This is an update to my call for Virtue in the Wasteland to clarify the level of their endorsement of Emily Joy’s views. I posted this article to Facebook with the following caption:
Several things need to be noted at this juncture.
- I want to make it clear that I do not bear any personal animosity toward these gentlemen. They have been gracious to my family, and while we have a given set of disagreements, that number does not rise above the normal baseline for brothers dwelling together in unity, numerically speaking.
- I would like to continue that unity, which inevitably means confronting one another when something threatens it. And even more so when something threatens to do damage to The Body at large through lack of appropriate attention and care.
- As much as I would have liked to let this issue pass without comment, I strongly believe that the act of promoting Emily Joy’s voice without qualification (or, better said, the qualification that we just need to “listen” rather than take notes or offer correction when necessary) needs to be addressed. If my wife’s comments on the original Facebook post promoting the episode had been allowed to stand, no one would have ever heard from me, as I would have considered The Body duly warned (though regrettably not by ViW, who bear chief responsibility for doing so if they are going to share her voice), and moved on. It was their censoring of that appropriate and well-spoken warning that prompted my original comments.
Since it went live, my original post has been shared widely, and Dr. Jeff Mallinson of ViW chose to respond via Twitter. His comment, with a response from my wife, are as follows:
Since I am the one who publicly called for a clarification, I feel the obligation to respond to acknowledge it, now that it has been delivered. Though, frankly, I can’t help but feel that my time would be better spent getting back to my “fun trash” novel for NaNoWriMo.
Ah well, Tom, you asked for this.
Are We Talking Past One Another?
Unfortunately, I feel as though we may both just be missing some key component of one another’s thought process on this. That possibility grieves me to no end. Understanding and being understood seem to be among the chief desires that “make us human.” Falling woefully short of that outcome is worth mourning.
And, truly, it seems to me that the entire Emily Joy episode is one in which the good Drs. are trying to achieve that kind of intimate understanding with a woman who has been “hurt by the church.” Indeed, Emily’s perspective is valuable for what it can teach us about raising our children in the faith, rather than exasperating them straight out of it. On that note, and based on his tweet above, Dr. Mallinson in particular seems to have a very paternal relationship with Emily; one which I hope will bear future fruit as she learns what real unconditional fatherly love looks like, and how it reflects the love of our Father in Heaven.
That being said, in order to foster that same (and longed-for) increase in understanding between all parties, I do need to respond directly to the misapprehensions in the above tweet.
- I am not asking ViW or its parties to “disown” Emily Joy.
I have no business making any kind of requests (much less demands) about their relationship with Emily Joy whatsoever, save to ask for this: that they are careful to provide appropriate qualifiers to their promotion of her message and work.
And this, only because they have a responsibility before their audience to model discernment befitting elders in the faith. In case these two college professors (former, in the case of Dr. van Voohis) have not noticed, much of their listenership is in the under-25 cohort — an impressionable age, to be sure.
This responsibility is magnified insofar as they are not an independent podcast, but represent 1517 and, by proxy, its other various projects. In this way, it’s not just that two kind, welcoming, friendly guys had a sit-down with someone who preaches that “it doesn’t matter to me whether the Church lives or dies” and “the Church in its current form might need to cease to exist” (as well as the repugnant things laid out in my original post on this subject), and put the resultant chat on the interwebs. Rather, it’s that 1517 paid for (in part or in whole) this person to be put before the Christian audience as someone worth listening to, full stop, no qualifiers.
Under these circumstances, making a statement that there are some serious problems here, let the hearer understand and discern, is the least that should be done.
Again, that is not “disowning” a hurting young women; that is doing your due diligence to make sure that the bitterness she carries does not find ready soil in your audience, who likewise trusts you.
- Who is it that is prohibiting “kids” (see, Jeff has indeed noticed what I said above, i.e. that his audience is FULL of youngsters) from “listening to many voices”?
As my wife pointed out: it is Virtue in the Wasteland, who removed her well-intentioned warning from their Facebook post. What can the justification for this possibly be, based on the position taken above, in Jeff’s own words?
I, on the other hand, have ENCOURAGED folks to listen to this ViW episode, with the following words:
“Judge for yourselves on what has been publicly confessed… Sure, even listen to the ViW episode and judge based on the words shared over this past summer…
“But judge. Judge whether Emily Joy would likely confess these words of Christ that sent Satan scurrying.”
I also provided a link to their page so that folks could easily do this.
I also SPECIFICALLY stated, in my closing remarks, that I was not necessarily asking for the retraction of the episode, simply a firm and clear statement to alert their audience to the nature of the hosts’ disagreement(s) with Emily Joy.
I am not the one silencing anyone’s voice.
I am, it is true, questioning the wisdom of listening to just any voice. Even more, I am questioning the wisdom of listening to a voice without a good idea of whom is speaking.
Again, my contention is, and has been, that ViW did not sufficiently provide that information to their audience, nor did they provide any significant caveat to indicate that Emily’s views, when tested against the truth of Scripture, are simply beyond justification.
AND, when a third party provided that context, ViW “prohibited kids from listening” to that voice.
- I am grateful for Jeff’s acknowledgement of disagreement with Emily Joy in the above tweet. I am grateful that he confesses the universal creed of the Church in the form of the Nicene Creed. What’s more, I am grateful that he is committed to mentoring and listening to those who have been “hurt by the church,” such as Emily Joy.
If I may be so bold, I would suggest that such “mentoring and listening” conversations with those who are currently outside the scope of orthodoxy, and consistently and knowingly push an agenda and a message that is in outright contradiction with the plain words of Scripture be kept off-the-record, instead of being released to an impressionable young audience.
Then again, there may be some young ones who need precisely the kind of “mentoring and listening” that these conversations provide, and would be edified by being a fly on the wall for them. In which case I would strongly (and again) encourage a disclaimer beyond “don’t take notes, don’t contradict… just listen.”
That’s up to Dr. Mallinson’s judgement, bearing in mind that we will all ultimately answer for every careless word spoken — and, maybe in some cases, those not spoken.
And, on that note, my time for speaking has run out.
The post Virtue in the Wasteland Responds — and so do I appeared first on The Chi Files.