MacArthur on Social Justice - Part Two

Despite recently posting a few thoughts, mingled with concerns, upon the first in John MacArthur’s series on social justice, I was not fully committed to interacting with the entirety of the series. I was hoping against hope that an elder statesmen of broadly reformed evangelicalism would bring balance to a discussion that has taken, contra the modern Red Scare language of the loudest voices, a hard right turn. Recent months have seen a slew of inaccurate, obsessive, and at times somewhat unhinged commentary unloaded by people who should know better, bizarrely arguing against social justice and racial reconciliation proponents. At first I thought they may have just misunderstood, thereby missing the point and responding out of ignorance - it can happen to anyone. Now I am not so certain. In any case, the skies of racial reconciliation are dark with the smoke of burning straw men. Unfortunately, to my disappointment, this series is making the skies even darker.

So with little enthusiasm, but a sense of burden, I have decided to do as an older pastor requested after my first article, and interact with the series. I am slightly behind, but shall take each piece one by one. 

After the introductory article, MacArthur wrote in two parts on “The Long Struggle to Preserve the Gospel”. In another context such a title would be completely unproblematic, but in a series that from the outset has seemed poised to critique church-based social justice, particularly the racial reconciliation movement, it seems to juxtapose the gospel with necessary components to and out-workings of the gospel. The proof is in the pudding though, and the contents of the articles illuminate the meaning of the title. 

The main point of the first of these two parts is to demonstrate, as MacArthur writes, “The most damaging attacks on gospel principles tend to come in relentless waves and not mainly from secular skeptics and contentious unbelievers, but almost routinely from within the church—and from all sides.” 

The article essentially constitutes a brief survey of some of these waves, the books MacArthur wrote in response to them, and the many criticisms he has weathered. This should not be, he tells us, understood as self-promotion but as a synopsis of major conflicts over the course of many years of faithful ministry. The controversies and his responses to them are meant to establish his credentials as someone who knows and loves God’s word and is committed to upholding it above all else. Though doubtless there will be haters, I think by and large he succeeds at this. There are reasons why, regardless of any disagreements people might have with MacArthur, he is held in high regard by a wide variety of people around the world, across the evangelical spectrum: the article gives some of those reasons. 

It is odd then to read at the conclusion of the first part of his article, a promise to in the next article give “an explanation of what the current evangelical obsession with “social justice” has in common with all of those other issues.” 

Note, MacArthur identifies his target as “evangelicals”. Though “evangelical” is a word often applied so widely as to be unhelpful as a descriptor, I am quite sure he does not have the likes of Nadia Bolz-Weber, Rachel Held Evans, William Barber, and Ryan Meeks in mind. But in the context of racial reconciliation dialogues, I don’t see how even mega-church pastors on the fringes of so called-evangelicalism could be in view. After all, those who have been most outspoken on the subject of racial reconciliation are theologically conservative, uphold the authority of Scripture, proclaim the Lordship of Christ and necessary power of the Spirit for holiness and gifting, gravitate towards a Reformational if not fully Reformed soteriology, and have a consistent track record of consistent, Christ-centred ministry in their preaching, church life, and writings. MacArthur writes off the concerns (not as he says just “current”, but expressed over many years) they have raised and critiques they have made about evangelicals, racial reconciliation, and wider justice issues as  “obsession”. He goes further, comparing their pleas for admission, awareness, confession, and repentance, and their biblically shaped suggested paths forward, with previous attacks on Scripture and the gospel - particularly denials of the authority and sufficiency of God’s word and the Lordship of Christ. This bizarre comparison is ironic and sad coming from a man often maligned himself for being obsessive in his critiques to assaults on the gospel; if any one is paying attention, racial reconciliation advocates believe current attitudes, tendencies, and divisions represent just that - an assault on the gospel, very in keeping with the spirit of the age and the blowing winds of culture. In an odd roundabout way then, MacArthur finds himself on the opposite side of men and women seeking to preserve the gospel whilst himself claiming to preserve the gospel. My mind boggles at the frustrating weirdness of it all. 

MacArthur makes the astounding and unsubstantiated remark that “much of the rhetoric about this latest issue poses a more imminent and dangerous threat to the clarity and centrality of the gospel than any other recent controversy evangelicals have engaged in”. A staggering claim, broad in nature and sweeping in its implications, that he absolutely must prove in the aforementioned context of evangelicalism, but he does not in this article go into that rhetoric. Surprisingly too for a series on “social justice” from a world-renowned exegete, two articles in and we have yet to have a definition of terms or a study of the relevant words and their origins. The problem is, were that done - as by Joe Carter here and Carl Ellis Jr.  here, the conclusions reached would doubtless be very different from where this series seems to be headed. 

Please note that this is part of an ongoing series in response to an ongoing series. I am aware that at the time of writing, other articles have been published that may speak to some of the things mentioned here, but this article is simply in response to one of the articles. Future posts will similarly respond to individual articles on their own terms.