The Latest church of Christ Issue

A few leftover thoughts

Last week, the brotherhood police in the churches of Christ were at it again as Terrance Brownlow-Dindy of the Texas School of Preaching took aim at Todd Clippard over the issue of alcohol. This time, he was joined by Don Blackwell of GBN in a joint public confrontation.

Todd wrote a well done piece laying out his position, but the damage has already been done. More fractures have been caused, more reputational damage has been done. Why? Because that’s what they do.

I commented on it on my Facebook account to say:

It’s time the rest of us band together and tell the dividers and the slanderers, “Enough.”

The responses to that have given me a few angles that I believe need a little bit more examination.

The confrontation needs to be public

I have seen many comments and posts decrying the division going on and the public nature of the confrontation.

I’m sorry, but some of you are going to need to develop the stomach for this kind of thing, at least for a little while.

Until you do, the brotherhood police’s tactics are going to keep working. They publicly blast people, start gossip backchannels, destroy reputations, put faithful people’s livelihoods and ministries at risk, and sever friend and family relationships.

And the only reason it works is because everybody in the middle wants to privately shake their heads about how unfortunate it all is, but never actually name names and take a stand.

The ivory tower lectureship set won’t risk their seats. Others will cancel speaking invitations and quietly distance themselves from good guys like Todd, even if they don’t disagree with him or don’t think it matters that much. They do this because that’s just way easier than dealing with the discomfort of pushing back.

This is simple stuff. It’s The Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven, A Bug’s Life, and all those movies about the many realizing they don’t have to keep getting stepped on by the few. But the only way that happens is if the many start talking about it.

When Paul opposed Peter to his face “in the presence of all” (Galatians 2:11-14), I’m sure there were people in the room who thought Paul was way out of line for causing a scene.

But Paul didn’t walk in there and take the Gentiles aside and go, “Wow, what a bummer that those guys are treating you that way. Sorry that happened to you, brothers.” No, he did the right thing and publicly called out the problem. Hundreds of millions of people know about Peter’s sin because Paul confronted it and then wrote the encounter down. Sometimes that’s needed.

“There goes Jack, thinking he’s Paul,” somebody might respond. No, I’m not an inspired apostle. But does this not set a precedent for publicly calling out men in leadership who are causing division in the church?

“It makes the church look bad”

This has been one of the common claims, that airing our dirty laundry publicly is a hindrance to the church’s image. I understand the point, but I disagree. Many outsiders think we’re exactly the kind of church Terrance wants us to be—constantly purity-spiraling, devouring each other, preaching everybody but a tiny circle of people into hell.

Publicly pushing back and saying “We’re going to be a movement that gives each other some grace, and we’re not going to be the kind of movement that allows bad faith actors to fracture us over every tiny detail” is, in my view, a good thing for the church.

If you were an outsider, which would you want to be part of:

A church that sits by while anybody who disagrees on the long-debated issue of alcohol undergoes public reputational death?

Or, a church that polices itself whenever somebody attempts to do that?

The first is what we’ve been doing. The second is what we’re attempting. You tell me which one has more appeal?

A bad incentive structure

Consider the incentive structure in place when rooting out “false teachers” is a path to the top and a way to establish oneself as a “faithful brother” and “defender of the Gospel.”

Why else do you think we see the same guys repeatedly popping up in comment sections labeling everybody and their dog a false teacher? Because this is what “good preachers” do in this approach to Christianity.

What’s worse, is you see young guys coming up who immediately start taking aim at “false teachers” in ministry as a way to prove their mettle. A while back I got a private message from somebody I don’t know and have never met asking me my position on the New Heaven and New Earth doctrine. No intro, just a doctrinal grilling.

And, wouldn’t you know it, he’s labeled me a false teacher to mark and avoid. Sadly, many of us have this exact kind of encounter we can share. That’s what this rotten version of Christianity produces. Test the fruit.

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves” (Matthew 23:15).

(Lest the accusation get turned around… I’m not trying to climb the ladder here because 1) I’m not on it and never have been, and 2) If I was aiming to get on the ladder, writing this piece is the dumbest thing I could possibly do.)

False teachers, you say?

While we’re on the topic of the “false teacher” label… the casualness with which that term gets thrown around is downright shocking. These guys use it to mean some combination of “person who disagrees with me” and “person who is wrong about anything in the Bible.”

That is not the Biblical meaning of the term. In 2 Peter 2:1-3, false teachers are described as sensual, greedy men who are bringing swift destruction on themselves. Galatians 1:9 says anyone who teaches a contrary Gospel (as they often accuse us of doing) is accursed. In Matthew 7:15-20, they are called ravenous wolves who will be known by their fruits.

Yet in the hit piece against Todd Clippard, they repeatedly refer to him as a brother. In my comments, I’ve been called a false teacher and brother by the same person at the same time. Sorry, you’re going to have to pick one. False teachers are not your brothers.

They will use “mark and avoid” in Romans 16:17 and not keep reading into 16:18, where the men they are to mark and avoid are called slaves of their own appetites and NOT slaves of Christ.

This, once again, is the cowardly disfellowship of the brotherhood police.

If somebody advocated we put a pride flag out front, throw a rock band on stage, and have a lesbian pastor take over the church, they wouldn’t be calling the guy who suggested it “brother.” None of us would.

But this way they can have their cake and eat it too. They can be the staunch defenders of “TRUTH” without actually siloing themselves off from everybody who dares disagree with them on anything. And, they get to cast themselves as loving by still sprinkling the term “brother” in there.

The Cowardly Disfellowship of the Brotherhood Police

What they don’t realize is, by their standard of measure it will be measured to them (Matthew 7:2). If doctrinal perfection is your standard of fellowship and faithfulness, you had better not be wrong about a single jot of the Scriptures.

But, that’s what leads to their refusal to entertain even the slightest discussion about allowing for matters of opinion or agreeing to disagree, because it would bring their whole system crashing down. The vicious cycle rolls on.

We don’t have to keep putting up with this

I maintain that we need as many of us as possible calling these tactics out, praying for repentance, and refusing to let ourselves be divided by these games. And, I maintain that, as unfortunate as it is, we need to have the stomach for confrontation until it stops.

A lot of people have disagreed, and you’re free to do that. But as I always say, saying “I don’t like that” isn’t a solution. Tell me how we’re going to put a stop to the bullying and brotherhood policing.

I’m open to a better way if you have one, but until I see one, I maintain we all need to speak up and say “Enough is enough.”