GRACE, HYPOCRISY AND WHY SO MANY ARE DONE WITH CHURCH
You might have heard news that Philip Yancey, one of the most widely read and trusted Christian writers of the last few decades, has confessed to a long-term extramarital affair and is stepping back from public ministry.
(For those unfamiliar with his work, Yancey’s writing especially “What’s So Amazing About Grace?” has shaped the faith of many Christians over the years.)
Whilst there’s nothing to be gained by adding to the performative grief, personal attacks, or hot-take pile-ons, there is still something important to be named here in the way this conversation is playing out online.
You might have noticed that a lot of evangelical commentary has followed a very familiar pattern: shock, sadness, eloquent reflections on human brokenness… and then an abrupt pivot to grace and forgiveness.
Now let’s be clear – of course grace matters. And it matters more than probably most of us realise.
But there is a kind of “grace talk” that functions less like good news, and more like a protective coating – especially when a respected spokesperson within evangelical Christianity is involved.
As Yancey himself said: “Grace is unconditional acceptance”, which is quite rightly a big and beautiful claim.
And so you would think it should show up most clearly where people have been most marginalised, shamed, or policed.
And yet, when it comes to LGBT people, women in leadership, survivors who won’t stay quiet, those who question, or anyone who doesn’t fit evangelical norms – suddenly the tone is very different.
Then there is much less grace talk, and it’s all “the Bible says” or “church authority” or “we can love you but not affirm your choices”. Way less grace, more “holiness, accountability, repentance, obedience” etc.
But when yet another male, evangelical figure sustains a nearly decade-long deception while publicly teaching about faith and morality?
Now the language is suddenly: “We’re all broken”, “Let’s not judge”, “Grace, grace, grace”.
Where was all this radical, scandalous acceptance when we’re talking about everyone else?
All too often, the church suddenly wants to ‘get grace right’ when it applies to one of their own. But even then, there is far too much minimising of the fallout, and the harm caused.
Remember, this wasn’t just a mistake in a one-off moment of weakness. It was a sustained, 8 year deception – all whilst making the daily choice to continue a public, high profile, Christian ministry.
So this isn’t even the church upholding the principle of grace, because grace (amazing as it is) does not excuse minimising harm, or rushing past betrayal, or using theology to shield institutions and male reputations.
So when grace is only invoked when it benefits those who already have the microphone – grace itself becomes diminished, and people are right to be suspicious.
Again, this is not an attack on Philip Yancey and it is certainly not an invitation to stone anyone.
But it is an invitation to stop and reflect.
About honesty, about power, and about the hypocrisy of evangelical culture that so often reaches for the Bible and “authority” when it wants to exclude, but for grace and forgiveness when it wants to protect its own.
If we as the wider church can’t see that, then we shouldn’t be surprised when people walk away.
If the church wants to be credible, then grace can’t be something we reach for just to protect the institution.
For grace to actually be grace, it has to be consistent, especially toward those we have historically made to feel least worthy of it.
(Feed generated with FetchRSS)