The Duggars aren't perfect. After 13 years, the really really really bad horrible terrible thing that happened has finally reached the ears of the gossip magazines, and as a result, the lives of 19 kids, their parents, their spouses, their in-laws, and their own kids have been successfully destroyed.
It sure does the heart good to know for sure that such a sickeningly good, happy, loving family has to go through the absolute torture of being eaten alive by wolves, don't it? I'll tell you, if this doesn't get me out of bed with a smile on my face, nothing will.
The truth is, this is a big deal for no other reason than because the world has been watching and waiting for something like this to happen ever since the Duggars first rose to stardom. You can tell because Lena Dunham didn't flood my news feed when she admitted, in a funny little anecdote, that she had sexually abused her little sister for years and that it wasn't a big deal and anybody who didn't like her experimentation needed to get over themselves. In fact, I hadn't even heard of her scandal until someone else mentioned her in relation to the Duggar case. The Duggar case blew up.
So why is it wrong for a Duggar but okay for a Dunham? Well, that's very simple. It's because the Duggars talk against immorality, so if they mess up, they're hypocrites. While since Lena Dunham doesn't speak against immorality, immorality is just fine for her.
So it's not really that the world cares about sexual immorality or anything like that. It's not that they feel sorry for the victims who just wish their past and private hurts had stayed past and private. It's not that they actually think that what Josh did was wrong. What they think is wrong is for Josh Duggar to say that it's wrong because since he did it 13 years ago, saying now that it was wrong makes him a hypocrite. Because if you don't practice what you preach, you're a hypocrite. You know, not from a view of time as a strict progression of cause to affect, but from a non-linear, non-subjective point of view where time is like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff. And from that perspective, since time is non-linear, of course it's hypocritical for Josh to say something is wrong since he did it. That's practically the same as him saying something is wrong and still doing it. And that makes him a hypocrite.
But here's the big deal: The world doesn't really hate hypocrites either.
Don't close this page down just yet, I promise, I'll explain that statement later. For now, I want to get to the real, true root of why the Duggar's skeleton is so much more newsworthy than the Dunham's skeleton. It's because the Duggars are Christians and they're happy.
If there is one single thing that the world hates more than every other single thing, it's to see someone who "does right" to actually be happy. It casts doubt and suspicion on the whole "YOLO, eat drink and be merry, do whatever feels right" method of obtaining happiness. People like to believe that morals and Christianity are a prison, that nobody can be happy if they have to follow some uptight goody-two-shoes rulebook.
So when somebody comes along who is happy because they follow Christ, the world has two options:
1) Admit that living a righteous life leads to peace and happiness.
2) Call the person a fake and wait for them to screw up because they WILL screw up and when they do, you can be right there to kick 'em one for good measure.
Surprise, surprise, most people opt for choice number two.
The thing that really gets me, though, is the double standard held by the people who are most "enraged" by the news, and this is where the hypocrisy issue I mentioned earlier comes in. The phrase "Your God" has been peppered throughout the entire debacle. "How can you stand these people when your God allowed it to happen?" "How can these people say they're a Christian!?!? Doesn't your God say immorality is wrong?" "I don't know how you can believe in your God when these are the kinds of people who believe."
This, coming from the mouths of the very people who also say things like "Doesn't your God tell you to forgive?" "Doesn't your God tell you not to judge?" "Doesn't your God tell you to love your neighbor?" Never mind the hurt they may have caused, never mind the fact that they might never have apologized, never mind that they might have spoken selfishly and demanded respect when they gave none. If they are hurt, they demand restitution. If they hurt others, especially if the others are a Christian, the others are expected to forgive without the dignity of receiving an apology or the reassurance that they won't be hurt again.
