Mark Galli is hardly the one to be lecturing Christians on breaking the 10 Commandments

Brannon House at WorldViewWeekend.com recently posted a piece entitled "Christianity Today Editor in Chief Called God a “Divine Drama Queen” But is Worried About President Trump Disrespecting God?." In it, House reminds readers about Christianity Today magazine's (CT) current senior editor, Mark Galli, who, on December 19, 2019, following the partisan impeachment of Donald Trump, published the article,“Trump Should be Removed From Office," wrote a piece in 2010 entitled "Divine Drama Queen."

 

Mark Galli was senior managing editor of CT magazine in 2010. In the article now removed from CT, he described the God of the Bible in such provocative, irreverent terms, CT was forced to take the article down because of public outcry over the images Galli used in characterizing God. Some called for the removal of Galli as senior managing editor. CT eventually would reward him, however, by promoting him to editor in chief.

 

House reproduces significant portions of a 2010 review by T.A. McMahon well worth your time. The page where "Divine Drama Queen" was originally posted in 2010 on the CT website still exists, but the essay itself is missing. In its place is an explanation by Galli why they felt the essay failed to connect to its readership. An alternative to reading the excerpts from Galli's essay composed by McMahon would be to read Galli's original CT article still available on archive.org.

 

Below are some of Galli's images of God in his "Divine Drama Queen." He describes God as a,

• "volatile Italian woman who, upon discovering her husband's unfaithfulness, yells and throws dishes"
• "a melodramatic God [who]... yells and throws dishes, and walks off in a huff, slamming the door behind him..."
• "He's anything but calm and collected, reassuring and reasonable. He's as mercurial as gods go"
• "He's like the crazy uncle in the family. At some point, you have to let your friends know about him, but you'd just as soon avoid having to introduce him"
• "The road to hell is paved with reasonable religion with a non-anxious god. Most days, I'm pretty happy driving down that road. But I keep running into this Crazy Fellow along the way"
• When God sees the space shuttle hurtling toward its destruction, he weeps, he rants, he pulls his hair out. And something inside him dies"
• "He's such a drama queen"

In addition, Galli describes our Lord Jesus as having mental/emotional issues. "We may think this a crude depiction, except that Jesus—God with us—seems to suffer the same emotional imbalance."

 

Please know I'm neither opposed to creative writing nor poetic expression nor satire nor hyperbole. The Bible is filled with every sort of literary genre. But comparing the varying genres of the Bible with Galli's depiction of God, it goes without saying nothing exists in the inspired text on the level of irreverence and outright blasphemy that Galli writes. Not only did his images not connect with the evangelical readership of CT, it wouldn't connect with mainstream Christianity at all.

 

Thus, Christians were right to protest, calling for retraction. But again, rather than retract, CT merely took it down, offered a thin rationalization, and eventually promoted Galli to editor in chief.

 

That was CT in 2010.

 

Little surprise exists, therefore, that CT's editor in chief called for President Trump's removal after President Trump's partisan impeachment this past week.

 

On December 19 of this week, Galli unequivocally declared, "Trump should be removed from office." He cites parallels between President Trump's impeachment and the 1998 impeachment of then, President William J. Clinton. Quoting from a CT article in 1998:

The President's failure to tell the truth—even when cornered—rips at the fabric of the nation. This is not a private affair. For above all, social intercourse is built on a presumption of trust: trust that the milk your grocer sells you is wholesome and pure; trust that the money you put in your bank can be taken out of the bank; trust that your babysitter, firefighters, clergy, and ambulance drivers will all do their best. And while politicians are notorious for breaking campaign promises, while in office they have a fundamental obligation to uphold our trust in them and to live by the law.

Prompting the 1998 editorial to conclude: "Unsavory dealings and immoral acts by the President and those close to him have rendered this administration morally unable to lead."

 

Comparing the 21 year old editorial on Clinton's impeachment with Trump's recent impeachment, Galli concludes:

Unfortunately, the words that we applied to Mr. Clinton 20 years ago apply almost perfectly to our current president. Whether Mr. Trump should be removed from office by the Senate or by popular vote next election—that is a matter of prudential judgment. That he should be removed, we believe, is not a matter of partisan loyalties but loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments.

