In defense of troublemakers

Last year, a 25-year-old Seattleite named Andrew got a taste of Mark Driscoll’s almost cult-like style of church discipline. Andrew’s story has made the rounds many times since blogger Matthew Paul Turner first shared it. I won’t rehash the details here.

Yesterday, Slate picked up the story, which prompted some to accuse Turner of tarnishing Christianity’s reputation by criticizing Driscoll. The following comment, posted to Turner’s Facebook page, captures the feelings of those who believe it’s wrong for Christians to publicly criticize other Christians:

Way to go Matt. You’ve given those far from God fodder for scoffing at Christ and his bride… hope you are proud.

Matthew Paul Turner loves to poke a stick at the more ridiculous elements of the Christian subculture. From really bad church signs to abstinence bears, he invites us to share an ironic laugh at the expense of the absurd.

But there’s nothing funny about spiritual abuse. So instead of his usual satire, Turner’s criticism of Driscoll is intense, earnest, and, at times, angry.

Which bothers those who think it’s more important to protect Christianity’s reputation among nonbelievers than to call out abuse and injustice in our midst.

But such preservationist instincts never stopped writers of the Bible from criticizing corruption in the early church — loudly, at times. If it’s wrong to engage in public criticism of those who are abusing others in the name of Christ, then we may want to consider making some drastic changes to our Bible. We could start by cutting 1 Corinthians.

Paul lashes out at the church in Corinth for everything from separating into factions to neglecting the poor. His letter is now canonized in sacred scripture, where anyone, Christian or otherwise, can read it. Whether he knew it or not, Paul was airing the Corinthians’ dirty laundry for all to see.

“But they’ll know we are Christians by our love,” some argue. And they’re right. Jesus himself said as much. But if it’s Jesus’ reputation we’re concerned about, then it’s incumbent upon us to speak up when someone abuses people in his name.

Love means standing up for the abused and marginalized, even — and especially — when their abusers profess to follow Christ. Yes, even if that means being labeled a troublemaker.

The world could use more troublemakers like Matthew Paul Turner.

3 thoughts on “In defense of troublemakers

  1. We should also cut out Galatians when Paul gets in Peter’s face in front of the church even. The world is right to hate the church. In my opinion every rock group, TV personality, movie star etc. is right to say Chrisianity taste bad. We have let it be taken over by another gospel, many other gospels and we quitely let it happen. Go trouble makers go! Jeremiah was a trouble maker, Paul was a trouble maker, Jesus was a trouble maker.
    Who to you when all men speak well of you for that is how they treated the false prophets.
    To be a trouble maker in defense of the gospel puts us in good company.

    Like

  2. Anyone who’s come out of spiritual abuse has a responsibility to expose it, rather than keep it as the churches “best kept secret”. I personally have the feeling that God himself is behind this explosive movement, just as Jesus overturned the money changer’s tables, God is overturning the spiritual abusers inside God’s church. After all, it IS His church, and He doesn’t take kindly to seeing his sheep beaten and abused.

    Like

  3. Pingback: Good and bad reasons to criticize Mark Driscoll | Ben Irwin

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s