Like countless pastors who’ve neglected their own children in favor of leading a church, public evangelicals like @albertmohler are now sacrificing younger generations of believers in their effort to influence a culture—
https://twitter.com/albertmohler/status/1322706504131186689
which influence is both beyond the scope of their calling as a ministers of the Gospel and, judging from the utter destruction that their culture war has visited on our public discourse, well beyond their capacity to fruitfully exercise.
I’m particularly troubled by @albertmohler ’s cavalier attempts to minimize his own contradictory public statements by dismissing previous comments as merely "dumb" or careless. Such explanations shouldn’t satisfy his own conscience, let alone the church.
https://twitter.com/albertmohler/status/1320839319683301383?s=20
As this television appearance attests, the previous remarks now dismissed as “just some dumb thing I said” were not recorded surreptitiously at a gathering of trusted friends, or obtained by a hacker who gained access to private emails.
https://twitter.com/JarranSainsbury/status/1322710124373434374?s=20
Nor were these remarks made in a semi-public context like a classroom discussion or faculty meeting—places where a poorly formed thought might be excused as part of reasoning out loud in a group.
@albertmohler isn't guilty of merely holding a false belief, or expressing a questionable proposition to friends or colleagues. He has put forward, in his own assessment, a false moral judgment and commended that judgment to God’s people as a guide for conduct.
Where’s his sense of shame at having misled God’s people? Why should he be trusted now?
It would be one thing if he offered a thoughtful argument explaining why he’s now stating the truth. But he hasn’t done that.
It would be one thing if he offered a thoughtful argument explaining why he’s now stating the truth. But he hasn’t done that.
His current position ultimately comes down to the limits of his own “moral imagination.”
That isn’t an argument, so much as a statement about his own cognition—which, by his own admission, is known to have produced sentiments that are misguided or, in his word, “dumb.”
That isn’t an argument, so much as a statement about his own cognition—which, by his own admission, is known to have produced sentiments that are misguided or, in his word, “dumb.”
The fact that his previous error hasn't occasioned sufficient humility to tame his speech does not inspire confidence in his capacity for prudence. So, at least when it comes to politics, I doubt that his guidance will "stand the test of time." I agree with him on that much.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
