The Patriarch Convention, The Gospel Coalition, and Snap Judgments
When we lack charity, we fail at cultural engagement
Debates have raged within the church over the proper tactics for impacting our culture for Christ. Widespread agreement on this issue is not forthcoming. Nevertheless, one Bible verse in particular has radical implications for Christian influence over culture. In John 13:35, our Lord says, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
As Jesus explicitly says, “all people” will recognize our status as emissaries of God’s kingdom based on one criteria: that we “have love for one another.” Thus, an essential component of our cultural impact is the demonstration of our love for fellow believers.
It is hard to act as an ambassador in a foreign land if that land does not even recognize our ambassadorship. That being the case, a lack of love and charity toward those in the church will sabotage our efforts to engage with those outside the church.
Uncharitable Judgments ≠ Love
Two events I recently witnessed provide a sobering reminder of how often we as a church seem hell-bent on discarding the law of Christ for our own faulty strategies.1
The first event was an online outcry against Pastor Michael Foster for his repeated involvement in the 21 Convention (which includes the Patriarch Convention). Over the years, this annual event has featured speakers who tout their machismo, crassness, and ability to bed countless women. Visitors to the convention’s website are invited to “boost your toxic masculinity by over 500%” and “become the ultimate alpha male” who can “command the attention of beautiful young women with ease.” The site includes a smattering of reactionary, hyper-partisan language.2
Due to the conference’s worldly ethos, online critiques of Pastor Foster have included questioning his legitimacy as a pastor and calling him culpable for promoting an “anti-Christ” message. Those are serious charges—and we will address them in a minute.
The second event I recently witnessed took place in another corner of cyberspace: the online posting of a panel discussion video for The Gospel Coalition, entitled “How to Discuss Sexuality in a Post-Christian Culture,” featuring Brett McCracken, Sam Allberry, and Trevin Wax. What caused an uproar was a pull-quote by Sam Allberry, which was used to promote the video on social media:
We don’t live in a moralistic age where we need to prove people to be sinners. We live in an anxious age where we need to prove to people they’re worth something.
I saw plenty of accusations against Allberry, with words and phrases like “heresy,” “false prophet,” “trash,” and “anti-Gospel.” Those are serious charges—and, like those against Pastor Foster above, they are worth addressing.
Is Michael Foster Really “Anti-Christ”?
It took a little digging, but I found a blog post by Michael Foster addressing the major criticisms of his involvement in the 21 Convention. For example, what does he think of being associated with “salacious speakers and topics”?
[T]here have been speakers [at this conference] that are advocates for BDSM and fornicating with as many women as possible. I’ve called those activities, what they are, sins and perversions. I’ve done so from the stage and in person.
What kind of compromise is needed to gain a platform at this convention?
I was invited to speak in 2020. I agreed on the grounds I could say whatever I want. And the lead guy, Anthony Johnson, said he wouldn’t have it any other way. So I did.
It was an amazing experience both years. Multiple men, some speakers, invited me out to dinner or lunch to talk about Christianity. I laid out the gospel and I did my best to answer their questions. I confront people on the destructiveness of sexual immorality. The receptivity was off the charts. A few became Christians and now attend reformed churches.
But shouldn’t Christians avoid associations with the sexually immoral?
In 1 Corinthians 5:9-10, Paul says, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.” . . . .
I find Chrysostom’s interpretation of this text [including verses 11-13] to be a helpful summary:
“When I command you to shun fornicators, I do not mean all such; otherwise you would require to go in quest of another world; for we must live among thorns so long as we sojourn on earth. This only do I require, that you do not keep company with fornicators, who wish to be regarded as brethren, lest you should seem by your sufferance to approve of their wickedness.”
Not only can we not avoid the sexually immoral of this world but, in a sense, we should pursue them.
Whether or not one agrees with Foster on particulars, one cannot accuse him of being “anti-Christ” without being incredibly uncharitable.
Is Sam Allberry Really “Anti-Gospel”?
A similar situation exists with the Sam Allberry situation. Taken out of its context, his comments are unclear at best (is it promoting self-esteem?) and dangerously inaccurate at worst (is it denying the reality of sin and our need for a savior?).
As Allberry clarified later, “I was talking about an appropriate starting point for our evangelism, ie. beginning with creation and not sin.” Of course, one only need read the quote in context (or watch the original video) to discern Allberry’s true intention. Below is a transcribed (and slightly cleaned up) version of the section in question:
In earlier generations, we were living in more of a moralistic framework. And one of the tasks in evangelism is to try to show people actually, “You’re a sinner.” So all these people who think they’re good people, we’ve got to show them they’re sinners so that they then realize their need for Christ.
And a lot of our evangelism began in Genesis three; we have to begin in Genesis one. We don’t live in a moralistic age where we need to prove people to be sinners, we live in an anxious age, where we need to prove to people they’re worth something. And start with Genesis: start with this high view of humanity, and the unique dignity God gives us as his image bearers, and begin to cast a vision of what it looks like and means to be a human being—that actually, in the light of which our culture’s understanding will then appear very shriveled, and actually dehumanizing.
