We Don’t Speak Ill of the Dead?

Hypothetical scenario: You live in a large apartment building in a major city with many co-tenants. By chance, you discover a fire deep in the building’s basement and flee. Standing safely outside, you call out to the other tenants to get out of the building as well. Shortly thereafter, a fire department official arrives at the scene and after a cursory inspection declares there is no danger. The other tenants go back into their apartments thinking they are safe, but the building is eventually engulfed in flames and all of the residents perish.

I came out of the Roman Catholic church with its false gospel of salvation by sacramental grace and merit in 1983 and accepted the free gift of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone. Over the course of forty years, I’ve witnessed many evangelical pastors and para-church leaders, who “should” have known better, declare that the RCC was fine or “close enough.” It’s not a matter of ambiguity. The RCC teaches unabashedly and without apology baptismal regeneration and that salvation is ultimately merited by obeying the Ten Commandments and church rules.

Evangelical Protestant pastor, theologian, and author, Tim Keller, died this past May 19. Keller was very popular and influential. He no doubt did a lot of good over the course of his 48-year ministry, but he also made a critical error/compromise by publicly embracing the Roman Catholic church as a Christian entity. He in effect declared the burning building, the RCC with its false gospel, was safe.

I briefly referenced Keller in my weekend round-up the day after his death with the following observation: “Many souls accepted Christ through the ministry of Tim Keller. However, Keller also muddied the Gospel by embracing the Roman Catholic church with its false gospel as a Christian entity and by introducing Catholic mystical ‘Lectio Divina’ and contemplative prayer to his Redeemer Presbyterian (NYC) mega-church congregation.”

A WordPress blogger subsequently took umbrage with all those who criticized Keller after his passing by publishing the post, “We Don’t Speak Ill of the Dead.” The writer leans upon the popular social norm and convention that frowns upon all criticism of a dead person, especially if they’ve recently passed.

Christians are not subject to worldly etiquettes and norms, especially when the Gospel is under attack. The Bible doesn’t teach us to revere false teachers or to remain silent when those who present themselves as shepherds allow wolves into the sheep pen. The Gospel and souls are at stake. We must not remain silent whether the person is living or dead.

The blogger, who only reluctantly identifies as an “evangelical Protestant,” shares Keller’s view that Roman Catholicism is a very valid branch of Christianity. She objects to those who focus on the irreconcilable doctrinal differences dividing Catholics and evangelicals and has even stated in comments elsewhere that it’s not up to her to decide if Mormonism and the Watchtower proclaim false gospels. In this particular “evangelical Protestant” blogger’s view, it’s all about a nebulous, doctrine-lite (c)hristianity where “warm and fuzzy” supersedes doctrinal truth and church history. Sadly, this type of wide-is-the-way relativism is beginning to permeate the body of Christ.

Yes, we certainly DO speak critically of the dead if they compromised/betrayed the Gospel of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.

56 thoughts on “We Don’t Speak Ill of the Dead?

  1. “Yes, we certainly do speak critically of the dead if they betrayed/compromised the Gospel of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.”

    Yes it would not be fair to the lost if we didn’t!! 🙌

    Liked by 6 people

    1. Thank you, Beth. It’s regrettable that we have to explain ourselves for defending the Gospel to “evangelical Protestants,” but that’s how it is these days.

      Liked by 4 people

  2. I do not doubt that Tim Keller is with the Lord but I do think he will be answering to God for things he professed while on this earth. Allie Beth Stuckey actually commented on this at the end of one of her podcasts this week and I thought she handled it quite well when she said that you can believe a person is with the Lord and comment sadness after their passing while still objectively disagreeing with things they said. I saw no issue in anything you said about Keller.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Thanks, Katherine. Yup, I agree that Keller did much good and is probably (as far as can be known) with the Lord. It baffles me that these learned “Protestant” men are unable to distinguish Rome’s false gospel, but it’s part of a general malaise/spiritual blindness that’s quite rampant. Thanks for pointing out that Allie Beth Stuckey commented on this circumstance. If you can possibly recall the particular podcast, I would appreciate it.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Thank you for the link! Allie is a bit critical of Keller for his leanings towards the social gospel and of course I’m critical of his ecumenism with Rome, which denies the full forgiveness of sin through faith in Christ that Allie spoke of.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Not to sound like I’m being judgmental but I wonder if it’s ok to do what he and many other “evangelical Protestants” are doing in regards to Roman Catholicism and be saved? Just wondering…

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Keller’s identification as an “evangelical Protestant” contradicted his view on RC-ism, which unambiguously denies the “evangel”/Gospel of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone. Deep, deep spiritual blindness. It’s an epidemic. I can’t know his salvation status. Many false teachers – Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Charles Taze Russell, etc., spoke/wrote with great false devotional piety.

