out it’s made him enemies. This is undeniable.
Second, Beth Moore was not any of those things you mentioned, yet MacArthur still criticized her. His version of complementarianism is beyond what any of the traditions you mention.
While it is true I am more in the egalitarian camp, to the degree I have a stance at all, I don’t hold a harsh view of different traditions that are graceful, fair and honest. From where I’m standing, MacArthur seems to be none of those things.
Comment by Terrence Linden on February 27, 2023 at 6:18 pm
Mr. Smith’s response is helpful. I am glad it has now been established that there are, in fact, “mainstream” versions of “complementarianism” that do not deserve to be condemned as “strident” even though they hold that women “should serve only in supporting roles in the church.” Thus the transhistorical worldwide majority of Christendom has been potentially exonerated. This is good for Christian charity, among other things. And it is important to remember that Constantinople, and Rome, and (historical) Canterbury were adhering to the catholic distinction between men’s and women’s ministry roles long before anyone dreamt up the word “complementarian.”
Comment by Christy Thomas on March 1, 2023 at 11:22 am
Good heavens! Something on this blog that has labeled every single United Methodist progressive as evil and unredeemable now says that it is possible for an Evangelical to have done something wrong and that maybe the dialogue rules of the day could be problematic? Really? Have you gone woke or something? I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you. How this one got past the JE censors is beyond me. Someone clearly slipped up.