Many have speculated about what’s next for Steve Lawson in the aftermath of his very public and scandalous fall into moral failure. It’s been about 2 years since Lawson, married and at the pinnacle of his ministry career (if we can call it that) was exposed as having carried on an inappropriate relationship with a much younger woman for about five years. The news was heartbreaking on many levels.
As one might expect, Lawson lost his position as lead Preacher (he was not actually an elder there from what I’ve been told) at a prominent Dallas based Church. His various teaching positions all evaporated – justly. His writing contracts (as I understand it) were also terminated. And of course the ministry he headed crashed.
Now, Steve has written his confession in greater depth than his original open letter. It is a sad read. Yet hopeful. It is not his best writing in my opinion. But I am not a great critic to be heard on that front either. It is short. Full of statements of sole, personal responsibility. And fiercely controversial.
For the most part, reviewers and commentators I’ve read and/or listened to are sharply polarized. They range from – “let’s forget it all and move on” to – “we wish him the best, but we really think this dog ought to go off and die somewhere quietly so we don’t have to think about him any more.”
It is understandable that many feel betrayed. His actions were a betrayal. A familial betrayal. An ecclesiastical betrayal. A personal betrayal to his many friends and admirers. A betrayal to his place of leadership and to the life of this young woman. A betrayal to the cause of solid Reformed and Biblical Christianity. No question.
In the book, Lawson owns all of that without flinching. But as one commentator I read said well, both extremes in the responders are both right, and wrong. Extremes tend not to suffer from being tempered. But I must add that I am sorely disturbed by the foulness of the vitriol from some in the name of Christ. Proper censure? Of course. But some pretty un-Christlike invective is being slung around. And that, from some who ought to know better.
Let me get on to my own thoughts so as not to make this as long as the book itself. These issues stand out to me.
1 – One prominent critic stated flatly “Steve should not be writing a book.” Mmmm. “Should” implies some sort of Biblical or at least moral imperative. But in truth, no such objective “should” can be pointed to. There is nothing governing whether anyone should or should not write a book. It is a misguided pronouncement.
Now, I do question whether or not writing this work at just 2 years in is wisest. I do not know. More on that below. But I have no right to prohibit him from doing so. There is nothing inherently wrong in doing so.
I also note that some say that writing such a book is the equivalent of “teaching” – as though Lawson is in the pulpit. In truth, any form of communication where rights and wrongs are discussed, instructions given or in this case – warnings sounded – is indeed a form of teaching. But as others have noted, if one cannot warn others in their confession, we’re not only going to have to ignore many of the Psalms, but whole books like Jonah. After all, Jonah was the only one who could record all his own failures. And he did so unsparingly as part of Holy Writ. Let’s not over speak here. Or historically, should we castigate Augustine’s Confessions or Retractions? What of other saints in history?
Once, I attended a small conference where a number of the participants were asked to introduce themselves and tell something of their life stories. This was nearly 30 years ago. But I will never forget the humble and powerful opening statement of one of the men. He began his time by saying (paraphrasing) “I’m only here today as an example of what can happen when Church discipline has gone right.” He was no longer qualified for the pastorate. He owned that. It melted us all.
Steve Lawson’s fall was very public. His confession needs to be just as public. And there is no better way to reach the broader number of people he sinned against than in using print media.
I will not fault him for this, even if I would have counseled differently on some aspects.
2 – Profiteering. Many have leveled their criticism here in terms of accusing Lawson of “profiting from his sin.”
Is it possible? I suppose. But can I say it is the case? No. I do not know his motive(s). Neither do you. But I also think there some other points to be considered.
Given the loss of Steve’s normal streams of income, he still has to earn a living. We cannot begrudge him that. And a great portion of his livelihood has been derived from being a writer. There is nothing prohibiting him from using his skills to support himself and his family in this way.
In Luke 3, when the Tax Collectors came to John to ask about what their repentance ought to look like – he didn’t tell them they couldn’t be tax collectors any more. He told them to administrate their jobs righteously instead of as the thieves they had been.
The question going forward for Steve is how he will use his gifts, and in what venues? No, he cannot be an elder. He has lost that place. May he speak at times to groups? In time, perhaps? There is nothing requiring him to become mute. But he has lost the position of authoritatively preaching the Word to the congregation. Could he still be used in a seminary position? Possibly. I think those sorts of things need to be worked out over time, where he has been under good accountability, and done what he can to restore something of a transparently observable track record. But writing? Why not?