And as evidenced by the video in its entirety, the panel discussion represents a robustly orthodox position on sexuality, and a clear commitment on the part of its participants to a solidly Scriptural sexual ethic.
Whether or not one agrees with Allberry on particulars, one cannot accuse him of being “anti-Gospel” without being incredibly uncharitable.
Legitimate Concerns
None of this is to say that disagreement with Foster or Allberry is off limits. On the contrary, in fact. In the scenarios above, critics of both Foster and Allberry have legitimate points.
In the case of Michael Foster, it could be argued that he has not sufficiently distanced himself from the politically-charged and reactionary rhetoric of the 21 Convention. If anything, he has leaned into it. For example, one of his previous talks at the conference was entitled “From BASTARD to Patriarch.” And in the marketing for this year’s conference, he has allowed his visage to be featured prominently, with one Photoshopped picture showing his head superimposed over the body of Thanos holding the Infinity Stones, accompanied by the text “Patriarchy is inevitable.”
What’s more, the founder of the 21 Convention, Anthony Johnson, recently tweeted the following (language warning):
I’ve received hundreds of comments over the years that I’m doing “the lord’s work” and that I’m “more Christian than most Christians”.
Because I’m morally righteous to the bone and more virtuous than a bunch of luke warm beta male pussies[.]
If Johnson is to be believed, there are at least hundreds of professing Christians who hold the work of the 21 Convention to be synonymous with “the Lord’s work.” To them, there is no contradiction between orthodox Christianity and 21 Convention because they are basically the same thing. So it’s not completely baseless for Christians to question Foster’s involvement in the event, as it gives the appearance of endorsing a worldly and highly politicized form of masculinity that is foreign to the teaching of Scripture.
Similarly, critics of the wording of Sam Allberry’s quote have valid concerns. As Twitter user Daniel McPhearson put it, Sam Allberry’s position “may misdiagnose our culture. We live in an extremely (even extraordinarily) moralistic age[—]an age that recognizes sin, under some definitions. And it is an age that constantly preaches self-worth. I don’t think, however, it recognizes that sin separates us from God, incurring God’s wrath.” McPhearson makes some good points (which, for the record, is something Allberry himself publicly acknowledged when he Tweeted, “Thanks Daniel. Much helpful food for thought in your response”).
Furthermore, it was the Gospel Coalition’s social media team that selected the pull-quote to promote the video. Of all the segments from the panel discussion, the two sentences they selected were unhelpful and (as is evidenced by the public response) needlessly controversial. Responsibility for the bungled marketing choice lies with them, not with Sam Allberry himself.
Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Religious Right
One might point to the legitimate critiques above and say, “See? Foster and Allberry (and TGC) did do something wrong! In effect, they did this to themselves, and they deserve the pushback they’ve received.”
We are not, however, talking about the legitimacy of criticism. That is not in question. We are talking about hasty and uncharitable judgements. Such an antagonistic posture represents a refusal on the part of Christians to give other professing believers the benefit of the doubt, and to instead assume the worst as a matter of course.
There is no Scriptural caveat that says, “If a person communicates poorly or unwisely, you are then free to exercise snap judgements, assume the worst, and lob accusations of heresy with impunity.” Such rhetoric is akin to that of schoolyard boys who argue, “But he hit me first!”
We can’t say, “I will obey 2 Timothy 2:23-25 only if they obey it as well.” If our obedience to Scripture hinges on whether or not the other party is true or honest or fair or wise, we’re showing that our allegiance is not ultimately to the God of the Scriptures, but rather to our own personal whims.
“They’ll Know we are Christians by our Lack of Love”?
If we are judgmental in our judgments, we will be no better than Job’s friends: operating under an oversimplified, reductionist orthodoxy that rejects fellow believers under false and misguided pretenses. If we insist on biting and devouring one another, we undermine the very purpose of God’s law (see Galatians 5:14-15).
And if we refuse to love others as we ought—in direct opposition to the command of our Lord—it won’t matter how savvy or clever or strategic our cultural engagement is; our efforts will prove to be self-defeating. We cannot transform our culture for Christ (by any legitimate measuring stick) if we insist on warring with ourselves.
I had intended to conclude with some Scriptural solutions, but I’ve gone long enough as it is. I will leave my further exhortations for a separate post.
In the meantime, I highly recommend reading a John Newton letter (entitled “On Controversy”), which includes some wise and practical advice for the person who feels compelled to criticize another for their lack of orthodoxy. (You can download a PDF of the letter here.)
I confess that in both of these events, I was tempted to make my own uncharitable judgments. By the grace of God, I did not succumb to those temptations, choosing rather to investigate both situations more fully.
Examples of such language include the following:
“Dominate your wife, dominate life.”
“Many ‘conservatives’ are little more than beta male puppets and cuckservatives today.”
“You have to be alpha to build great relationships with women, whether it’s for a night or a decade.”
“Common sense…[is] under [an] all out attack by a woke mob of lunatics in pink hats.”
“[U]ndercover feminists and beta male enforcers…want you just manly enough to be a productive work horse, a good beta pig, staying put on the feminist plantation for the ever expanding matriarchy we live in.”
Good stuff, Cap. Just another sad reminder that too many Christians are being discipled by the culture wars instead of the Creator's word.