        Liked by 2 people

  3. I tried to find the post that you referenced, I wonder if she took it down? I have said the same thing as you. It goes to far to say Keller isn’t saved, but there is nothing wrong in critiquing/analyzing the body of work that he is leaving behind. This is necessary to help future readers/believers.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. I had trouble linking so I referenced the episode via YouTube, link below.
      Yes, I would be abdicating my responsibility if I didn’t point out how Keller got the RCC totally wrong.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Wow! So obviously my paternal grandmother isn’t famous. She died in 2004. My nana was a very bitter and mean woman. That is not me speaking I’ll of the dead. That is not me not speaking the truth in love or whatever that line was, it’s literally me being honest. There’s character assassination (dead or living) and then there’s being honest about who the person was. When I die there will be people who will be happy to see my demise and others who will be sad. I just want people to be honest about me and not try and canonize me or make me better than I was. What you have said about Keller is true and fair. I will not question his salvation, that is not mine anyway, but critiquing his body of work as I’ve already said is right and necessary. Thanks for sharing this!

        Liked by 3 people

      2. Thanks for the good comments, Mandy. I fully agree. The church will tolerate false teachers, doctrinal aberrations, and Gospel compromise, but turns on the red-flag wavers.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. Thanks, Linda Lee. Even in the 1st Century the apostle Paul noted that the early church readily accommodated false teachers and false gospels.
        “For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.” – 2 Cor. 11:4

        I would say salvation-by-merit appeals to people’s sinful nature (which believers must still deal with) AND there’s the current ideology of “tolerance, plurality, inclusiveness, and relativism” – appropriate in some circumstances, but definitely not in regards to the genuine exclusive Gospel.

        Liked by 4 people

      4. Thanks, Linda Lee. I’ve responded to that query several times in the past, so the ol’ brain neurons didn’t have to hobble across too many synapses.

        Liked by 2 people

      5. I would be leaning heavily on all after AND . . . and I have experienced a few instances of it myself over the years. Those who have not learned to actually study the biblical topic of discussion, thoroughly from all aspects or sides, have a tendency to go with the “common consensus” or what I call “small flock” rule, usually articulated by someone who has a superficial knowledge of the subject matter, but has not invested the time and effort to to have a good working knowledge of the whole counsel of God’s Word on the particular subject. Or, because of loss of face or false pride associated with one’s standing in the “small flock”, does not wish to publicly acknowledge that there are deeper issues associated with the subject matter that do have to be taken into consideration. When this oversight is experienced in the “small flock” situation, it generally isn’t prudent to point the deficiency out publicly, at that particular point in time, but if one is to remain within this particular “small flock”, it inevitably does need to be addressed because the negative consequences of not doing so, are too severe. Each situation is different and the general rule of thumb is proceed with prayer and caution and due consideration that what is said, is truth and spoken because of love and concern. I saw nothing wrong in what you stated and how you stated it, Tom.

        Liked by 2 people

      6. Thanks, Bruce. It’s unimaginable to me to NOT point out those “evangelical Protestant” leaders who contradict the Gospel and the Bible and advise that Roman Catholicism is fine.
        I’m not saying that we throw love and charity out the window, but when a Christian leader who influences millions deviates from Gospel truth and imperils souls, someone needs to speak up. It’s out of love for the Lord, for lost Catholics, and for evangelicals who have been misled that I speak up.
        Bruce, I appreciate the support and encouragement. Opposing ecumenism with Rome is not a popular view within big tent evangelicalism these days.

        Like

      7. The thought crossed my mind that you might have misunderstood where I said it wasn’t always prudent to speak out. That’s why I said each instance is different. I was personally speaking of a study that I attended in a new church years ago where the leader was inferring that it wasn’t always black and white and others within the group joined in and agreed with him. I did actually indicate that when it comes to some RC doctrines, it is either one or the other (Protestant or Roman Catholic), but my response was not well received by the leader and some others who were relatively new in the faith, in the group. This was kind of a trial run for me to see what was being taught, needless to say, I decided this was not the church that I wanted to attend. One of the newer Christians actually corrected me quite forcefully and I waited for the leader to tone the response down somewhat, but it wasn’t forth coming. This just wasn’t the time or the place to get right into it then. Obviously there are other times when one is compelled to stand and voice what needs to be said. Sorry for the possible confusion by my statement. Blessings!

