You’ve seen it happen again and again – some new controversy bursts on the scene and everyone starts weighing in, giving their two cents’ worth about who said what, who should have said what, etc. In our hypersocialised world, we have new vocabulary for these phenomena. We speak of “virtue signalling” when others flaunt their ethical superiority to those who are like-minded, or more broadly the “cancel culture” of rapid politically correct movements which punish and afflict persons and point of view outside of the ideology of the mob – all a reflection of “wokeism”, the dominant millennial/Gen-Z moral ethos which has found amplification and solidarity through online means.
Into this complicated world of speaking loudly to no one and everyone, how should we steward influence and leadership, especially for those of us who occupy a position, both formally and informally in communities and organisation which bear the name of Christ? On one hand, we too live in the world and should strive to be relevant, and on the other hand, we have a weighty responsibility to tread carefully and consider our stewardship. I suggest five thoughts about when and how to join a debate.
First, exercise self-control and never say anything when emotional or on a whim. The assumption to start with in the gospel is that my sin lurks in and with me, and that my greatest problems often begin with me. There are reasons why James speaks of the dangers of the tongue, a “world of fire”, and that our words must be scrutinised and watched carefully as they leave our own mouths. Is there a place to “speak honestly” or “speak one’s mind”? Of course. But leadership requires a muzzle on our otherwise loose tongues, and maturity demands self-control, and even stopping speech when necessary. Anger, folly, pride and impatience are some of the many emotions that can push us towards careless and loose speech. This consciousness of our own sin, or self-control, should come out in how we speak, and we ought to be less conscious of the fear of man in our speech, and more of the fear of God (see point 3).
Second, if speaking, have the gospel clarity to know and consider your intended audience. Often, we join debates to change minds, confront others or “call out” bad behaviour. These may be admirable communication goals but we may not always think them carefully through. It is good to consider our goals in speaking carefully, weighed out against what possible reactions might be, and whether we will have unintended consequences with what and how we speak. “Gospel clarity” is needed – thinking through how we are making appeals in mercy, how we show grace in speech, and whether or not our audience can and will act out of faith or not. If our comments or weighing in will not reach or shift the needle for our audiences, perhaps it is worthwhile reconsidering whether to speak.
Third, never say anything that you’re not comfortable being accountable to the Lord Jesus for. A unified approach to what we say, both in private and public, without any silos or compartmentalisation of our lives helps to ensure that what we say are always honorable, consistent, kind and gracious. To excuse certain types of speech for certain contexts is to strengthen our practice of hypocrisy. One tip is simply to assume that everything you say will at some point go viral – will those words honor Christ and represent Him truthfully?
Fourth, remember that not every debate is worth wading into and choose your battles wisely. The nature of the information space is such that there will be hot button issues every few minutes. Time and perspective remind us that today’s hot issue will not be tomorrow’s. What hills are worth dying on then? What fights are worthy of participation? I suggest that we need wisdom to know what issues are foundational and formational to those who love. That said, leaders must have a humility that acknowledges our limitations before a Mighty God. He is sovereign is able to save. I am neither. Will I be useful in this fight? Is my voice needed or am I just itching to scratch my ego? That said, there are some battles that need more voices, even mine, or other battles which we should fight again and again even if we don’t win.
Fifth, when online, always remember the third-person principle. I often assume that if I wade into an online fight, I am not just engaging with my interlocutor, but with the third party watching the fight unfold. How will that person perceive me, my position and my “tribe”? Am I winning respect for the gospel or am I coming across as obstinate and unpersuasive? Am I coming across as unreasonable, proud and aggressive, or is my secondary audience being put off by my witness?