Apparently for Galli, if either the Senate does not constitutionally convict Donald J. Trump of "high crimes and misdemeanors," or evangelicals do not discontinue supporting Donald Trump for president in 2020, we will be guilty ourselves of "[dis]loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments."

 

However, what Galli fails to mention from the 1998 CT editorial is, there's no call for Clinton to be removed from office. None. In fact, the article concludes by acknowledging President Clinton would continue his well-known "comeback-kid" character for the rest of his presidential term:

At this writing, we expect Clinton to hang tough, to remain the comeback kid he is known to be. He has played that role well in the past, and we see little evidence that he will try a fresh approach. As we pass through a period of increasingly intense political struggle, we cannot help thinking what a difference true contrition could have made.

In essence, CT's 1998 editorial merely scolded then President Clinton for a moral breach and assured him things could have been much different had he shown a little contrition. After impeachment, had President Clinton showed remorse and admitted his errors, the country could have been healed, and the issue resolved.

Bill Clinton missed a truly historic moment. August 17 could have been a great opportunity for national healing. A straightforward admission, with some evidence of contrition, would have brought openness and resolution.

To suggest, as Galli does, that CT called for the ouster of Clinton in the 1998 editorial for moral breach, and therefore, to be consistent, they must call for President Trump's removal, is flat out dishonest. CT did no such thing with then President Clinton.

 

Why, then, would they declare in no uncertain terms, "Trump should be removed from office," and charge those who do not see Trump's clear constitutional and moral breach Galli and the Democratic Party see with yielding "loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments" if they continue to support him?

 

Perhaps it's because Galli himself is a loyal Democrat and has been a #NeverTrump supporter from the very beginning.

 

Perhaps.

 

One thing seems certain, however.

 

Given Galli's understanding of the God of the Bible, he has no business whatsoever lecturing other Christians on possessing "loyalty to the Creator of the Ten Commandments."

Comments

[David Pitman]

Well said! Thanks for your clarity and courage.

[peter lumpkins]

Thanks David!

[Jacqui Rigby]

Well said and I wish all Christians would see this!!! He

[peter lumpkins]

Thanks, Jacqui.

[David Pickard]

Thank telling the truth ,so sad.

[Tom]

Excellent, Peter. Thanks. Sad, strange days we live in.

[Tom Rush]

Well done Peter - thanks for your outstanding work on this!

[Lydia]

You have to wonder how CT stays alive. I don’t buy that advertising and subscriptions keep its organization alive because I have a bit of experience with how these journals work. One thing that struck me years ago was their turn toward a more leftwing (and shallow) focus. Politics is not the only thing that’s downstream from culture. So are a lot of “Christian” organizations.

[Gary Yaeger]

I'll bet Franklin Graham doesn't appreciate this idiot making his statement? Franklin is one of our great president's allies and friends.

[Betty Witherspoon]

Anyone who would write and publish such blasphemous words against our God and Savior has to be called into question on anything he would write...or maybe none of his words are worthy of a read.

[George J Murrey]

Christianity played a two edged sword. They dismissed Clinton for his obvious indiscretions, but sees Pres Trump as the bad guy. Thank goodness I never subscribed to that magazine.

[Nancy Gilbert]

Thank you for this informative piece. Long ago someone sent CT to me but I didn’t find it useful. Mr. Galli is typical of Democrats who use their positions to spout lies and use others to give credibility to those lies. Using Dr. Graham in this manner is despicable but not unexpected. CT will not take calls directly but rather uses their customer service to take complaints and comments. No doubt this will lead them further into the whole of obscurity which is where they deserve to be.

[Ronnie W Rogers]

Absolutely vital historical information concerning Galli's credibility. Excellent!

[Lynn]

Thank you for your article - most likely will not change any minds but is worthy of countering this self appointed false prophet.

[peter lumpkins]

Thanks all for your feedback.

