When talking to a fellow who bemoaned how bad his employer was (not Biola), I asked if he was going to let the boss know or going to resign . . . but it appeared he had no such intention. It wasn’t that he was looking and had to keep his job in the short term. He was content to keep doing something and supporting a thing he loathed merely for money.
This man risks losing his soul and gaining a cubicle.
We should always follow the Logos where it leads. If the argument leads to a position, one hopes for the courage to do the hard thing, be honest, and love our ideals more than gold.
There is an admirable courage in men who follow arguments into ideas that threaten their jobs. One can disagree with the position taken, but when they are open about what they believe and risk their living they are not cowards.
These true lovers of wisdom may have embraced folly for the moment, but if they persist I have confidence that God will come to their aid. All of us should carefully listen to their testimony and to their arguments, because they have given up much to believe.
It is a brave man who has earned his bread in Republican politics, but decides his conscience means he must leave and become a Democrat with fewer prospects.
It is a brave woman who is a famous secularist and then must proclaim that she has decided God exists and lose her cachet.
Of course, sometimes the “switch” can lead to further or enhanced prospects and then the situation is more clouded, but I have known brave men and women who have changed their minds, been public about it (though not venomous), and sacrificed much their health, their career, and their wealth.
God bless them and may I, in this one sense, be like them.
What nobody should tolerate, however, is the wicked weasel, the moral coward, who changes his or her mind, but tells nobody and keeps collecting checks from people’s whose views he no longer shares. Even worse is when, finally, after much patience he is let go for his new views and then plays the martyr.
Peter was not a martyr because Nero refused to give him bread and circuses.
Imagine the pastor in a conservative church who thinks Evangelicalism is “crap,” but bites his tongue around the congregation, because he might lose his job. Picture a leader at a Baptist church who thinks young earth creationism is stupid, but does not tell his young earth senior pastor. Imagine the Christian college professor who opposes a big part of the mission of his school and loathes the opinions of most of the parents of his students, but only shares his disdain with his select minions and keeps collecting a check.
These people lack courage in their convictions.
There is nothing wrong with open dissent that cares risk. Open dialog is to be commended, but can we have an end to people who loath Evangelicals while taking their money?
Can we have an end to pastors who feel superior and smarter than the people whose checks pay for their condescension?
If you think the creed at your Evangelical college is hog wash, fight to change it and accept the consequences.
If you think certain Evangelicals are a bunch of sad SOBs, let the SOBs know it and don’t take their money.
If you mock your pastor-boss to your friends, let him know how you feel and stop working for him.
If you feel superior to the subculture you serve, tell them your point of view and see if they still want to pay you.
Many people will be shocked to discover that their community is more broadminded than they believe. I have known men and women who felt uncomfortable when they discovered that an open expression of their “edgy” views was not getting them fired. “What if,” they seem to fear, “I am actually the sort of person who can work at a Christian ministry?”
This is not an issue for only one group. Nobody should take a person’s money while secretly smearing their name. You don’t eat bread with the enemy, act the friend, and stab your host in the back.
Even the Homeric pagans knew that much . . . and Christians should as well.
Can anyone defend the cowards who demand payment from those they despise?