The now-disgraced CCM star hasn't really come to a mature understanding of what he did. He admits he only committed "sins," when he actually committed crimes.
This was a great article, and I'm glad to see critical response to this rather than the directionless outrage I've been seeing.
One thing I've noticed in online discourse is that Tait's equating of his sexual misconduct (i.e. crimes) as "sin" not only detracts from its severity, but allows for misplaced anger at the nature of his actions. I've seen people more upset about the fact that Tait's actions were towards other men than the actions themselves, as if assault is a lesser evil than same-sex attraction, though I guess in many evangelical circles, it is.
I think your take on things displays an underdeveloped understanding of sin. To characterize an action as simply "a sin to be forgiven" as opposed to being a (potentially) ongoing roadblock to union with God requiring *repentance*. Maybe this is a vestige of "one saved, always saved" theology or maybe it's a reflection of the all-too-often public line that is presented in the wake of the publication of iconic Christians' misdeeds. Either way, it reinforces a weak understanding of the seriousness of sin in the same breath you're complaining about it.
My view is that calling something like sexual assault a sin rather than a crime downplays how serious it is. It also potentially weaponizes forgiveness.
I was about thinking this too. Sinning against God and our fellow man is the greatest crime we could ever commit… there is so much more to sin than simply admitting you sinned and then asking the person you sinned against to forgive you. There’s also repentance required, and that has multiple parts. Part of that is acknowledging that what you did was wrong, and part of that is recognizing how what you’ve done has affected the other person. There’s an action part to repentance too, it’s on the offender to practically make things right as much as they are able. It’s no light thing.
When I was a kid, if I stole my sister’s candy, I wasn’t just told to apologize, and she wasn’t just told to forgive me. I was told to apologize, think about/understand how what I’d done had hurt her, and to give her my candy to replace the one I’d stolen. There was an actual consequence and it was on me to step up and make it right, and not just in words. That’s what repentance should look like. Hopefully Tait, if he’s walking with God and seeking to honor him and love his neighbor, will do way more than just admitting to having sinned and apologizing.
“When you’re with the same people for that long, they can and should see if something is wrong, no matter what you say.”
This is the thing I think you (we) are missing. Abuse happens all the time in homes we know and love. It goes unseen, sometimes even by the victims, because conservative Christianity condones behaviors that are not Christ-like: namely control, but also isolationism and gaslighting. Happens all the time while we smile and nod.
That, and a transactional approach to relationships. It’s about getting people saved above all else. Especially in the Newsboys’ generation—likely thought dealing with Tait honestly could potentially keep someone from being saved. Ironic, since their mishandling of Tait has effectively blacklisted them from radio.
Growing up, I can remember so much emphasis being placed on this very thing. I heard so many people say things like "We just gotta get 'em saved!" Getting people to pray the "Sinner's Prayer" was the primary focus. What happened after that seemed to be an afterthought, as if someone was just supposed to know how to be a Christian immediately after becoming one. Over the years I have seen so many people have an emotional, tear-filled "getting saved" moment only to completely disappear from church a few months later. This didn't always happen, of course, but it happened far more times than it should have.
The problem, to me, is that we treat getting people "saved" like it's the finish line when in reality it's just the starting point. We usher people along to the point of believing and then leave them to the spiritual wolves so that we can rush to try to get the next person "saved." No one expects a newborn child to fend for itself. Why do we expect spiritual "newborns" to do any different?
It’s more serious than that. A lot of evangelicals see people merely as potential notches in their Bibles. They don’t care about them as actual people, meet them where they are. My former pastors’ pastor once called it “speaking Christian.”
What a convicting article. I wish more Christians thought like this. The sin is obvious. So obvious, but the downplaying of the criminality of these “downfalls” or “backslidings” is brutal to the victims. As a Christian community, we need to demand justice and restoration for the victims. While I certainly want to see Tait and any other criminals come to repentance, if they were truly repentant they'd do the right thing. Like Zacchaeus who paid back 4 times what he stole.
This reminds me of another article I read today (link below) and this quote " Hearing about women’s experiences in evangelical culture has played a big role in helping Nate question the ideas around gender he grew up with. “For us boys, the teachings were always very internal, policing our thoughts and feelings,” he said. Katy, on the other hand, was taught from an early age to not tempt men to stray, to always dress modestly and never do anything that could be misconstrued as flirting: “It sounds like so much pressure, having to monitor your surroundings.”
This is all linked to a mindset in our wider culture, and reflected in religious institutions, that 'boys will be boys' - remember 'locker room talk'? There's just nothing boys and men can do about their aggressive need for sex, other than try to control it or channel it in the context of marriage. The onus is on those to whom they are attracted to stay buttoned up and be physically unavailable.
I agree with you that simply presenting sexual assault as a 'sin' absolutely downplays how serious this is, and in the Christian world, there is a sense then that all the accused has to do is ask forgiveness, and we can all move on.
This is predatory behaviour. Bill Cosby is a predator, Donald Trump is a predator, that Quiverfull reality guy is a predator - and Michael Tait is a predator. It's unlikely they stopped/will stop willingly. In every case, they targeted vulnerable - in different ways - people. Many of Michael Tait's targets had already experienced sexual abuse when they met him, AND THEY CONFIDED THIS in him. He and the others listed above weren't tempted by those they assaulted, they preyed on them.