        Liked by 1 person

      8. Thanks, Bruce. Yup, I get it. The message often depends on the circumstances, including especially the listener/s. I “adjust” my message according to who I’m speaking to. Some can only take in a small amount (or are completely averse as you mention above).
        My wife and I get into some mild disagreement over this because she’s of the type of personality who will go full-bore into the deep S thru Z particular errors of RC-ism with a person when they are barely ready for the A-B-C errors. Blessings to you!

        Liked by 1 person

  4. I didn’t know much about Tim Keller but had hard about him. Thank you for a very well wriiten response to this issue. I am a Baptist but am drawn to listening to the reformed preachers like MacArthur, Sproul, etc on the radio. Most don’t waver on the Catholic issue. I known Mormons and JW’s but never win debates

    Liked by 2 people

  5. I agree! It’s always right to stand up against those who teach false doctrine. It’s seem like this strange doctrine is getting stronger. I personally have had to pray that I don’t be deceived. But I look at your story and I if God can set you free, He can set others free who are being deceived. Was anybody criticizing you when you were Catholic?

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Thanks, J! Yes, it is always right to stand up against those who teach false doctrine. I was a Catholic until I was 27 shortly before I accepted Christ as Savior by faith alone. No one was criticizing me when I was a Catholic, but I was reading my Catholic Bible, which made me question many Catholic doctrines and was also frequenting a local Christian bookstore that carried many publications critical of RC-ism. Sadly, most Christian bookstores still in business caved to ecumenism long ago. I don’t know your circumstance, but an excellent book on the irreconcilable differences between RC-ism and Gospel Christianity is “Same Words, Different Worlds: Do Roman Catholics and Evangelicals Believe the Same Gospel?” by Leonardo De Chirico readily available from Amazon.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. “I don’t think Genesis teaches that the world was created in six 24-hour days. Evolution is neither ruled in or ruled out at Redeemer.” that’s an old quote from Tim Keller, reflecting his ongoing compromise on God’s account of creation. While sanctioning the RCC is bad enough, diluting the glory of God, in my mind, invalidates anything else you have to say.
    When one continues to misrepresent God, I do not expect any godly inspiration nor unction to come forth from him.
    As for the cliché ‘don’t speak ill of the dead’, baloney. But if you know someone is wrong, don’t wait til their dead before you speak!
    You and wifey have a good weekend!

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Lisa Beth, thanks for the good comments! I’ve said 100X the first thing I want to know about an “evangelical Protestant” pastor, theologian, or para-church leader is their view of RC-ism. If they don’t have enough discernment to get that right, I don’t need to hear anything else they have to say. As you pointed out, there are other important criteria.
      Thanks, Lisa Beth! I hope you and your husband are enjoying a good weekend as well!

      Liked by 2 people

  7. I have a similar story, in that a couple of years ago another pastor and I had a bit of a blow up. It took 6 weeks of conversations to understand each other better.
    He thought it wrong to denounce pastors and teachers (and even apostles and prophets today) if they proclaim Christ. I heard from some of his congregation a couple months ago (they were upset) that he preached that the leaders of Bethel Church (Redding, CA) are false teachers, and The Passion Translation is not a good Bible for personal study. Many in his Vineyard-offshoot congregation think Bethel is the height of Christianity, we should be listening to the apostles and prophets today, and TPT is God’s renewed scripture.

    Progress on his part! He still believes in the full sign gifts, but he now doubts there are apostles today. On Catholicism, he is willing to say that at least the current pope is not a Christian.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, Daniel. So much bad stuff going on today under the banner of “evangelicalism” including NAR, bogus translations, and ecumenism – pretty much everything that’s on TBN.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, DebbieLynn. I have a small doctrinally-solid network of readers who I’m grateful for. BTW, I’m grateful for all of your support over the years. However, I fully expect some pushback at some point. This post isn’t copacetic with “Big Eva” evangelicalism.

      Like

    1. Thanks, Elizabeth. Many believers just don’t have enough information and discernment when it comes to Rome and ecumenism and that deficit starts in the pulpits.