Note this from The Law: “If there is a dispute between men and they come into court and the judges decide between them, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty, 2 then if the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall cause him to lie down and be beaten in his presence with a number of stripes in proportion to his offense. 3 Forty stripes may be given him, but not more, lest, if one should go on to beat him with more stripes than these, your brother be degraded in your sight. (Deuteronomy 25:1–3, ESV)
Did you catch that last verse? Even in punishment, it should never be meted out in such a way that the guilty party is degraded in our sight. We do not strip others of their dignity, even when discipline, severe discipline is required.
3 – Too Soon? Plenty have weighed in on the fact that this book came out only 2 years after Lawson’s disgrace. In the process, they speak as though there is some sort of Biblical standard or mandate which dictates how much time must elapse before one is restored or allowed to be heard from again. But no such mandate exists.
Is there wisdom to be sought here? For sure. Given Steve’s “affair” lasted 5 years, 2 does seem reductive. But that is merely my opinion and sense. It is not Scripture.
Others have pointed out that it was only 50 days from Peter’s triple denial of Jesus to his preaching on the day of Pentecost.
There’s debate over just how much time elapsed between the writing of 1st Corinthians and 2nd Corinthians. Estimates run between 6 months and a year or two. But think about it. The man sleeping with his step-mother while in the assembly, is rightly disciplined, but in pretty short order is brought back into the congregation. And this is done with Paul’s admonition “so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8Therefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him.” (2 Cor. 2:7–8, BSB)
Some corners seem to think Lawson should not be accorded similar treatment to either of the two examples above, and have set themselves up as the arbiters of what his being restored ought to look like, above and beyond those who are intimately working with him. I think this is shameful personally. I am grieved over it. Everyone can have their opinions. No, no one’s opinions are binding on the Church (or Lawson) except the authority of Scripture.
4 – Restoration is not reinstatement. Yes, it is our job – if genuine repentance is evident, to restore our brother. No, that does not mean he can be reinstated to certain positions or roles in the Church. That said, I believe that part of the restoration process ought to include our responsibility to help our brother find a continuing place of usefulness in the Kingdom.
Everyone in the Kingdom, whether they have fallen as Steve did or not, still have a responsibility to contribute the Body with what they have. What that looks like in his case will have to be worked out. But he is not to be relegated to the dung heap and forgotten. We must find ways to restore him to usefulness. That may be in roles and capacities he’s not – or even ever – considered before. I don’t know. But it would be good for us to be thinking about it.
In closing:
My dear brother Steve Lawson. Take it slow. I know the temptation is to try and make the sting go away in whatever ways you can. That is legitimate. But as John Owen points out in his work on the Holy Spirit – He is the comforter. It is not up to us to comfort ourselves after sinning, but to wait on His work in His way and in His time. It is OK to wait for that fulness. It will come. Give Him leeway. And don’t rush others. Think deeply about how hurt people, severely bruised people cannot even stand the touch of a healer. Many are still raw. Give them the space you desire too. Some will sinfully respond no matter what. Pray for them to be released. Don’t try to make a way for yourself going forward as much as waiting on the Lord for Him to open right doors of providence. Keep your head down. Keep yourself on your knees. Be open to an entirely new set of ways to serve your King and His people. Paul loved planting Churches. He wore himself out in that endeavor. But it was his time in prison that has had its most lasting effect in his being shut up to write. Wait. And don’t tell us how much you’ve suffered. That’s between you, the Lord and come confidants.
To my dear brothers and sisters in your criticisms, comments, reviews and opinions – do not degrade, write off or place unbiblical constraints on your fallen brother. Like a comrade in arms who’s been wounded on the battlefield – drag him back before the throne of grace that he might be bandaged up, and raised up to fight another day. Yes, his wounds may be self-inflicted. And so are yours and mine. An old rabbinic proverb says “let the man who is too old to act on his lust, not congratulate himself that he doesn’t.” I haven’t faced Steve’s particular temptations under his particular circumstances. But I know the doctrine of depravity well enough to know that any human being, redeemed or not, is potentially capable of any atrocity given the right circumstances. When many Christians folded under the threats of the Decian persecution, many found little sympathy for those who returned. Let us learn from the stain of that response ourselves. Don’t just pray about Steve – pray FOR him. And forgive as Christ has forgiven you. Think more about what sound restoration can look like, than whether or not we’ve mapped out the best discipline.
And may our gracious God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ remind us how much more He delights in mercy than in sacrifice.
