Read on Twitter
I'm so angry (sorry for the previous sarcasm tweet) that I can't begin to think about putting these thoughts into an actual article. But here is a Q&A on the work of abusers after they have been outed.
Q: Can I continue to use the work of this abusive theologian?
A: Perhaps a better question is, "what do I think about the relationship of people to their work?" Are human beings bodies separate from their brains and produce different things? Seems weird. And sus.
A: Perhaps a better question is, "what do I think about the relationship of people to their work?" Are human beings bodies separate from their brains and produce different things? Seems weird. And sus.
Q: But this person's work is so good and it's not reflective of this thing they did
A: Have you checked? Like actually interrogated the work and said "I am going to read this with an eye to someone who thought women's bodies were their property to be abused and deserted."
A: Have you checked? Like actually interrogated the work and said "I am going to read this with an eye to someone who thought women's bodies were their property to be abused and deserted."
My guess is no. And maybe it's a better exercise in general to ask, "what in here do I need to read through the lens of someone committed to anti-oppression? What in here is establishing hierarchies, gender essentialism, suspicion of women's voices, avoids accountability?"
People say "the work is great" but what they mean is "this work has been essential to me and it would be a lot of hard work I don't want to do to get into how THAT thing I'm drawn to is actually embedded in THIS business over here."
Q: Sounds like you think some sins are worse than others. Aren't we all sinners?
A: This is the ground of a whole catastrophic ecosystem of moral nihilism that I don't really get. Like, you can't tell the difference between child abuse and someone having a consensual affair?
A: This is the ground of a whole catastrophic ecosystem of moral nihilism that I don't really get. Like, you can't tell the difference between child abuse and someone having a consensual affair?
Are those really equivalent? That seems like a really tough way to go through life, not being able to morally and ethically distinguish between murder and running a red light. But okay, we're all sinners. So evaluate the work. What do you get?
Q: Okay, I've done that. Still think it's solid
A: So now you have to decide what it is you want out of this. I won't read your work if you use John Howard Yoder. I'm guessing most survivors of abuse will wonder about your discernment unless you specifically talk about the use.
A: So now you have to decide what it is you want out of this. I won't read your work if you use John Howard Yoder. I'm guessing most survivors of abuse will wonder about your discernment unless you specifically talk about the use.
My guess is that 99% of the work that is important to you has some corollary out there in the theological universe. We're not a very original bunch. It may take a little effort but most of the time you don't need that abusive theologian to make your point.
Getting back to what you want - I think there's a longer term issue here. What do you want to normalize as essential? The reason these men get away with abuse for literal decades is because THEY CAN. They believe they are indispensable. We'll get over it because we have no choice
We can't live without them. And they convince their victims of the same. They convince others to cover for them for the same reasons. But if you get along without them, then that creates a culture of expectation and accountability for those in church leadership
Q: SOUNDS LIKE CANCEL CULTURE, PASTOR
A: IDK can you cancel someone who's dead? But let's take your concern for a moment. People aren't the worst thing they've done. But when someone dies, we're not given space for accountability and reparation.
A: IDK can you cancel someone who's dead? But let's take your concern for a moment. People aren't the worst thing they've done. But when someone dies, we're not given space for accountability and reparation.
We don't get access to the sorts of living action that would let us look at this work together and begin to unwind its problems with the offender. Instead, we have books. And books last a long time.
Q: So I guess you'd never read Luther since he's anti-Semitic?
A: This is actually a good example of someone's work that has been rigorously examined by Lutherans. Lutherans are engaged in active and on-going work of evaluation of how to read Luther. That's great.
A: This is actually a good example of someone's work that has been rigorously examined by Lutherans. Lutherans are engaged in active and on-going work of evaluation of how to read Luther. That's great.
Books last a long time. Maybe in 100 years people will look back and think "wow in the 21st century church men were out of control and super hated women. That was the culture of the day. So now we need to go back and keep that in mind as we read."
I'm for it! But you have the living, breathing survivors of Jean Vanier, Bern Wannenwetsch, and Ravi Zacharias walking this planet. Maybe some space to center survivors and to grapple with the heterosexism and patriarchy that led to this moment is a better place to spend time
instead of figuring out how you can continue to have access writers who have made life a living embodiment of hell for thousands of survivors of their abuse.
(Since I'm never going to get the energy to put together my "Instead of Yoder" website, feel free to add your suggestions in your tweets from time to time
My recent discovery was John Bowlin's essay “Barth and Werpehowski on War, Presumption, and Exception,” in Commanding Grace: Studies in Karl Barth's Ethics, ed. Daniel Migliore. Good replacement for "Karl Barth and the Problem of War" #insteadofyoder )