Peter

[Dave]

Good article, Mr Galli and CT need to open the Bible and learn of the creator of these sacred writings, maybe then they won’t so quickly take sides with the god of this world. 63 million people elected this man . I don’t know how much readership CT has from that number but I believe it’s about to drop very low. When you are in a position where you believe you can sway a population, think again. The Democrats thought their people were stupid and it has begun to bite them back. The same will likely happen to CT magazine. I know I’m not buying it any longer. The American people are very patriotic and lovers of all that is America, we won’t be swayed to liberal junk!

[Richard Sherry]

I've just finished reading the Mark Galli article on "Divine Drama Queen," and I encourage your readers to have a look at it. You can find it at https://web.archive.org/web/20100718111004/http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/julyweb-only/38-41.0.html.">http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/julyweb-only/38-41.0.html.">https://web.archive.org/web/20100718111004/http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/julyweb-only/38-41.0.html.

I'm a little concerned, however, with your summary of it, which is, I think, dishonest. You accuse him of blasphemy, etc., without seeing his point: God has done, is doing, and will do anything to get our attention and to bring us to recognition of our fallenness and lead us to salvation. And once you have cherry-picked all the images Galli chooses to help us get the point--God cares, profoundly, seriously, without limits--you use them out of context to condemn him. I think that's fundamentally dishonest. Here are the last paragraphs of Galli's essay:

I much prefer reasonable religion with reasonable expectations, and a God who doesn't get bent out of shape every time his people trip up. But then again, I don't love as God loves. Not God. Not others. Not myself.

The road to hell is paved with reasonable religion with a non-anxious god. Most days, I'm pretty happy driving down that road. But I keep running into this Crazy Fellow along the way. At every stop light, he jumps up and down to get my attention. He pounds on my window asking me where the heck I think I'm going. He stands on the front bumper, shouting at me to turn around. When all else fails, he throws himself in front of the car.

He's such a drama queen.

Have you read other pieces by Galli from CT? If you had, you'd realize that he is about as orthodox a Christian ss they come, with a high regard for scripture and for the Trinity.

Your whole "let's quote Mark Galli from 2010" strategy is an example of one of the fallacies of argument, what we call "poisoning the well." Let's dig up dirt on someone so we can avoid dealing with their argument. And selecting portions of the earlier essay without putting them in context is what we call the "fallacy of accent."

[peter lumpkins]

Richard,
A). I linked Galli's archived article in my piece so readers could decide for themselves.

B). You accuse me of dishonesty "without seeing his point." That's your view, and you're entitled to it, as are others here who disagree with you and apparently saw the same point I saw

C). You accuse me of "cherry-picking" but unfortunately did not explain how documenting offensive language is somehow supposed to be cancelled out by quoting 'non-offensive' language. Much in Galli's piece remains non-offensive. But that surely does not redeem his very offensive descriptors of our Holy Lord

D) If you believe Galli's point is to show what "God has done, is doing, and will do anything to get our attention and to bring us to recognition of our fallenness and lead us to salvation," then you've just shown how theologically delusional Galli is. God most certainly *won't do anything* get our attention and to bring us to recognition of our fallenness and lead us to salvation. a) at least one sin exists He won't forgive; b) He won't send His Son back to die again; c) He won't overlook our sins; among other things I can name.

E). No, it's not poisoning the well. I stated *relevant* information to my topic at hand; namely, "Mark Galli is hardly the one to lecture us on breaking the 10 Commandments."

F) Finally, if Galli's piece was the wonderfully orthodox example you claim it is, it will be puzzling to most of us here just why CT took it down from its site, and one can only find it in the archives of another.

Thanks again for the feedback.

Peter

.

[Lydia]

Peter, Thank you for your point in D. above. As I was reading Mr. Sherry’s comment, I had to wonder if he and Galli believe every catastrophe or tragedy is orchestrated by God to get our attention. Or, perhaps Mr Galli uses them to promote his view of God? Like Piper and Tornados and Bridge collapses.

Believers are well aware they live in a fallen world but is it really like the last paragraph of Galli’s2010 piece that Mr. Sherry quoted? That question has been debated to death online for the last 15 years. I simply chose to go another way from these types who come off as carnival barkers to me.