When Should the Pastor Play the Fool?

By Mark W. Christy, PhD

In this contemporary setting, many pastors have clearly sold-out in favor of the world’s trappings of success. As they abandon sound doctrine and focus more on a people pleasing and people exalting style of exposition, real men of God are left in the wake and often find themselves judged by the presumably faithful who choose to remain in a biblically faithful ministry. Even so, many of their parishioners struggle as they see examples everywhere where these compromising churches are constantly demonstrating signs of ‘blessing’ which is, unfortunately, defined too often in worldly terms. Though some among them rise above this worldly perspective and move forward to become encouragers to the pastor, others prefer to judge their pastor with an extremely fine-tooth comb, even while stating that they themselves should not be judged not realizing, of course, that they themselves are demonstrating their ignorance of the biblical teaching on judgement. Nevertheless, they press on demanding the utmost from the man God.

Like these godly men, Paul constantly found himself having to deal with challenges to his leadership, his authority, and his character. At one point, he was forced to give what some have entitled ‘His Fool’s Speech’ in 2 Corinthians 11:1-12:3.  Paul had hoped that the faithful in Corinth would have defended him against the false accusations of false teachers, but instead they assumed the judgement seat and gave ear to the rantings of these charlatans. Their susceptibility to this course of action was directly connected to their ongoing struggle with sin, their resistance to the maturing work of the Holy Spirit, and their continued struggle to submit to biblical authority (1 Cor 3:1-9).

Among the ridiculous charges levied against Paul, at least one can be discerned from his speech. Apparently, the Corinthians were being led to believe that Paul lacked the qualifications of a true apostle. Though false, this charge threatened Paul’s apostolic authority which in turn directly affected the proclamation of the true gospel. If Paul would have conceded at this point, then these pretenders could potentially portray their falsification of the gospel as the true version. Such an outcome was obviously unacceptable, so the only alternative was a self-defense.

This trap of being pushed into a situation where one has to defend one’s self less the gospel become maligned essentially becomes the devil’s vice where all alternatives are fraught with peril. In response, one could remain silent and receive the suffering as if he believes that the ill-treatment equates to the shared sufferings of Christ which all believers are called to bear. Like Christ, one can choose to offer no defense even while the nails are driven in. Nevertheless, there is a difference between taking up one’s cross (and bearing whatever suffering comes with it) and defending the truth of the gospel.

In this situation, Paul chose to defend the Gospel even while avoiding, at least as best he could, any self-exaltation. For this reason, he cast himself as a fool. He made plain that he was being forced to speak as a fool. His speech makes clear that none of this was what he would have desired to engage in. Even so, he did desire to defend the gospel at all costs even if that mean presenting himself as fool and casting away his own pride. Like Paul, pastors will at times find themselves under an unjust and even ignorant consternation and judgement of some who like the Corinthians have been blinded by their own sin and thereby exalted themselves in their pride. When this occurs, they will have to consider whether to graciously maintain silence or put up a defense. Should they put up a defense, such a deed must be done with the same mindset as Paul when he said, “to live is Christ and to die is gain” (Phil 1:21).[i] It must be rendered only in defense of the truth they have been called to proclaim.

[i]Scripture reference is taken from NASB1995.