There are two kinds of sorrow. One is a genuine sorrow over sin, and the other is a trap baited by sin. One turns away from displeasing the Lord while the other wallows in displeasing the Lord.
“For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death” (2 Cor. 7:10, ESV).
One sort of grief or sorrow is fruitful. It leads to salvation and no regrets. The other kind of grief just generates more grief. One kind of sorrow eliminates sorrow, while the other kind goes in for sorrow-farming. One plunges dirty hands into a sink full of hot soapy water, while the other uses the same sink to try bathe a tar baby with vegetable oil. One cleanses, and the other defiles.
But both go under the heading of “grief” or “sorrow.” One kind does the work of repenting while the other does the far more complicated work of not repenting.
And this brings us down to the most convoluted question of political correctness, which is a carnal form of false sorrow. The attempt to govern the masses by shaming them into feeling bad about an ever-increasing list of sins, micro-sins, and then nano-sins, has largely discredited itself. But it has only discredited itself in the eyes of those who have actually seen what has been going on over the last several years. That would not yet include those many millions whose politically correct project has been rejected. Many of them are still in denial. There are many who are still trying to run that play.
Moreover, there are many Christian leaders who are trying to run a faint echo of that same play. The PC directors tell us that we must go gently in any discussion of race, sex, gender, colonialism, wealth, etc. Stop. Check your privilege. The sins of the West are grievous, and have smoked to the sun. Any attempt to preach the gospel must begin with an apology, after which point you must listen to a gaggle of voices telling you that an apology is not good enough, and that no, you can’t preach the gospel yet. Not until true social justice has been ushered in. In other words, you can’t talk about your Jesus until after their Jesus has fixed everything. There are many Christian leaders who think that this is somehow a reasonable demand, and that we must prepare them to listen to the message of Christ by allowing them to continue to preach their argle bargle collection of inchoate resentments.
To ignore these PC decrees of theirs is most offensive. And rule one in modern apologetics is never to offend. Your apologetics must be apologetic. In some defense of this approach, there were many situations that made it all feel plausible. People won’t care how much you know unless they know how much you care. And you show how much you care by nodding at any tomfool thing they might say, right? So it seemed reasonable—but it was never biblical.
But then the revolt came. There are many unbelievers—very much in need of Christ—who are sick of the suffocating fumes generated by the perpetually offended. They would be interested in hearing from Christians who were not such simpering Christians, who were not Christians who just nodded at everything that the insufferable NPR world touted as upright and moral. But such Christians are altogether rare. They are still around, here and there, but they have been largely embargoed by the Christian sensitivity establishment. Treated as dinosaurs and relics, they were actually visionaries ahead of their time, and now nobody knows what to do.
So here it is the new reality in a nutshell, as seen on the Internet:
Shot: “You don’t get to determine what’s offensive to the offended.”
Chaser: “You don’t get to determine whether or not I care if you’re offended.”
Now I take it as a given that every true Christian wants to live a life of repentance. There is no way to follow Christ and not be a penitent. The Lord built a confession of sin into the prayer He taught us regularly to pray (Matt. 6:12). We are instructed to confess our sins to one another (Jas. 5:16). Living in true Christian community means that love covers over a multitude of sins (1 Pet. 4:8). If God were to mark iniquity, then no one could stand (Ps. 130:3). We understand that through the law no flesh will be justified (Rom. 3:20). Honest, true, sincere, and ongoing confession of sin is absolutely necessary. By God it is necessary. Before God it is necessary. And we are not talking about the sins of others, but rather our own sins.
Dealing with sin honestly is a necessity. This is to be done with trusted spiritual advisors, with friends and with family, and with those who are directly affected by our sins. But it is not done for the convenience of those who have successfully weaponized the tactic of demanding apologies. And that refers to the world of the politically correct.
So according to the Bible, the face of sorrow is not the face that the Church is to present to the world. Here is Peter, just a matter of weeks after his blaspheming denials of the Lord Jesus.
“This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus” (Acts 4:11–13).
On the day of Pentecost, why didn’t Peter lift up his voice and say something like this to them? It would have been more seemly, more fitting somehow . . .
“Men of Jerusalem, I really shouldn’t be here right now. I would like to deeply and humbly apologize for my recent misconduct, which has made it difficult for this searching generation to hear anything I might have to say. So I want to begin by recognizing that my behavior has deeply hurt many people . . .”
Not only did Peter not talk that way, he proved his repentance by not talking that way.
“For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake” (2 Cor. 4:5).
Periodically our ministry here in Moscow becomes the drop off center for various accusations and slander, some of the looking pretty gaudy, like the south end of a north bound baboon. Our task, during such times, is to rejoice and be glad, just as Jesus instructed us. When people cannot find enough vile stuff to throw at you, the attitude we are instructed to take up is that of joy and exceeding gladness (Matt. 5:12). When the tumultuous time comes, the goal is not to stay on for eight seconds. The goal, as my son recently put it, is to stay on until the bull pukes.
The Spirit works in His people by giving them boldness (Acts 4:31; Phil. 1:20; 1 Tim. 3:13). God has not given us a spirit of timidity (2 Tim. 1:7). Now this is the kind of boldness that is not only likely to offend, it was designed to offend. God lays the stone in Zion (1 Pet. 2:6), and it is the precious cornerstone. But that same stone, in that same spot, laid there by God, is the stone of stumbling and the rock of offense (1 Pet. 2:8). And people stumble there because they were appointed to.
Someone once joked that an Englishman is the one who, if you step on his foot, will say to you, “I’m sorry?” As a cultural trait, it can be endearing. But a spirit of polite diffidence, when it comes to matters of law and gospel, is entirely alien to the New Testament. And yet, it is the shrinking spirit that pervades the evangelical world today.
At the same time, whether the world wants its Christians to be nonthreatening and winsome, kind of like the puppies in the safe space room at a university near you, or wants its Christians to come barreling out of the wilderness like some uncouth Tishbite, is not the determining factor. What does the Bible require of us?
Yes, we should be winsome. Yes, we should be able to answer gently in the hope that God will give repentance (2 Tim. 2:25). But this is a gentle boldness, not a gentle milquetoastery. It is gentle strength, not the simpering of the chief ministry dude of Pencil Necks for Jesus. And when it is weak, as it often is, it is a weakness that conquers everything (1 Cor. 1:27). The strength of man goes down before the weakness of Christ like grass before the scythe.
So as we prepare for this new year, this year of our Lord 2017, we must be eager to confess our sins as the grace of God requires it, and be prepared to engage the world through being not sorry at all.
> “Men of Jerusalem, I really shouldn’t be here right now. I would like to deeply and humbly apologize for my recent misconduct, which has made it difficult for this searching generation to hear anything I might have to say. So I want to begin by recognizing that my behavior has deeply hurt many people . . .”
Gosh, that’s funny.
On a serious note, this is a great article.
I frequently call myself an unapologetic. However, what is always missing from your posts is justice. This culture war is all about injustice. To ignore the injustice, to pretend as if it is just a bunch of made up stuff is to be in complete denial.
So we rejoice and show our joyousness when child victims of sexual abuse are crying out for justice? Demanding to know, where was my church?
And racism, the real deal, where was my church? The poverty, where was my church?
ME, always missing?
Yes, always missing. “The strength of man goes down before the weakness of Christ like grass before the scythe.” A few days back you were demanding unconditional surrender. People, always as the enemy to be crushed, conquered. Heaven forbid we as the church ever apologize for things like racism, sexual abuse, domestic violence, economic injustice. That’s all just the back end of a baboon, some silly nonsense the secular world is always whining about, mostly just to try to slander us. Does it ever occur to you that the church had a huge hand in creating all the defiance and… Read more »
If every congregation in the world were to proclaim with one voice, “We’re sorry!” I’m not sure that would make a hill of beans worth of difference. Not to the SJWs, who will only be satisfied when their tragedy d’jour is getting the most attention, money, and press. I can’t and shouldn’t apologize for the Inquisition or Salem Witch trials, assuming there was anything wrong with either of those things. I won’t apologize for the Crusades or the Confederate States of America. Even if I could, should, or would, it makes no difference. That was the past. Today is now… Read more »
Ironically, Jilly above seems to get it. I have apologized on behalf of a pastor I don’t even know who raped a nine year old girl. I am so sorry for that woman’s suffering, for the lies and deceit that kept her out of the church for the next 30 years of her life. I have apologized to someone who had suffered years of domestic violence in a church that insisted that was simply her lot in life. I have apologized to young men groomed into homosexuality, yes by members of their church. And the women I’ve apologized for, don’t… Read more »
“Then I heard a loud voice in heaven say: “Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Messiah. For the accuser of our brothers and sisters, who accuses them before our God day and night, has been hurled down.” Revelation 12:10 It is one thing entirely to confess sins of which one is guilty and to plead the blood of Christ over them. It is quite another to submit to guilt heaped upon you for which you have absolutely no control or responsibility. My ancestors enslaved people, raped people,… Read more »
The funny thing is that the vast majority of us had ancestors who were victims of their own regimes and who had almost no ability to affect the wrongs those regimes were committing against other people. When the British Empire was participating in the international slave trade, my own British ancestors were at least 100 hundred years away from getting the vote. At the Berlin Conference that divided up Africa’s resources among the European powers, any ancestor of mine would have been there only to take out the trash and sweep the floors. Unless we have personal, direct complicity, we… Read more »
Hey Memi! Happy New Year! You know I am an old saw for The Word of God, it’s always better than yours and mine. See below for what Jesus says re: “peace”. As far as interpersonal peaceful means go, to achieve interpersonal peaceful ends, that’s good if you can get it, but such does not preclude a righteous fight, to achieve righteous peace, and righteous peace is the only kind of peace there is. Also, don’t forget that while we are all innocent of some sins, we are all guilty of others. Perhaps part of what Wilson reiterates is that,… Read more »
What are your feelings about Father Coughlin?
I just discovered that not only was he Canadian, he was born in the very same Canadian city that I was! How can I live down the shame?
A. You are female, and not accountable for things men do!
B. You are American now!
C’mon Jilly! Identity politics / identity absolution! ????
(Oh! And don’t you have high cheekbones Jilly? That might make you an indigenous person, and thus as perfect as Elizebeth Warren!????, I mean Fauxcahontas!)
As far as I can tell he’s was best thing about Roman Catholicism since Chesterton. What’s not to like? (I brought him up since ME mentioned “social justice” and the church.)
I spent only about three minutes on a trad-youth website, but it was enough to make me understand why you would like him! I immediately encountered a statement that genuine Catholicism can flourish only in a monarchical or fascist state! I would have preferred “feudal” or “authoritarian” to fascist, but it was their choice of word.
What you described above is not justice. The sin of one man does affect many, but that one man is the one who has to be dealt with to restore order to the many. Curious, do often find yourself confessing the sins of Eve or Adam? Are you vocal on other blogs calling every black man to apologize for sins of the black community? Where does it stop?
“What you described above is not justice.”
Well, justice is actually redemption, reconciliation, and healing. And, “as you have been given, freely give.” So, whatever serves to bring about healing and reconciliation, serves the goal of justice.
Jesus Christ died a brutal death for me, for the cause of justice, so it seems as if I am hardly in a position to complain about simply apologizing to people for whatever sins they may have experienced in the world.
No, not “whatever”, cuz “whatever” does not actually heal. Cain’s “whatever” sacrifice was actually sin.
To apologize is to express empathy and compassion for the suffering of others. To say, “I don’t care about your struggles because I didn’t cause any of them” is the wrong answer.
I am sorry. I am sorry Jesus Christ suffered on the cross for the sins of the world. “Ain’t my problem, I didn’t cause it,” is the wrong answer.
Perhaps saying “I’m sorry” is a way to express empathy and compassion, and sometimes that is sufficient to make someone understand that they are not along and others do, in fact, care about them. But that has nothing to do with justice. Justice actually has much to do with giving someone what they deserve, assuring that the crime does not go unpunished and, if possible, that the damage is restored. This might be why long, vociferous rounds of male White Anglo-Saxon Protestant apologies for being not female, black, African, and secular never really help anything. When you are dealing one-on-one… Read more »
“I’m sorry” is just the wrong word. “it hurts me to hear about your pain” or something else might be more appropriate.
Agreed, Steve. ME is frustrated that “no one on these blogs understands what she’s saying” even though “we claim to be following Christ.” Strong words. I was actually trying to reach some kind of understanding amidst the confusing language, grant her that a gentle approach might help, and then in that same mode of gentleness suggest some clearer thought.
True that
Why are you sorry that Jesus died for and suffered for the sins of the world? That’s the best thing ever. I’m even more confused now. I do like what you wrote about empathy and compassion, I just don’t understand why you are apologizing. Jesus didn’t say he was “sorry” to people.
I am sorry the most of all that there are so many on this blog claiming to be following Jesus Christ who cannot even understand what I am saying.
I think it’s super cool that you have compassion for hurting people. Perhaps we just have a symantic disagreement. I have certainly said that “I am sorry for your pain” to people too. I think the major issue is that Christ alone can only take anyone’s sin burden on, and this is why we NEED Him. Those who reject Christ, even those who have been sinned against by the church, have no where to go. You or I cannot do more than Christ. We also cannot pay for the sins of others or even for our own sins. The world… Read more »
“To apologize is to express empathy and compassion for the suffering of others.” Umm, not in my dictionary. You can empathize without apologizing. I think this is why the social justice people are all confused, their definitions are wrong. I’m not sure what your vague, generic apology about Christ’s suffering is actually accomplishing?? Justice can only come when men, all men submit to Christ. We do not bring justice by apologizing to people for third party sins.
Sometimes I think men and women use “I’m sorry” differently, and I have often noticed that women find it easier to apologize than men do. I think that when men apologize, they mean it as “I am sorry that I did X to you and made you miserable.” Often women mean it as “I’m sorry that ABC did X to you, and that you have had to deal with this pain.” When guys I knew would get into quarrels and I would advise them just to apologize, it was a much bigger deal for them than it is for women.… Read more »
Sorry is defined in the dictionary as “feeling sorrow or regret.” It has nothing to do with who is to blame. We are sorry someone’s grandma died. That doesn’t indicate that we are the ones who killed her. Godly sorrow is closely entwined with justice. If you want all men to submit to Christ, they must be capable of feeling sorrow over the human condition and empathizing with those who suffer. Listening to you I imagine going to the foot of the cross with a contract and a list of exemptions. “Lord, read the fine print in section 2:3, it… Read more »
You won’t find that in the Bible.
I believe it’s actually called the gospel, also known as the entire message of the cross. Jesus actually died for our sins, so we could be reconciled with God.
…. yes. The gospel is a message of redemption, reconciliation, and healing — because Jesus satisfied the requirements of justice.
As we saw in August, you seem to have no concept of what guilt, innocence, and justice actually are.
Justice is receiving exactly what one has earned by one’s deeds. As it is written, “the wages of sin is death”. Missing the mark for which one is supposed to be shooting is the deed by which one earns death. At what mark is one supposed to be shooting? Why, nothing less than the Glory of God. As it is written, “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Therefore, we have all earned death. It would be justice if God were to kill us all now. We committed great injustice when we killed the only innocent… Read more »
If we cannot equate reconciliation and mercy with justice, than we have missed the entire message of the cross.
This is neither a biblical nor reasonable usage of those terms.
Wrote you a whole post, ashv.
https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2017/01/04/riding-puking-bulls-at-the-alamo/
Do you believe Hell is a real place?
Reconciliation and mercy are associated with justice through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, but the concepts cannot be “equated”. They are not the same and it is foolish to pretend that they are.
In Jesus Christ we have received our justice, in the form of mercy and reconciliation. Such things are only foolishness to those who are perishing.
Phrased that way your meaning is clear. Thank you for clarifying.
It also means that your usage of Justice, Mercy, and Reconciliation, are not applicable outside the context of Christ’s redemption of man.
And the cries for social justice are far, far outside any kind of redemption.
“And the cries for social justice are far, far outside any kind of redemption.”
Here’s a post I wrote about social justice.
https://insanitybytes2.wordpress.com/2017/01/08/two-worlds/
I think there is one area where real remorse is due, and I find myself thinking about this with a lot of self-reproach. We all ridicule the snowflakes with their coloring books and teddy bears, and their extremely lopsided views on justice. But I created my own special snowflake. I expect that most people on this board did far better than I did in being a good parent, but I also believe that there is an entire generation of us out there who could have been hired at Disneyland to produce synthetic snowflakes for the annual Christmas parade. Who gave… Read more »
Acknowledging a fault in an actual relationship is way different from apologising for things you didn’t do to people who you’ve never met.
That is very true, but a vivid imagination can always discover an actual fault.
Keep digging, sweetie.
Repent if guilty, make restitution if you owe it (IF), yeah. If not guilty, tell the truth: not guilty. Churches make mistakes and have sins to repent of and forsake, e.g. teaching people to sit down and shut up instead of showing mutual love, as if listening to the one prophet of the lonely allah instead of taking council with triune Jehovah. (Read Jim Rutz’s “The Open Church,” and be free to correct its mistakes along with correcting pupitcentric ones.)
“Does it ever occur to you that the church had a huge hand in creating all the defiance and rebellion we see around us?”
Yeah, you really should get out of the church. Or start apologizing to the world for being in it.
I think that sometimes legal liability questions get in the way of apologies that really are necessary. There are Catholic parishes which would, I expect, have apologized except for lawyers ordering them not to. And, undoubtedly, there were sexual abuse victims who would not have sued a beloved church if only somebody had recognized their pain and apologized.
You can’t apologize for something you didn’t do. I will never apologize for a church forcing kids to watch the entire “A Theif in the Night” movie series. Why? Cuz I didn’t force anyone to do it. When you make innocent parties confess, you thwart justice. Empathize, sympathize, share a tissue, but don’t apologize. Once you start you will never be forgiven
I think that the British/Canadian apology reflex is misunderstood, and that when it is understood properly, it is not contrary to the spirit of the Gospel. When I apologize to you when you step on my foot, it is not giving away the store. It is simply recognizing our mutual humanity, and indicating a minimal level of caring for other people’s feelings–however silly or exaggerated we may think those feelings are. And, of course, when there has been genuine, undeniable injustice, apologizing for it–or at least recognizing it as a stumbling block to–is a first step in making anyone see… Read more »
All true, jilly. Yet, it is quite different to express sympathy by saying “I’m sorry for any part I played in increasing your pain” and, as we are required by the SJWs to say, “I apologize for all the pain your ancestors experienced 200 years ago.” The latter is wholly disconnected to reality. Hanging onto the pains of past generations is called harboring a grudge. It’s why the Sunnis and Shiites are still killing each other; it’s why the Hatfields and McCoys can’t get along. It’s stupid. I must take personal responsibility for another person’s pain when I have (or… Read more »
Very true! But, if you let me know where your ancestors came from, as a good Canadian, I will apologize for any part that mine might have played in oppressing them. On the other hand, my ancestors were mostly Cedric the Swineherd and Julia the Shepherdess, so I don’t know how much oppressing they managed to get done!
Original sin Jilly. If they were European you can take it for granted they were oppressors, and you by imputed sin share in their guilt. Do you think “Oh, my people were but humble folk” absolves you? No! That just indicates you are in denial of your own inherited oppressor nature.
The British used to say, “Might as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb.” On that basis, I should be grateful to the few genuine scoundrels among my humble ancestry who at least can have me sadly shaking my head. Is luring ships onto the rocks in order to steal their cargo of whiskey count as pure villainy or as civil disobedience against the excise agents?
Well, whatever else they were they obviously weren’t Baptists. :)
No kidding! But, oddly, there was an offshoot of the family who belonged to some group called the Bible Christians. When I learned that my great-uncle’s name was Ebeneezer, I assumed that was why. But it turned out that my great-grandfather made a drunken bet with a friend that the first son either of them produced would be called Ebeneezer. Family history is very disappointing!
Bethyada, perhaps we are distant relatives. After a couple of the Dorset Wreckers from Langton Herring got executed for their felonious activities, the rest took off for New Zealand. A DNA test showed that my family is directly connected to their descendants. (Not that I am suggesting that any ancestor of yours could do anything quite so wicked.)
It seems like this paragraph covers it pretty well:
“Someone once joked that an Englishman is the one who, if you step on his foot, will say to you, “I’m sorry?” As a cultural trait, it can be endearing. But a spirit of polite diffidence, when it comes to matters of law and gospel, is entirely alien to the New Testament. And yet, it is the shrinking spirit that pervades the evangelical world today.”
I do understand that. But my point was, does it have to indicate polite diffidence and a shrinking spirit? Or can it reflect an urgent, though understated, concern for everyone’s welfare, and for recognizing that this person, like you, is someone made in the image of God and whom our actions can affect for good or evil? Is proclaiming the law any less fearless because a priest, for example, says “What you went through at the hands of Father Shenanigans was terrible, and our hearts bleed for you. But, nonetheless, you must continue to do your duty and you cannot… Read more »
I took it that the shrinking he was referring to was shrinking when it occurs, not that all willingness to express sorrow was shrinking. I understand your concern — don’t crush the idea of expressing appropriate sorrow for what others have suffered. He’s addressing another, and at least equally pressing concern — don’t blur issues of justice and right and wrong by making the expression of sorrow the first, or central, concern in dealing with others who have their own repenting to do. Your concern is not misplaced in every situation, nor is it appropriate in every situation. And same… Read more »
“Blind spot”?
Hey! Repent! Umm,…for something! ; – )
Matthew 9 9 Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2 Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, “Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven.” 3 At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, “This fellow is blaspheming!” 4 Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, “Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5 Which is easier: to say, ‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Get up and walk’? 6 But I want you… Read more »
I think the parts of scripture that tell us that the gospel is offensive and that we should tell it anyway are there to en-courage people like me who naturally shy away from all conflict and desire to make everyone happy.
Heaven knows, I know that feeling!
Paragraph “Periodically our ministry…”, 2nd line, should “some of the” be “some of them”?
The SJW demands for apologies or privilege checking are simply sophisticated methods of boxing out the gospel and not repenting of their own sins.
Christians who bow to this nonsense are more interested in popularity than effecting the gospel in our secular world.
“Christians who bow to this nonsense are more interested in popularity than effecting the gospel in our secular world.”
These types have “sugar and shade” confused with “Salt and Light”. !
And when we give in to their demands to apologize, we end up joining them in condemning “those dumb Christians.” Because nothing shows how non-judgmental you are than joining them in who they condemn, or how loving you are as spewing hatred for those old-fashioned Christians who weren’t as enlightened as us.
Very appropriate, timely, and inspiring. My favorite quote: “One kind does the work of repenting while the other does the far more complicated work of not repenting.” That right there is gold.