Richard Nixon (1913–94) was President of the United States from 1968–74. He resigned from office in disgrace because of his part in the cover-up of the Watergate scandal. By today’s standards, the Watergate scandal might be considered small potatoes. Nixon himself, who disavowed any knowledge of the break-in, called it a “third-rate burglary.” Indeed, it was an amateur, ham-fisted affair. He is known for a number of things, e.g., meeting Elvis Presley (1935–77), who paid the President a surprise visit, in the Oval Office, the opening to China, his conduct of the Vietnam War, his ardent opposition to Communism, his massive expansion of the welfare state, and his enemies list.

In the last few days, another list has appeared in public. This one was not typewritten and is not found in a presidential library. It was displayed as part of an interview conducted with a stated clerk of a NAPARC denomination by an evangelical organization. During the interview, the clerk held up a scrap of paper with a list in order to illustrate a point. Of course, viewers took screenshots of the clerk and the list before the video was taken down. The podcast host has apologized for unintentionally publishing the list and the clerk himself has issued an apology.¹ I am omitting names here, not to be cryptic but to focus on the issues at hand.

During the podcast, the clerk described those on his list as “scandalizers.” Scandal is an important concept both in Scripture and in the Christian tradition. Our English word scandal is a transliteration (e.g., writing a Greek word in English letters) of a Greek root (σκανδαλ), which entered the English language in the thirteenth century.² The English verb to scandalize means ” to cause to be brought to a downfall, cause to sin” or to “be led into sin” or “to give offense, anger, shock.” ³ The noun scandal can refer to a “trap” or to “an action or circumstance that leads one to act contrary to a proper course of action or set of beliefs, temptation to sin, enticement to apostasy, false belief, etc.”⁴ The Oxford English Dictionary, however, gives a sense which might strike closer to the sense in which the noun scandalizers is intended in this case: “Damage to reputation; rumour or general comment injurious to reputation.”⁵

The Greek root for our English words occurs about 41 times in the New Testament and has been the subject of no little study. The first thing I read on it was John Calvin’s 1550 De scandalis, which he wrote as a defense against attacks on the gospel and to strengthen those who were being led astray by them.⁶

The use of these terms in the gospel of Matthew and elsewhere in the New Testament is instructive. In Matthew 5:29–30 our Lord says, “If your right eye scandalizes you, tear it out…” and “if your right hand scandalizes you, cut it off….”⁷ Whoever is not scandalized by Christ is blessed (Matt 11:6). Some are scandalized by the word of the kingdom and fall away (Matt 13:21). When Peter rebuked our Lord for telling the disciples about his coming suffering and death, Jesus responded: “Get behind me Satan! You are a scandal to me” (Matt 16:23).⁸ Scandal is central to one of our Lord’s most solemn warnings: “But whoever scandalizes one of these little ones, those who believe in me, it would be better for him to have a millstone hung around his neck….” (Matt 18:6).⁹ Nevertheless, it is necessary for scandals to come (Matt 18:7). There will come a time when many will be scandalized (Matt 24:10). Equally solemn were our Lord’s words to his disciples, “You will all be scandalized because of me this night” (Matt 26:31).¹⁰ Scripture itself describes Jesus as a “rock of scandal” (Isa 8:14; Rom 9:33; 1 Pet 2:8).

In his explanation and defense of Christian liberty, Paul exhorted the church at Rome, “Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or scandal in the way of a brother” (Rom 14:13).¹¹ He warned the congregation to beware of those who cause “divisions and scandals” contrary to the teaching they had received (Rom 16:17). Writing to the Corinthians he had to address those who were scandalized by the stronger brothers who were able to eat meat offered to idols (1 Cor 8:13). His rule was, in the case that exercising the liberty to eat meat offered to idols caused a weaker brother to fall, then we must give up our liberty (cf. 2 Cor 11:29). To the Galatians he explained that the gospel should be a scandal to the Judaizers and that we should never play down the cross for their sake (Gal 5:29).

In biblical terms, then, it is plain that to be a scandalizer is a very serious thing indeed. Just after 39 minutes into the interview, about his list, which he brandished like Joseph McCarthy brandished his lists of alleged communists,¹² the clerk said, “Those are the names of the scandalizers, the people who have invested hours every day attacking others for their supposed lack of faithfulness, for their compromise…whose identity comes from scandalizing others. And every name on that list has either left his family, left the faith, or taken his life—every name on that list.” These are very serious allegations. I do not know all those listed, but I know some of them and these charges are not true of those I know. Five of those listed are ministers or ruling elders in good standing in NAPARC denominations. It is difficult to square the clerk’s words and the display with the ninth commandment as explained by the Westminster Standards:

The duties required in the ninth commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbor, as well as our own; appearing and standing for the truth; and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things whatsoever; a charitable esteem of our neighbors; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name; sorrowing for and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging of their gifts and graces, defending their innocency; a ready receiving of a good report, and unwillingness to admit of an evil report, concerning them; discouraging talebearers, flatterers, and slanderers; love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requireth; keeping of lawful promises; studying and practicing of whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report (Westminster Larger Catechism, 144).

Did the list and his description of those on it show a “charitable esteem” of his neighbors? Did they promote the good name of his neighbors? Did it stand for truth? Did it cover up their infirmities? Did it freely acknowledge their gifts and graces?

The sins forbidden by the ninth commandment are:

all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbors, as well as our own, especially in public judicature; giving false evidence, suborning false witnesses, wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, outfacing and overbearing the truth; passing unjust sentence, calling evil good, and good evil; rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous, and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; forgery, concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, and holding our peace when iniquity calleth for either a reproof from ourselves, or complaint to others; speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful or equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of the truth or justice; speaking untruth, lying, slandering, backbiting, detracting, talebearing, whispering, scoffing, reviling, rash, harsh, and partial censuring; misconstructing intentions, words, and actions; flattering, vainglorious boasting, thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others; denying the gifts and graces of God; aggravating smaller faults; hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins, when called to a free confession; unnecessary discovering of infirmities; raising false rumors, receiving and countenancing evil reports, and stopping our ears against just defense; evil suspicion; envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any; endeavoring or desiring to impair it, rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy; scornful contempt, fond admiration; breach of lawful promises; neglecting such things as are of good report, and practicing, or not avoiding ourselves, or not hindering what we can in others, such things as procure an ill name (ibid., 145).

Did the list and his description prejudice the truth, give a false report, call good evil, did it slander, revile, or show partial censuring? These are questions for others to answer, but such questions should be asked and answered.¹³

Finally, we should think together about how to handle conflict. Clearly, this minister is perturbed at a number of people whom he characterizes as “scandalizers.” I understand. Every Christian has been (or will be) hurt by other Christians. Repeatedly, people have said to me that they were treated better or faced less conflict in working for secular organizations than they did in their Christian settings. I believe it. Spiritual warfare is a reality and it is difficult to understand until one has experienced it. The evil one hates Christ, his gospel, and his church and does all that he can to damage the same. One way he seeks to damage them is by sowing division not over the truth but over interpersonal offense. This happens because in the church and in Christian organizations we tend to have higher expectations and are thus perhaps more gravely wounded when we are disappointed or offended. Here one thinks of part of 1 Corinthians 13:5, “Love…keeps no record of evil” (οὐ λογίζεται τὸ κακόν), which leads us to the list itself. According to Yanek Mieczkowski, upon learning about the list, upon assuming the presidency after Nixon’s resignation, Gerald Ford observed a person “who can’t keep his enemies in his head has got too many enemies.” ¹⁴ That seems right to me. It may be impossible for a faithful minister to avoid conflict for the sake of Christ and his gospel (Rom 11:28). Some will become “enemies of the cross of Christ” (Phil 3:18). Matthew 5:43 assumes that we will have enemies and it teaches us what to do about them: love and pray for them.

The vanquishing of Christ’s enemies, however, belongs to Christ and he will accomplish it at his return. The New Testament teaches us this repeatedly by quoting and interpreting Psalm 110:1, “until I make your enemies your footstool” (e.g., Heb 1:12; 10:12; Luke 10:43; Acts 2:25; 1 Cor 15:25). God has a list but it is not at all clear from Scripture that we are to keep such lists, whether on paper or in our hearts and minds. When we consider our Lord’s words and the eschatology and ethics of the New Testament we do better to keep a prayer list.

notes

1. The clerk wrote, “With deep regret for harm done to others, I am issuing a public apology for not taking proper care to protect the reputation of others. In an unplanned moment on a recent video podcast posted by The Gospel Coalition, I held up a small piece of paper that I believed was not readable but included the names of individuals. TGC personnel who prepared the video also thought that nothing was legible on the paper. However, there are now those who have taken a screenshot of the video and enlarged it to identify some names. I sincerely apologize.”
2. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word first entered the English language in 1225.
3. William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), s.v., σκανδαλιζω.
4. Ibid., s.v., σκανδαλον.
5. Oxford English Dictionary, s.v., “scandal.”
6. Wulfert de Greef, The Writings of John Calvin, Expanded Edition, trans. Lyle D. Bierma (Louisville: WJKP, 2008), 127. See John Calvin, Concerning Scandals (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978).
7. Translation revised from the ESV.
8. Rev. from the ESV.
9. My translation.
10. Rev. from the ESV.
11. Rev. from ESV.
12. This analogy is not original to me but was shared with me in a comment by someone else.
13. The PCA Administration Committee has released this statement.
14. Yakek Mieczkowski, Gerald Ford and the Challenges of the 1970s (Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky, 2005), 28.

©R. Scott Clark. All Rights Reserved.

RESOURCES

• Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
• Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
• Browse the Heidelshop!
• The Heidelblog Resource Page
• Heidelmedia Resources
• The Ecumenical Creeds
• The Reformed Confessions
• The Heidelberg Catechism
• The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
• Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
• Why I Am A Christian
• What Must A Christian Believe?
• Heidelblog Contributors
• Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to

Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization