(Daryl is a fivefold teacher on Don Atkin’s apostolic team.)

SORTING THROUGH GOSSIP

The disclaimer is very telling.  “I don’t know if this is gossip, but . . .  .” suggests that the information-bearer has some measure of doubt concerning whether or not the soon-to-succeed data bit should be shared.  Inevitably the story is almost always told.  Yet even when the speaker proceeds with the best of intentions, he cannot go forward in the full assurance of faith.  His wavering and confusion are tied to the lack of a clear understanding concerning “gossip”—what it is, and whether or not under certain circumstances it is appropriate and constructive.

For the most part the church has done little to significantly illuminate this subject.  Much of the concrete direction that she has provided has categorically declared the sharing of all information of a critical nature that is related within a private context to be destructive and sinful, especially when the subject has to do with church leadership.  This position is not without foundation.  The Greek word which is translated “gossip” or “whisperings” is psithurismos (it even sounds like “Psit!” which precedes something whispered), and it is only used twice in the New Testament:

“For I am afraid that perhaps when I come I may find you to be not what I wish and may be found by you to be not what you wish; that perhaps there will be strife, jealousy, angry tempers, disputes, slanders, gossip, arrogance, disturbances (2 Cor. 12:20) . . . .”

The reprobate are described, among other things, as  “ . . . being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips (Rom. 1:29) . . . .”

These two usages clearly frame gossip in the negative sense.  Practiced maliciously or indiscreetly, none would debate the insidious effects of whispering.  Still, the assumption that any statement that could be considered negative and that is whispered is inherently evil is a stretch.

A friend of mine visited Russia years ago, before it fragmented into the various states that now mark its geopolitical boundaries.  He told of how the crowded buses were filled with a deathly silence, and how no one dared glance up from the floor or acknowledge his neighbor seated right next to him.  The awareness that “Big Brother” might be listening to any conversation had each occupant paralyzed with an oppressive terror.  In some cases the church has operated in a fashion that is not altogether removed from this illustration.  The results, while obviously not to this extreme, have not only served to quench slanderous communication but have also dampened the free flow of healthy dialogue.  This has all occurred under the admonition, “If you can’t say something positive about someone, don’t say anything at all,” coupled with the threat of rebuke or worse for anyone who violates the rule.  

The problem with this as a hard-and-fast axiom is that critical examination and discussion among peers are often essential before individuals can come to the truth on a particular matter.  By squelching the verbalization of anything that is not “positive” we create an atmosphere where discernment is despised, reason is devalued, and honesty is rejected in favor of an artificially rosy world.  When that which is “positive” is preferred over that which is a true, delusion abounds.  “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter (Is. 5:20)!”

What is needful is not the elimination of all intimate discussions of problem issues, but rather a honing of the parameters surrounding such conversations.  The Scriptures amply provide that, without anyone having to overstate the same.

1.      “Therefore, putting away lying, each one speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members of one another (Eph. 4:25).”  We are always responsible to be truthful with one another.  One should no more lie to a fellow member of Christ’s body than he would lie to himself.  While this ought to be self-evident, many unfortunately resort to less than honesty with one another in their efforts to satisfy their objective of fulfilling a distorted but popular notion of what constitutes “positive” edification (i.e., only the “fluffy” and “feel good” stuff).

2.      “ . . . but, speaking the truth in love (Eph. 4:15a) . . .”  It is not enough to merely be truthful with one another.  Our motivation for speaking anything is critically important, since truth can cause tremendous damage if misused.  If one is not operating in the Spirit of Truth, he may also be found making statements which are technically true when viewed according to the letter but are actually subtle lies.  Satan did this quite masterfully when he visited Jesus in the wilderness.  When a believer is walking after the Spirit he will experience the Lord checking him from saying things that are, while true, not in accordance with love.  If a word doesn’t advance the purpose of God’s kingdom in the earth and serve to point the hearer or others to a deeper life in God, then it flunks the “love test.”

3.      “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers (Eph. 4:29).”   It is possible for us to speak truth from a proper heart motivation, and still miss edifying our neighbor.  Sometimes a thoughtful consideration of our listeners will rein us back from making statements that, while true and well-intentioned, are not audience-appropriate.  (In one sense, this could be considered a more developed aspect of “speaking the truth in love.”)  A lack of edification in speech is sometimes more the result of a deficiency in wisdom rather than a wrong intent.  It is helpful to pray for wisdom, so that the phrasing and timing of what we share has maximal benefit to the hearers.  “Walk in wisdom toward those who are outside, redeeming the time.  Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one (Col. 4: 5, 6).”

4.      A final point has to do with accountability for information that we choose to share.  We must accept responsibility for the fact that others can and sometimes do misuse what we extend to them in good faith.  By the time something has run through the “rumor mill” (by now it may be twisted beyond all recognition of what we actually said), we have to accept our measure of blame for the fall-out from things that we have whispered in private—no matter how truthful, well-intentioned, and edifying our conversation may have been.  Wisdom therefore mandates that we be prudent and judicious in determining who we bring into our confidence, and to what extent.  Equally important is the assessment of whether or not the hearer is involved in the matter about which we are speaking, or is part of the ultimate solution.  Just as a “need to know” is a release criterion for sensitive or classified government information, the same can be true in the private sector. 

A great many things that are gossiped in intimate settings fail one or more of the aforementioned criteria.  This is the reason why a number of Christians adopt the position that a blanket-condemnation of all whispering serves to establish godly order.  While I do not agree with this conclusion, I do acknowledge the potential dangers associated with gossip, and hasten to list the following scriptural admonitions:

“And besides they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips (‘phluaros,’ or tattlers who are babbling, or garrulous) and busybodies (‘periergazomai,’ or those who work outside their own sphere and meddle in the affairs of others), saying things which they ought not (1 Tim. 5:13).”

“For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies (see above note).  Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread (2 Thess. 3:11).”

Much conversation in general—not just that which is whispered—is detrimental.  That is why warnings abound throughout the Bible:

“In a multitude of words sin is not lacking, but he who restrains his lips is wise (Prov. 10: 19).”

“For a dream comes through much activity, and a fool’s voice is known by his many words (Ec. 5:3).”

The problem of corrupt speech is not really a “gossip issue” at all.  First, it is far more comprehensive than that, because it ultimately involves a refusal to relinquish control of one’s tongue to the Lord.  Conversely, the freedom and responsibility to speak forth the things that God would have us to declare opens voicing concerns and criticisms in a private setting.  The real key is recognizing that He weighs our every word, and we will answer for everything that we say.  

“A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things.  But I say to you that for every idle (‘argos,’ or inactive, unfruitful, ineffective, worthless) word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment.  For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned (Matt. 12: 35-37).”

So, is it wrong to gossip?  That depends.