Take singer Carrie Underwood, a professed Christian, who came out in support of same-sex “marriage,” crediting her faith for her position. In explanation, the songstress told the British press, "Above all, God wanted us to love others,” adding, “It’s not up to me to judge anybody.”
But judge she has, for by her very endorsement of same-sex “marriage,” Underwood made a moral judgment on the practice and its practitioners, as well as a moral insinuation, if not judgment, about its critics.
Regrettably, Carrie Underwood, like most “nonjudgmentalists,” is oblivious to the logical inconsistency. If we are proscribed from judging the wrongness of actions, we are likewise proscribed from judging their rightness. And either way we come down is a judgment on the opposing view.
We can’t not judge
Conformance with the “anti-judgment meme” requires neutrality on all moral matters, but humans are anything but morally neutral. Regardless of our religious or anti-religious sympathies, it is commonly held that a number of things are universally wrong, like cheating, rape, exploitation, and greed, and that a number of others are universally good, such as honesty, fairness, charity, and selflessness.
Furthermore, in a fallen world where virtue and vice exist side-by-side, everyone must judge whom they will trust, what ventures they will pursue, what policies they will support. (You can bet that when Carrie Underwood becomes a parent she will make judgments aplenty, sniffing around for any hint of child abuse, pedophilia, or other behaviors she deems morally questionable in the backgrounds of prospective babysitters.)
The person who can’t or won’t discern truth from falsehood, good from evil, and healthful from harmful is someone destined to be a victim of those who are adept at parading one for the other. Thus, abstaining from moral judgments is not a hallmark of Christian character, but of foolishness.
Rather, the signature of the Spirit-filled life is the ability to make correct judgments to prevent, as St. Paul warns, being taken “captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.” Indeed, Jesus’ advice about “fruit” inspection was to help keep his disciples from falling in with bad teachers and their sophistry.
The popular meme persists, in large measure, by isolating what Jesus says a few verses up -- "Do not judge, or you too will be judged" -- from the rest of the chapter and coupling it with the second half of the Great Commandment.
The reasoning goes something like this: I know that I would be offended if someone pointed out my moral failings, so loving my neighbor as myself means that I shouldn’t point out his. In that way, I can fulfill God’s commandment, escape His judgment, and relieve myself and my neighbor of any awkward moments, to boot. It has undeniable appeal.
For folks bothered by any lingering notion that anybody is qualified to make a judgment about anybody else, there's Jesus’ piercing challenge to a murderous mob of moralizers: “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Yet, there’s his equally piercing instruction to his disciples, “If your brother sins, rebuke him.”
Sounds like Jesus not only expects us to make moral judgments about others but, in fact, has authorized us to do so, as well as to confront them and invoke discipline when necessary. The apostle Paul had some sharp words for a congregation that failed to do just that.
It had come to Paul’s attention that the Corinthian church was ignoring an occasion of sexual immorality in its midst. Scolding the assembly for its moral complacence, Paul ordered the expulsion of the offender, warning, “Don’t you know that a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough?”
Paul’s instruction to turn the man “over to Satan” seems overly harsh and cruel – and certainly not loving -- until he explains, “so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord.” This is the same Paul who told the Galatian believers, “if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently.”
As taught by Jesus and practiced by the early church, moral judgment and church discipline are not about condemning people but restoring them, for their spiritual well-being and that of the Body.
Judging vs. condemning
In the Pharisaical sting operation that nearly led to the stoning of an adulteress, neither the morality of her deed nor the mob’s authority to judge it were at issue. The woman had sinned, plain and simple, a fact acknowledged by Jesus in his parting instruction: “leave your life of sin.”
Had the moral police done likewise, pointing the woman to the path to life, this biblical vignette might never have been recorded. Instead, they condemned her to death, and Jesus called into question their license to do so. Their response -- laying down their stones and walking away – was a reluctant acknowledgement that neither they nor anyone has the authority to condemn.
Condemnation requires more than just knowing when a moral standard has been breached; it requires knowing what is in a person’s mind (what did they know about the standard) and heart (what was their intent), places that no one has access to but God. And although those places were open to Jesus, even He didn’t see fit to condemn the sinful woman.
On the other hand, anyone can judge the morality of an act, knowing only the applicable standard. Applying God’s word, acts that are immoral at all times and circumstances include adultery, murder, slander, idolatry, and fornication (which, contrary to the moral lights of Carrie Underwood, includes same-sex couplings, committed or otherwise).
A Facebooker who was pleased with Underwood’s endorsement made a move -- straight from the social liberals’ playbook -- to silence moral objections by associating opposing viewpoints with hypocrisy. After duly lecturing Christians about sin in the camp, he trotted out Matthew 7:3 (“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?”).
While it is all too true that heterosexual sin is a problem in the church, the moral state of the pew and pulpit has no bearing on the morality of homosexualism and the novel institutions it promotes, or of any other practice for that matter.
What’s more, contrary to popular proof-texts, Jesus never said that one sinner can’t or shouldn’t judge the actions of another. Instead, in the context of Matthew chapter 7, Jesus teaches that we should be attentive to our own “specks,” so that we can “see clearly” (that is, discern readily and rightly) the specks of others and help with the removal process.
People who decline to do so -- particularly, who-am-I-to-judge Christians -- have much to answer for the moral pathologies of the church that they are quick to, uh, judge.
They are like the village physician whose patients are dying off, one by one, for his failure to check for life-threatening conditions he finds too uncomfortable to tell them about or treat. Or the mom whose child has become a tyrant because of momma’s fear that a “no” landing on her budding prodigy’s delicate ears would damage the sense of exceptionalness that she has worked so hard to nurture.
Loving my brother
Love seeks the supreme good for others. Above all, love desires them to become the persons they were created to be: children of God, being transformed in the image of the Son, and enjoying unbroken fellowship with the Son and Father through the presence of the Holy Spirit.
Love means that I am my brother’s keeper, with the duty to observe, question, challenge, and, yes, judge his actions -- not to condemn, but to guide, coach and encourage toward life abundant. To do otherwise is not love but indifference or cowardice.
Carrie Underwood was right: “Above all, God wanted us to love others.” However, we love others not by never having to say they’re sinning, but by helping them with their “specks” and allowing them to help us with ours.
Regis Nicoll is a freelance writer and a BreakPoint Centurion. Serving as a men’s ministry leader and worldview teacher in his community, Regis publishes a free weekly commentary to stimulate thought on current issues from a Christian perspective. To be placed on this free e-mail distribution list, e-mail him at firstname.lastname@example.org.