Forgiveness or Accountability
Addressing moral failure in a post-truth society
In January of this year, we watched as Pete Hegseth went from having a questionable at best chance of being sworn in to actually becoming the Secretary of Defense. One of the big things that was holding him back was a history of heavy drinking and alleged abusive behavior toward an ex-partner. The question raised was whether or not he was morally able to enforce the military’s code of conduct while he himself was guilty of violating it again and again. Apart from the abuse allegations, he never denied that any of the rest was true, but rather promised to stop drinking if he were sworn in. Apparently this was enough to sway the holdouts because he was sworn in as Secretary of Defense on January 25, 2025.
This was going to be about that.
It was going to be about how, as Christians, and so many of these people who have been elected and placed in roles in our government already claim to be such, are called to be above reproach and avoid even the appearance of evil, with Hegseth being a part of the government apparatus that has this very thing as a part of its ethos, based on Paul’s admonition to the church at Thessalonica.
It was going to be that kind of post.
I did not get around to writing that piece at the time, though. The anger and despair and frustration at the daily news cycle was just too much. It sent me on a downward spiral and escape and fuming internally at the state of things.
Then something happened this week that knocked me out of my stupor.
As I have detailed previously, I went through a rather long period of deconstruction about ten years ago. I am still going through it, though I have begun to pick up pieces here and there and put them back together. Some things that have kept me from just throwing out the whole thing have been the other people and groups who have been dealing with the same struggles at almost the same time, and in the same ways as I have. From Derek Webb and his music speaking to that to Rob Bell’s books that sort of, whether intentionally or not, are capable of guiding someone through those kinds of doubtful journeys to internet communities seeking to expose the hypocrisy in the church, and speak truth to that power. The NEw Evangelicals is one such group.
But this week was not kind to them.
Earlier this week, the regular content from their main creator, Tim, was not posted. Instead, it was a statement from someone on the board of directors talking about allegations made against Tim and missteps that the board had taken in addressing them, all of which was spelled out in a report from an independent investigative organization that looks into allegations of spiritual abuse in religious settings (You can read the full report here). The posts did not really spell out what happened, and were very vague about what they had done wrong in addressing it.
So I read the report. All 94 pages of it. Basically, someone who was working with The New Evangelicals was riding in a vehicle with Tim, who was visibly angry because she had been late, and he rage drove to the worksite and made her feel very uncomfortable. When it was brought up later, he became agitated that she would bring it up and when a mediator was brought in to help resolve the conflict, it was someone close to Tim and they attempted to gaslight her by making it out like she was the problem and was the one who needed to fix it.
Everything they had said over the next couple of days on the platform made it sound like they were implementing the recommendations of the report to rectify the situation. And all of this was being done with what gave the appearance of transparency, and without Tim being at the forefront, he being the face of The New Evangelicals. They opened up the DMs to allow people to reflect and ask more candid questions, and have sometimes made a brief statement about something that they have noticed is a common question that people are asking.
Apparently, one of those questions has been, “Where’s Tim?”
In the film I ♡ Huckabees, Jason Schwartzman plays a young poet (Albert) who leads an environmental organization. His nemesis, Brad (played by Jude Law), is the PR manager of a national retail chain ala Macy’s. At one point, the environmental group agrees to meet with Brad in order to put together a charity concert and Brad takes over the whole thing. When Albert tries to explain what is happening, without Brad present, all anyone can ask is, “Where’s Brad?”
It is very easy for a charismatic leader to take on a role that might be bigger than what they had intended. Or maybe they had those aspirations all along, but they had been unrealized until one day they wake up and realize where they are. They may be seeking to control in order to avoid losing their power and influence. Or they may be guided by the very best of intentions. They may be largely selfless in the fulfilling of their duties. Regardless, they become influential and powerful and, all too often, that kind of power goes right to the head.
As the worn-out adage says, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
Alongside the impact of power on the person with power is also the impact on the people who are influenced by them.
When we follow a leader, we are prone to placing them on a pedestal. We elevate them in an unhealthy manner and begin to see them as being unable to do anything wrong. Case-in-point: MAGA. The way that the MAGA movement esteems Donald Trump borders on cultish. They literally shattered windows and killed cops to get into the United States Capitol and raise a flag in his name. His vulgar speech towards women (“I can grab them by the pussy”) and mocking of a disabled reporter are shrugged off as if they are not signs of moral failing. His lies are rebranded and alternative facts. Nothing he says and does can be wrong.
