Filthy Lucre For Thee, But Not For Me: MacArthur and BLM
BLM.inc is a godless and radically progressive organization. I’m not a fan, haven’t been a fan, and I’m not going to be a fan (more on BLM, generally speaking). But I do want to discuss something I’ve seen recently.
I just read an article about BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors buying a $1.4 million home in a California neighborhood. According to this article, some within the progressive Black community are branding her as a fraud because of the expense and because it’s in a predominantly white neighborhood. I anticipate a strong response from anti-social justice conservatives who will likely see this expensive home as a sign of corruption, greed, etc. I have already seen some of these exact claims. I don’t necessarily disagree. A desire for opulence is never a good sign.
But I recall many recent conversations about John MacArthur’s similarly priced home, valued at $1.5 million. It’s also relevant to point out that John MacArthur also owns a second $700,000 home and a third $800,000 home. When Julie Roys reported on this matter and various other concerning financial practices associated with MacArthur and his ministries, countless defenders took up his cause. These conservative defenders justified MacArthur by pointing out that California is expensive and justified the expense by saying that it is okay to make money. Both of those arguments have at least some legitimacy.
This short article isn’t attempting to tackle the various issues with John MacArthur’s handling of money, nor am I condemning or justifying Cullors buying an expensive home. What I am asking for us to do is to think clearly and consistently about these issues.
One could make the argument that Cullors is a hypocrite for buying an expensive home in a white community, but if she’s automatically “in it for the money” or living an “exuberant” lifestyle because of this home, apply the same standards elsewhere. There are valid criticisms that could be made, but make the same criticisms as they apply elsewhere.
Cullors and BLM.inc have many ethical issues in which we can appropriately criticize and even sharply condemn. For example, the official BLM organization openly and proudly supports abortion and various sexual sins. These positions are sinful and should be called out as such. However, just because an organization or an ideological leader is rightly vulnerable to criticism, it does not mean that we, as believers in Jesus Christ, are justified in judging them partially. At the same time, there is much to value and admire in John MacArthur. Though I disagree with him on some points, he preaches Christ and has faithfully taught the Bible for decades. Just as our criticisms of those who hate Christ should be impartial and based on truth, our defenses of those in Christ should likewise be impartial and based on truth.
We have a higher calling than “owning the libs.” We do not get to have special standards for our team. Believers are called to have integrity and judge matters impartially and righteously. It is far too easy for us to judge our side very loosely while judging those we are opposed to very harshly. In other words, it is far too common to have one standard for the conservative and another for the liberal. If anything, we should have much higher standards for our ministers, not lower standards.
Whether or not it’s righteous to own million-dollar homes from money gained by either preaching the Gospel or social activism is a big question that deserves a longer article. But one thing is very clear, if it’s filthy lucre for thee, it should be filthy lucre for me.
“And I charged your judges at that time, ‘Hear the cases between your brothers, and judge righteously between a man and his brother or the alien who is with him. You shall not be partial in judgment. You shall hear the small and the great alike. You shall not be intimidated by anyone, for the judgment is God’s. And the case that is too hard for you, you shall bring to me, and I will hear it.’” Deuteronomy 1:16-17