Should We Be Shocked By Scandals?

We're all disappointed to hear about Michael Tait, but few of us are surprised. Is that bad?

Photo by Afif Ramdhasuma on Unsplash

When the terrible news about sexual abuse and grooming allegedly committed by DC Talk and Newsboys’ artist Michael Tait surfaced publically last week, it was greeted widely with resignation. Yes, this is tragic and disappointing, but it’s also not altogether surprising, people tended to react. After all, we’ve had so many public figures fall from positions of power and influence. This is not our first rodeo. And there seems to be something particularly toxic about celebrity that invites corruption. At this point, we almost expect public figures to be morally compromised unless proven otherwise. But I wonder about how healthy and charitable it is to assume the worst. Is it good for us not to be shocked by scandals? Isn’t there something inherent in the nature of scandals that warrants shock? And if so, how do we balance that shock with the prudential knowledge that we live in a fallen world in which people will abuse power, and people in higher positions of power will have great opportunities to that abuse power? These seem like moral questions worth wrestling through. I believe we are called to desire good for all people, especially those in the Church. This means hoping all things for them, including for people in positions of influence and power. So that when some of them suffer a dramatic public fall, we are shocked and scandalized by the way they have harmed others and themselves and disgraced the name of Christ. But we are not shaken by this fall, for we know that the nature of Christ, his Church, and our hope are not tied to the righteousness of others.