Esau McCaulley Assumes Police Murdered George Floyd

Dr. Esau McCaulley excerpts his book Reading While Black and writes on a Biblical view of policing in the latest Christianity Today.  He makes some good points, but near the beginning he discredits himself with an inflammatory assumption [Emphasis mine].

The dark silt of that history has been brought to the surface by recent events, most notably the murder of George Floyd at the hands of police. The many protesters who have marched in our nation’s streets bear witness to the fact that Floyd is not the first. Black Americans have been “under the knee” for not days or weeks but centuries, and this cumulative oppression is once again front and center in our national consciousness.

Thus McCaulley, for publication no less, assumes police murdered George Floyd.  He in effect writes that police intentionally killed Floyd; for murder implies intent.  Further, it is not clear just what killed Floyd.  One possibility is that an overdose of fentanyl killed him; the medical examiner’s report states that his blood had a level of that drug that can be lethal.

What makes McCaulley’s assumption worse is that the police involved are to stand trial, for 2^nd degree murder in Derek Chauvin’s case.  McCaulley does not seem to appreciate America much at times, but one good thing about this country is that our courts assume a man is innocent until proven guilty.  And responsible writers and publications usually take measures to respect that.  Newspapers make a point to print “alleged” murderer, or whatever the accusation is, when someone has not yet been convicted.  Both McCaulley and Christianity Today are reckless and irresponsible when they assume the guilt of murder, either legal or ethical guilt, particularly in such an unclear case.  And, yes, it is unclear.  (That police horribly mishandled a difficult situation is clear.  That it was murder is not.)

Further, in the midst of riots, arson, looting, and attacks on the streets, McCaulley’s assumption does not help matters. 

The above is bad enough.  What makes matters even worse is that McCaulley is a cleric in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and should therefore be all the more passionate and careful about truth.  Further he is responsible for recruiting other clergy as head of ACNA’s Next Generation Leadership Initiative.  And now he has been placed on ACNA’s Working Group on Race, Racism, and Racial Reconciliation.

It is difficult to see how McCaulley will be helpful in bringing about racial reconciliation when he so assumes a white policeman is guilty.  And Archbishop Foley Beach has requested restraint from ACNA clergy and that they defer to the Working Group for a season:

Specifically, regarding racial issues, we now have a Provincial Working Group on Race, Racism, and Racial Reconciliation which has begun meeting and who will present their results to the bishops in several months. Until then, it is time to listen and not to pontificate our specific political positions. Let us love our neighbors as ourselves.

McCaulley’s article may not be a technical violation of this request, particularly since he submitted it before the Archbishop’s letter.  But an apology and much more restraint forthwith is appropriate given his importance in ACNA and on the Working Group.

And if I were Christianity Today, I would edit the offending paragraph and fast for reasons both ethical and legal.  To assume in print a man’s guilt of murder in such an unclear case and before he goes to trial is not a trivial matter.

Christianity Today Spreads the Poison of “White Fragility”

At the beginning I will concede one good thing about Ed Stetzer’s introduction to CT’s series on White Fragility: it is a good summary of that book by Robin DiAngelo.

And the book is the usual Cultural Marxist poison, such as: Blacks can’t be racist because they lack power, so reverse racism doesn’t exist; America is founded upon evil; white privilege; “I judge people by the content of their character, not the color of their skin” is racist.  And, of course, like a good Marxist, DiAngelo blames white people if they don’t respond positively to this rubbish.  Such have “white fragility.”

The proper role of a Christian publication if it decides to address such a book is to thoroughly debunk such poison, not promote it.  But not Stetzer and Christianity Today:

Let me encourage you to get the book, [Yes, help DiAngelo make money off her poison! –Ed.] read it, and then we will think it through together in this series.

Now that we are all familiar with the basic premises of DiAngelo’s argument, I am pleased to introduce the other authors who will join us in discussing White Fragility over the next several weeks. As previously mentioned, the second round of authors will be responding to the book and the initial five articles. I am pleased that George Yancey, a contributor for part one, will be contributing to the second round of articles as well.

And as I look over the nine contributors, I notice a number of woke ones.  I notice only one likely to push back against DiAngelo – Neil Shenvi.  (Granted, I am not familiar with every contributor.)

This promotion and what will surely be a stacked discussion of this poisonous book is appalling.  But such is what happens eventually when you have an Evangelical Church of What’s Happening Now eager to be blown about by every wind of doctrine. (Ephesians 4:14)

The Big Smear From The Woke Church and Christianity Today

It is almost a creed with the Woke Church crowd that the founding of America was profoundly racist and that America continues profoundly racist to this day.  The Woke Church smears the church in America as well.  

From the Woke Church, Jemar Tisby being perhaps the most prominent example today, you hear a litany of sins committed against Black people by America and the church, some concocted (particularly in that much they call “racism” is hardly that) or exaggerated, but much of which are indeed awful and to be regretted.   We certainly should not ignore the history of racism in this country nor pretend that we and our forebears are without sin. 

The problem is the following baggage is attached to said accusatory confession:

The blithe ignoring of the almost universal nature of racism in the past.  

Go back 200 years or more.  Will you find any society that was not racist or at least tribal?  Why then is America singled out as peculiarly racist?  And are we to then reject everything good from American and British past and be good totalitarian Taliban and Jacobins and topple it all?

Chronological Hubris. 

