How Should Christian Leaders Respond to Former Church Members Who Bear False Witness in the Court of Public Opinion? (Part 1)

Last week the growing crescendo of many folks who present themselves as righteous whistleblowers who are exposing an alleged cover-up of evil abuses at Bethlehem Baptist Church and Bethlehem College & Seminary prompted me to offer some guidance concerning how Christian leaders should respond. Then, last Saturday morning, I opened my email box to find notes from no fewer than four scattered friends with a link to a published protracted defamatory assault against me by a former student who took a graduate course with me. That wicked attack not only demanded mindful consideration but also consumed many hours of prayerful deliberation concerning how to respond. Additionally, the vile defamation of my good name both sharpened the clarity of my thinking and invigorated boldness to communicate what I have not yet seen from others more capable and more influential than I.

Then, on Labor Day, I read a wonderful article titled, “When Gossip Is Not,” that explains in which cases one’s speaking on a matter is not a violation of the Ninth Commandment—“You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.” The article initially prompted unmitigated delight through the first four points. It is not gossip when—
• The matter is public record.
• You are seeking counsel about a matter.
• Justice is at stake.
• You are protecting your neighbor’s good name.

Then, I reached the final segment. It is not gossip when—
• You are a whistleblower against evil.

I agree with the category, for surely there are occasions when godliness requires us to blow the whistle against evil. Nevertheless, because I have extensive knowledge that both the author of the article and Julie Roys lack, disappointment settled over me because of two concerns. In fact, after attending Bethlehem Baptist Church for nearly thirty years until May of this year, I have witnessed many crucial decisions and actions that I assessed at the time that were unwise, imprudent, deleterious, improper, or wrong. If situations warranted, particularly if my input might contribute to altering the elders’ decision, I would express my concern. But to deem myself a whistleblower and seek someone to publish any of these assessments as grievances against Bethlehem Baptist Church, of which I was a member, in the Court of Public Opinion would have been wicked, profoundly wicked. When fitting, I have not hesitated to post principled concerns on my blogs but only as principles and beliefs not identifying them with any particular congregation or its leadership.

Thus, my first concern with the article above is this. To illustrate his case concerning whistleblowers, the author of the article links The Roys Report podcast, “where Julie Roys shines a light on abuse in the church.” Thus, the first problem is that, when Roys exposes abuse, she does not always show adequate discernment. For example, her latest podcast—“Is Bethlehem Baptist Church Safe for Abuse Victims”—posted September 1, 2021, features an interview with a woman, who after she was excommunicated from the church for refusing to repent of sin, denounces the church as a haven for male abusers, especially abusers of women. Julie Roys even promotes the woman’s book by offering it to all who donate $25.00 or more to her “Christian journalism ministry.” This imprudence surely contributes to the excommunicated woman’s calcifying of her unrepentant heart.

The second problem concerns the fact that The Roys Report reposted “When Gossip Is Not” from its original site because the article favorably refers readers to her podcasts without expressing any disclaimer or alert concerning the podcast mentioned above or her prejudicial journalism that credulously reports and publishes so-called whistleblowers’ grievances as though they were unquestionably truthful. Given Julie Roys’s journalistic proclivity to expose alleged sins committed especially by and among prominent Evangelicals, she too eagerly seized upon the recent resignations of three pastors from the BBC Downtown location to discredit Bethlehem Baptist Church (BBC) and Bethlehem College & Seminary (BC&S, see here, here, and here). Name-dropping characterizes her journalism. Thus, many names populate her gossip journalism. Consequently, everything that York wrote until his final point should have cautioned him against endorsing The Roys Report. His lack of adequate caution prompts me to alert readers to recognize that his use of The Roys Report podcast as an example of righteous whistleblowing seriously compromises his otherwise excellent article that addresses the sin of bearing false witness.

Another factor also should alarm discerning Christians. Prior to publishing “John Piper’s Successor Latest to Resign as Allegations of Abusive Leadership Mount at Bethlehem Baptist” concerning the multiple resignations of pastors from Bethlehem Baptist Church Downtown, Julie Roys interviewed Kyle J. Howard and featured his commentary on alleged abuse in her report. Also, her fishing expedition on Twitter, requesting individuals to report to her their accounts of abuse at Bethlehem Baptist Church garnered several notable responses which fed her fodder for her two subsequent hit-pieces on BBC and BC&S. Thus, she received Jason Meyer’s resignation letter, a letter by Steven Lee (surely leaked not by him), several leaked private emails, and many accusations of abuse which she reported in her next two articles. Then she published her podcast with the woman who was excommunicated from BBC. Now she has published this podcast, “The Fracturing of Evangelicalism & Bethlehem Baptist Church,” to which she has wrongfully attached three documents that were privately restricted among the BBC Downtown elders and should have remained so confined. It seems readily obvious from whom she received these documents. She also links a sermon that appalled many BBC members, including this one.

What I intended to be one blog entry has now expanded to at least two and perhaps three entries. This initial statement simply sets the context from which my subsequent entries will arise.

Watch for Part 2 next week.