For Christianity Today, the ends justify the means to remove Donald Trump

Christianity Today says witness to non-American Christians spurred their speaking out on domestic American political issue.

Christianity Today’s president Timothy Dalrymple published a response to the criticism his magazine received after calling for President Trump’s removal from office. Dalrymple claimed the organization is actually “conservative” and not partisan despite the publication of a biased and demonstrably false attack on President Donald Trump. What’s striking was the admission that Christianity Today prioritized Trump’s impeachment because it might appeal to non-American citizens.

CT’s president said,

“We are also a global ministry. We travel the world and see the breadth and depth of what God is doing through his people all around the planet. It is beautiful, and breathtaking, and immense. The global Body of Christ—and the community of evangelicals—is vastly larger than our domestic political squabbles. But partly on behalf of that global body, we can no longer stay silent.”

Get that? A domestic American political issue must be submitted to the feels of a global audience.

Globalists no doubt applaud.

He continues later, “We nevertheless believe the evangelical alliance with this presidency has done damage to our witness here and abroad.”

Christianity Today wants to remove President Trump not on constitutional grounds nor any political grounds, but on some nebulous commitment to our Christian witness.

A later paragraph makes it clear—that for Christianity Today, the ends justify the means.

CT’s president said, “And it has undercut the efforts of countless missionaries who labor in the far fields of the Lord. While the Trump administration may be well regarded in some countries, in many more the perception of wholesale evangelical support for the administration has made toxic the reputation of the Bride of Christ.”

This is consequentialism. The end (better evangelism) justifies the means (removing Donald Trump from office). This is dangerous. Christians should do what is right and not what is expedient.

What’s right is to judge a case on its merits–not to please a global audience.

Christians should uphold the rule of law and the constitutional and political system. That should determine if we impeach a president not our Christian witness.

Christians should support pro-life candidates and pro-religious liberty candidates. Why? These are the highest priorities for government according to biblical principles. In the 2016, campaign we had a choice between the Party of Infanticide and the Pro-Life Party. For evangelicals, the Pro-Life Party won their vote.

Plus, what evidence do you have to support such a sweeping claim? Can we believe that “countless” missionaries are “undercut” because conservative evangelicals support Donald Trump?

That’s absurd.

Donald Trump’s meanest tweets are less likely to impact foreign missionaries than the repressive conditions–conditions that Donald Trump fights.

Also, is it plausible that someone on the far-flung fields of distant lands cares about who is US president? How many newly reached or unreached peoples know about impeachment?

Let’s be clear, the Christianity Today editorial is about pleasing a domestic audience.

What audience? Coastal secular elites. That’s the audience Big Evangelicalism always tries to please. From Russell Moore attacking Trump voters in the New York Times and Washington Post to the latest round of virtue signaling by CT, Big Eva pleases New York and not the church.