People were even willing to brush Pete Hegseth’s indiscretions aside in order to advance Donald Trump’s agenda.
And at The New Evangelicals, it looks like many in their following are unwilling to hold Tim Accountable for what he did wrong, even though the investigation seems to have uncovered what amounts to a history of controlling and even misogynistic behaviors. The board comes forward, says they are making some changes, and people keep asking, “Where’s Tim?”
They said he would be back making content soon. They were giving him a bit of time off because they thought that was best. They wanted to hold him accountable since accountability is at the heart of their entire mission. To me, it feels empty. And maybe it will until I hear something in his own words about it. But I am concerned that will feel empty as well.
Because, while road rage and being controlling about your business venture do not rise to the level of sexual abuse scandals, they do point to potential deeper problems within a person, especially when there does not seem to be any genuine feeling of having done anything wrong. That lack of repentance and true desire for reconciliation shows a lack of seeing oneself as being responsible. It is asking for forgiveness when one does not see themselves as being in the wrong.
For some reason, we have created a culture where we can forgive someone or we can hold them accountable. We do not act as though these things can coexist. We have turned forgiveness into an erasure of punishment. We can forgive someone, such as the people who killed Capitol Police, or we can hold them responsible for their actions. But it is not an either/or scenario. Believe it or not, it is possible to forgive someone and also want them held accountable for their actions.
It is possible to forgive someone and hold them accountable.
In Christian theology, when Jesus forgives someone of their sins, it is understood that we could still face the consequences of our actions if our sin was against our fellow people. You can commit a mass shooting on Monday and get saved on Tuesday, but that does not mean you are not going to go to prison.
The only thing a person is spared when their sins are forgiven is permanent judgment. Instead, their punishment is lessened by there only being consequences in this life, but not eternal consequences. You still have to answer for your sins even though you have been forgiven of them.
But to attain that forgiveness, you have to admit your wrongdoing.
We live in a society that no longer values truth. In fact, overall we tend to deride it. Those of us who try to defend it are often met with contempt. Also this week, in my hometown, some kids were getting on the bus in the morning and a car decided to go around the bus at high speed. Not on the left side with the stop sign, but on the right, along the curb where some kids were getting on. They were almost killed. Luckily their mom caught it on their Ring doorbell camera. Intermingled with the comments about what people wanted to do to the person or think should happen to the person who passed the bus like that were people talking about how kids shouldn’t have to walk across the street to get on the bus. Said despite the fact that these kids were not crossing the street at all. When confronted with this fact, which they could see with their own two eyes, continued to say that this was how they felt.
In a world where truth is no longer relevant, we have blurred lines where there should be strong boundaries and have erected boundaries where there should be none. Anymore, we can hold someone accountable for their actions, which means not forgiving them, or we can forgive them, which means they face no consequences for their actions.
Which I guess goes back to what I was going to write all those weeks ago. According to Paul,
Do not treat prophecies with contempt but test them all; hold on to what is good, reject every kind of evil. (1 Thessalonians 5:20–22)
We often interpret the word “prophecy” as someone predicting what is going to happen in the future. While this is often a part of it, prophecy also has a broader connotation of being a divine message. When the prophets of the Old Testament spoke their messages to the Israelites, it also included strong admonitions that spoke truth to power. When Paul calls on this group to, as the King James Version says it, “abstain from all appearance of evil”, he was speaking this truth not only to them, but also directly to their leadership. Because, elsewhere, Paul had been laying out the qualifications for who could lead in the church and he said they needed to be “above reproach”. They should be the kind of person who it is impossible to bring a valid claim against. And here he takes that qualification and applies it to everyone else as well.
But those who lead are, also according to Paul, to be given double honors, which also means they have an even greater responsibility to others to be blameless.
So when they are not, accountability must be handled well and effectively.
I will wait and see what happens in the future before I make my final decision about The New Evangelicals. I believe in their mission and think what they do is vitally important. If they fade into the background, it will not be long before someone else steps in to continue the work. Which would, in itself, be a form of accountability. But even in the face of being held accountable, that does not negate the possibility and necessity of forgiveness.
Because it is not one or the other. We must practice both.