      Liked by 1 person

    1. When a Christian/church leader seriously deviates from Biblical truth there should be strong opposition. I’m getting the impression that most of the criticism of Keller was for his favorable support of the social justice gospel, but for me his pro-Rome views were more dangerous. The fact that most were only critical of his social justice push is an indication of how widely ecumenism with Rome is accepted these days.
      I have zero misgivings about calling out “evangelical Protestant” leaders – alive or dead – who tell people my former false church is fine.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. Thank you for this excellent post, Tom. When the pastors are ecumenical everything else they say and do seems hollow, for lack of a better word. To see the continued blindness regarding Rome in our churches can be overwhelming at times. Circumstances today have left me pondering and disturbed about the lack of interest I see regarding this widespread ecumenism. It was a great comfort to me to come here and see this discussion. I thank the Lord for my WordPress brethren that bring encouragement. And you did nothing wrong by writing this post. These things must be said.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, Cathy. I’m encouraged by yours and Billy’s outreach to Roman Catholics. How could we, who have been saved from the “burning building,” not expose and criticize those “evangelical Protestant” leaders who proclaim the building is fine?

      Like

  9. I believe that there are Christians in the Catholic Church but I don’t believe the entity itself is Christian. God is the final judge, so I will not judge others for how they were raised and what they believe, only for their lack of belief in a Savior, and even that is not my responsibility to judge. There are many false religions and a lot of idol worship, particularly, it seems, within Catholicism, but I don’t want to be the one to stereotype an entire group and make it so that they seem irredeemable. Jesus died for all, and I hope that Catholics, Jews, Hindus, and even Muslims will one day come to His saving grace and power. I’m sure you hope for the same.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for the comments, Vickie! The RCC officially and without apology teaches baptismal regeneration and salvation by sacramental grace and merit. That’s not my opinion, but the RCC’s official, unabashed teaching. I do believe some Roman Catholics respond to the genuine Good News! Gospel of salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone that they’ve heard or read from some source outside of the RCC, but they do so in spite of their church’s false gospel. The Holy Spirit will eventually lead them out.

      Liked by 1 person

  10. I know people who are Roman Catholics (by some definition) who would tell you they believe in salvation by God’s grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The sacraments are their way of expressing that faith, just as for evangelicals, baptism is “an outward expression of an inward change (choice?)” I’m not sure why these individuals stay RC, maybe from family tradition, or maybe they aren’t aware of the official proclamations that contradict the true gospel.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks, SDP. Yes, many Catholics are not knowledgeable about their religion. The RCC teaches its sacraments impart graces, which helps the recipient obey the Ten Commandments and resist sin so that they can hopefully merit Heaven at the moment of death. While there’s references to (sacramental) “grace” and “faith” (in the sacramental system), the bottom line of the RC system is Catholics must “cooperate with grace” (obey the Ten Commandments) to merit Heaven. The common parlance fools many evangelicals. Catholic clerics and knowledgeable Catholics would never assent to “faith alone” because of the merit factor. Yes, I believe there are a small number of Catholics who somehow heard or read and understood the genuine Gospel and are trusting in Christ as Savior through faith in Jesus alone, but the Holy Spirit will lead them out. Every mass they attend contradicts the genuine Gospel of grace.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Sorry, an addendum.
      It occurred to me that if 100 Catholics were asked to describe how to get to Heaven in one sentence, probably 95 would say some variation of “By being a good person.” Have to also add that the RCC officially teaches that all non-Catholic religionists and even atheists can also merit Heaven if they are “sincere” about their beliefs and are “good.” Sorry, you’re probably aware of all of this and I’m “preaching to the choir.”

      Like

  11. I completely agree, Tom. Jesus said that he wanted us to know the truth and that it would set us free. Red flags always went up in my mind every time Tim Keller’s name was mentioned for the reasons you mention here and his acceptance of mysticism. People in Mr. Keller’s position have even more responsibility than the average lay person because of their scope of influence. When it comes to the gospel message, the truth must be told. We sympathize with friends and family members at the loss of a loved one but we must never look the other way at easily discerned doctrinal error. I hope the author of the article comes to know the true gospel.
    Thank you for sharing.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for the good comments, Chris. Yes, when highly respected “evangelical Protestant” leaders approve of Rome’s works gospel (it’s a pandemic at this point), Christians with some discernment need to speak up. So many souls – Catholic and evangelical – have been affected by the ecumenical compromise.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment