Issues With The Banner Part 8 - "The Wise Woman"
Wherein the Banner ropes all the readers into participating in a weird, gossipy, mean-girl moment and also provides no clear actionable guidance on how to discern how to respond to foolish people
As explained in my introductory post, I have been slowly going through the March 2023 issue of the Banner and pointing out articles I have concerns with. I’ve been doing this not because I particularly enjoy criticizing the Banner, but because I’m trying to illustrate what I see as the wide-spread nature of the publication’s failings and the sometimes subtle ways concerning and unorthodox views are expressed in its pages.
In one issue, a total of nine articles quickly jumped out at me as expressing questionable beliefs or being of dubious value. Below is the eighth of those articles.
This article, like the one I most recently posted about, did not have any specific theological issues that jumped out at me, but I believe both of them illustrate the other issue the Banner has when it’s not pushing theologically suspect viewpoints and that is: it publishes empty, useless, unhelpful, pointless articles, and it uses resources people have given to God to fund the publishing of those empty, useless, unhelpful, and pointless articles.
“The Wise Woman” by Reverend John Groen
As with the article about adfluvial fish, this is another story that ultimately ends up having no point. The main problem is that it is too vague to provide actionable advice or guidance. It is premised on the concept that it takes wisdom to know when and how you should confront foolishness, but it doesn’t actually give any advice on how to discern when the right time is and what the right way is to confront foolish people.
It gives one supposedly real-world example, but that example is completely stripped of all relevant information. The details of the conversation in which the foolish thing was said are not shared, and the actual foolish statement is not described. The reader is left to simply accept that the situation as outlined in the story happened as described—that the statement was foolish, that the way the woman confronted the foolish man was the correct way, and that everything played out as it should have. But the readers have not been given any of the information necessary to determine if any of that is correct, nor is the story fleshed out in such a way that readers can meaningfully apply its moral to their own life. The end result is a manipulative story that gives the appearance of having wisdom and insight but ultimately lacks spiritual benefit because it is told in such a vague and contrived way.
It's also just absolutely bizarre….
If you take the story at face value, a pastor was told a somewhat private story by a woman about a mistake a third party had made. That pastor then ran off to an international religious magazine and published an article labeling this third party a “foolish man” to all the readers. He did this under the guise of praising the actions of the woman, but he's still also belittling and demeaning the man. One can only hope all the relevant people are dead, because while the majority of readers won't be able to figure out who the man or woman in the story are, the odds are the woman will be able to know she is the woman in the story, the man may be able to know he is the man being talked about, and people in Rev. Groen's circle of acquaintances may also be able to figure out who's being referenced, and they will all know that their pastor publicly pointed out the flaws of this third party. Overall, his actions have a very gossipy, mean girl vibe to them, and he and the editor of the Banner essentially roped all of the readers into participating in the gossipy belittling of the so-called “foolish man”.
The whole thing seems so bizarre that I half suspect and sincerely hope that Rev. Groen is himself the foolish man in the story and he rewrote the circumstances just enough that that fact wouldn't be obvious to readers. It would at least remove the catty aspect of the article which seems problematic coming from a pastor, but it would not ultimately make the article any less vague or any more useful.
An article that actually provided details about the conversation and laid out practical steps on how to discern when and how to confront foolish people could have been quite beneficial, but, as it is, the product that was published in the Banner contained no actionable guidance and, therefore, ended up being devoid of usefulness. Any editor worth their salt would have not run this as written, and, as with the article about adfluvial fish, I find it problematic that resources that were given to the denomination with the intention of glorifying God were instead spent disseminating this.