Why is it that the world, that professes a disbelief in MY God, uses him as leverage to get me to "forgive" sexual immorality AND as leverage to get me to shun sexual immorality, all the while mocking me for my belief in him? That's two separate double standards right there! Let me spell it out:
A man says "I don't believe in God," then turns to a Christian and says "God wants you to forgive everyone," then turns and points to someone else "But God doesn't want you to forgive THAT guy." And then turns back to the Christian, laughs, and says "I can't believe you believe in God. You're so stupid!"
People who aren't practicing Christians sure like to preach about what Christianity should look like, don't they?
Before you disregard my above statement as just another hypocritical one, read further.
The most widely accepted definition of "hypocrisy" is refusing to practice what you preach, right? Well, let's forget about Christianity for a second and give some examples of plain ol' hypocrisy.
When you demand forgiveness for your own actions but refuse to forgive those who have acted against you, you are being a hypocrite.
When you demand respect from the people you know but refuse to treat them with the same respect, you are being a hypocrite.
Here's a kicker: when you get all up in arms at someone who posted something hurtful about you on facebook so you respond by posting something hurtful about them on facebook you are being a hypocrite.
And before you come at me with things like "they deserve it" or "They did it to me first" or "I'm just holding them to their own standard," let me define hypocrisy again: Hypocrisy is holding somebody else to a standard you don't hold yourself. Not practicing what you preach. So for a liar to say "You shouldn't lie" Or for a thief to say "You shouldn't steal" OR for someone who doesn't follow Christ to say "You should follow Christ" is hypocrisy. If it's wrong for someone to hit you, it's wrong for you to hit someone else. It doesn't matter who swung first.
If you do not practice Christianity but you still preach about what Christianity should look like, you are being just as much a hypocrite as the very Christians you are trying to call out.
And I'm gonna throw out a brain-buster now: Hating on hypocrites makes you a double hypocrite because everybody in the world is a hypocrite about something or other.
It's like everyone in the world is saying "Everybody is a hypocrite except me!" And that makes them twice as much a hypocrite.
And yes, before you ask, I am including myself in that statement. How many times have I done the very thing I hate the most when I see it in other people? More times than I would like to admit. Yes, I am a hypocrite, and a big one at that. But truth be told, I have NEVER met someone who wasn't a hypocrite in at least one area of their lives. And actually, I have met very few people who I would say only were hypocrites about one or two things.
For someone to preach against hypocrisy while their entire lives are one big contradiction (i.e., they think it's wrong for you to lie, they think it's wrong for you to judge, they think it's wrong for you to hate, but they are the most selfish judgmental lying haters you know,) they have now become a hypocrite.
So when someone demands in the name of your God, that you forgive their sexual immorality, though they have no plans of ceasing, but then scoff at your God for reprimanding us to forgive those who have repented and turned from THEIR sexual immorality, they are holding a major double standard.
They seek forgiveness without being willing to forgive.
No wait, let me rephrase that: They DEMAND forgiveness and they DON'T ALLOW anybody to forgive someone THEY don't think should be forgiven. And also, let me point out: Deciding for yourself who should be forgiven and who should NOT be forgiven, is judging.
You are making the judgment call that X is permissible and Y is not. You are making the judgment call that X is forgivable and Y is not. You are making the judgment call, without any evidence, without any knowledge of the situation save what you read on facebook, without any idea whether or not This Person has truly repented and That Other Person has truly healed, that X is a funny little story and Y needs to be dealt with through years of major counseling and hard jail time. Is that not judging?
If it is absolutely %100 wrong for me to judge you, does it not then follow that it is absolutely %100 wrong for you to judge Josh? And if it is absolutely %100 wrong for Josh to be a hypocrite, does it not then follow that it is absolutely %100 wrong for you to be a hypocrite?
I'm not saying that what Josh Duggar did wasn't wrong. And without knowing any of the true story, I refuse to make the judgment call on whether or not he is a hypocrite. But if I were you, I would be very careful about what you judge to be the case, no matter how "inexcusable" you think it is. Because as Paul the Apostle says in Romans:
"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else. For at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, for you who pass judgment do the same things."
No comments:
Post a Comment