As C. S. Lewis well pointed out, we have a tendency to look down on the past and think ourselves so superior to it.  That certainly includes confessing their sins – a species of that favorite LibChurch activity of confessing other people’s sins – while overlooking or downplaying our own.  Those with unenlightened views of race in the past were in the wrong.  But they would be appalled by the prevalent sins of society today and would be right to be appalled.  Every age and society has its prevalent sins, and that includes us.  (No I do not consider white-on-black racism a prevalent sin today, but a dying one.  Anti-white racism on the other hand….)  Should we then smear and reject the good that our forebears have passed down to us because we are so arrogant as to consider their sins worse than ours?  Again, that’s what totalitarians do.

Downplaying progress. 

There has been astounding progress in the area of race in America even in my lifetime and marked by the election of Barack Obama as President of the United States in 2008. . . .   Oh, I hope I didn’t make you faint there.  Yes, I did and do see good in the election of Obama; it made clear that skin color is no longer much of a barrier in America.  At the time, I actually hoped it ushered in a post-racial America.  Sadly, Obama and now the woke crowd decided to pick and tear at old wounds of racial division and make them bleed afresh.  Yes, I think wokeness is a much bigger factor behind today’s divisions than “whiteness.”  If the woke crowd is really that concerned about racism and division in America, they need to take a good long look in the mirror.  We were making very good progress until they came along.

Trust that I could say more.

Oft times, the Woke Church is more Satanic than Christian.  Like Satan, they twist and weaponize history to accuse the brethren while practically ignoring the brethren’s repentance, forgiveness and ongoing sanctification. 

(And, no, I do not think Americans are a whole are being sanctified as American Christians hopefully are.  I certainly do not conflate being an American and being a faithful Christian. But the accusatory pattern of smearing one of the greatest nations the world has ever seen goes hand in hand with smearing the church.)

As many of you perceptive readers have already noticed, Christianity Today has joined the Woke Chorus of accusation.  Like much of the rest of The Evangelical Church of What’s Happening Now, they practically jump up and down and squeak, “Me, too! Me, too!  I’m woke, too!”   An op-ed by CT’s president and CEO Thomas Dalrymple is the latest example.  It is certainly in the Woke Big Smear genre, using very selective and regrettable history (And, again, what country or church does not have regrettable history?) and a warped interpretation of it to smear country and church. I found this passage especially slanderous and vile:

The name of Phalaris is not much remembered in the 21st century, but in classical antiquity it was infamous. The tyrant of Agrigentum on the island of Sicily, Phalaris is known for a gruesome instrument of torture: a hulking bronze bull, hollowed on the inside, set over a fire. As victims were forced into the bull and roasted alive, the nostrils of the bull rendered the screams of the dying into a sonorous groaning that filled the palace with music. You might be a guest at the feast, unaware that your entertainment came through the agony of others.

Today’s generations may say we did not invent the bull of racial injustice. But we have benefited from it. The resiliency, creativity, industry, and indomitable faith of African Americans in spite of all they have suffered is nothing short of miraculous. We have all benefited not only from their labor but also from their innovations and entrepreneurialism, their art and music, their films and poetry and books, their hymns and preaching. The transformation of black suffering into economic abundance for America, as well as art and passion and brilliance, has enriched our feast in the palace. Perhaps we can honestly say we did not know what our brothers and sisters were suffering. Now we do. So there’s only one thing to do: put down our forks and get our brothers and sisters out of the belly of the bull.

It disgusts me to see a once excellent Christian publication be the accuser of the brethren like that. 

Yes, for those concerned about how wokeness has infiltrated the Anglican Church in North America, there are any number of clergy that approve of the Big Smear and at least one diocesan Canon who publicly approves of this article.  I am not mentioning her by name because I do not want to single her out when it is a much wider problem in ACNA and other church bodies.   

The Woke Big Smear must be rejected by both Christians and non-Christians before it further poisons and divides our churches and our country.

About that Christianity Today Editorial…

When I heard of the Christianity Today editorial from Mark Galli calling for President Trump to be removed from office, I almost went incandescent.  But I had just pledged to lay off politics for the end of Advent.  So I deferred on posting here, while promising a “present” after Christmas Day.

Well, it’s after Christmas Day now, but by this time there is so much commentary out there I think it best for me not to add much to it, at least not now.  Many of you have probably heard quite enough about the subject already anyway.

At the same time, I want to point to two responses that are being largely overlooked. First is an open letter response from a number of evangelical leaders.  I am linking to it because although I’ve read about it, the open letter itself is not easy to find . . . because of search engine bias perhaps?  The letter concludes:

The editorial you [i.e. Christianity Today]published, without any meaningful and immediate regard for dissenting points of view, not only supported the entirely-partisan, legally-dubious, and politically-motivated impeachment but went even further, calling for Donald Trump not to be elected again in 2020 when he certainly survives impeachment. 

As one of our signatories said to the press, “I hope Christianity Today will now tell us who they will support for president among the 2020 Democrat field?” 

Your editorial offensively questioned the spiritual integrity and Christian witness of tens-of-millions of believers who take seriously their civic and moral obligations. 

It not only targeted our President; it also targeted those of us who support him, and have supported you. 

The second response is more off the radar screen of most, but it is one of the better rebuttals I’ve seen and merits more attention.  Carol Swain packs a lot into a short op-ed.  She begins by pointing out that Galli is wrong about the facts surrounding the impeachment hearings and wrong in being an “accuser of the brethren.”  But she says so much more.  Do go read her commentary.

I will briefly add that what I find most troubling about this episode is that a number of evangelical leaders not only seem not to have much problem with the perpetual coup against Trump but now are even cheerleading it.  And a few of the cheerleaders are leaders in ACNA. But you really do not want to get me started on that, so I will leave off for now.