That means that while his actions were sinful, they were also crimes. He's free to seek forgiveness from God and those he hurt - and I hope he does - but he should also be prepared to offer himself up to face legal consequences and make actual reparation - not wait to be sued or for the law to come after him.
I think people forget that the John James, the original lead singer for Newsboys, left the band in 1996. CCM/Newsboys said John left for ministry opportunities. In reality he left because of substance abuse and marital issues.
The band needs to really sit down and think about how they wish to proceed because there is clearly an ongoing problem and they’re ignoring it.
Actually working on a piece about that. James’ departure and the band’s double talk about it puts them even more firmly in “what did they know and when did they know it” territory.
I don't think it's just the Newsboys who need to sit down and think about how they want to proceed, unfortunately. Given Tait's position in the industry and that this has been going on for two decades (plus the fact that according to the reports, he was openly taking these young men to bars and getting them drunk), I'd bet there were a WHOLE lot of people who knew or suspected something and did nothing, or possibly helped to actively cover it up.
This shouldn't devolve into "seven degrees of Every Nation," but while Newsboys and Tait have apparently distanced themselves from Every Nation Church, they (and previous Newsboys lead singer Peter Furler) were very much involved in Every Nation's orbit during the time period when allegations first began to surface... coinciding with Tait's becoming Newsboys' lead singer. Newsboys' manager Wes Campbell was also very much involved. Remember Seward Hall?
This was a great article, and I'm glad to see critical response to this rather than the directionless outrage I've been seeing.
One thing I've noticed in online discourse is that Tait's equating of his sexual misconduct (i.e. crimes) as "sin" not only detracts from its severity, but allows for misplaced anger at the nature of his actions. I've seen people more upset about the fact that Tait's actions were towards other men than the actions themselves, as if assault is a lesser evil than same-sex attraction, though I guess in many evangelical circles, it is.
I think your take on things displays an underdeveloped understanding of sin. To characterize an action as simply "a sin to be forgiven" as opposed to being a (potentially) ongoing roadblock to union with God requiring *repentance*. Maybe this is a vestige of "one saved, always saved" theology or maybe it's a reflection of the all-too-often public line that is presented in the wake of the publication of iconic Christians' misdeeds. Either way, it reinforces a weak understanding of the seriousness of sin in the same breath you're complaining about it.
My view is that calling something like sexual assault a sin rather than a crime downplays how serious it is. It also potentially weaponizes forgiveness.
I was about thinking this too. Sinning against God and our fellow man is the greatest crime we could ever commit… there is so much more to sin than simply admitting you sinned and then asking the person you sinned against to forgive you. There’s also repentance required, and that has multiple parts. Part of that is acknowledging that what you did was wrong, and part of that is recognizing how what you’ve done has affected the other person. There’s an action part to repentance too, it’s on the offender to practically make things right as much as they are able. It’s no light thing.
When I was a kid, if I stole my sister’s candy, I wasn’t just told to apologize, and she wasn’t just told to forgive me. I was told to apologize, think about/understand how what I’d done had hurt her, and to give her my candy to replace the one I’d stolen. There was an actual consequence and it was on me to step up and make it right, and not just in words. That’s what repentance should look like. Hopefully Tait, if he’s walking with God and seeking to honor him and love his neighbor, will do way more than just admitting to having sinned and apologizing.
“When you’re with the same people for that long, they can and should see if something is wrong, no matter what you say.”
This is the thing I think you (we) are missing. Abuse happens all the time in homes we know and love. It goes unseen, sometimes even by the victims, because conservative Christianity condones behaviors that are not Christ-like: namely control, but also isolationism and gaslighting. Happens all the time while we smile and nod.
That, and a transactional approach to relationships. It’s about getting people saved above all else. Especially in the Newsboys’ generation—likely thought dealing with Tait honestly could potentially keep someone from being saved. Ironic, since their mishandling of Tait has effectively blacklisted them from radio.
Growing up, I can remember so much emphasis being placed on this very thing. I heard so many people say things like "We just gotta get 'em saved!" Getting people to pray the "Sinner's Prayer" was the primary focus. What happened after that seemed to be an afterthought, as if someone was just supposed to know how to be a Christian immediately after becoming one. Over the years I have seen so many people have an emotional, tear-filled "getting saved" moment only to completely disappear from church a few months later. This didn't always happen, of course, but it happened far more times than it should have.
The problem, to me, is that we treat getting people "saved" like it's the finish line when in reality it's just the starting point. We usher people along to the point of believing and then leave them to the spiritual wolves so that we can rush to try to get the next person "saved." No one expects a newborn child to fend for itself. Why do we expect spiritual "newborns" to do any different?
It’s more serious than that. A lot of evangelicals see people merely as potential notches in their Bibles. They don’t care about them as actual people, meet them where they are. My former pastors’ pastor once called it “speaking Christian.”
What a convicting article. I wish more Christians thought like this. The sin is obvious. So obvious, but the downplaying of the criminality of these “downfalls” or “backslidings” is brutal to the victims. As a Christian community, we need to demand justice and restoration for the victims. While I certainly want to see Tait and any other criminals come to repentance, if they were truly repentant they'd do the right thing. Like Zacchaeus who paid back 4 times what he stole.
This reminds me of another article I read today (link below) and this quote " Hearing about women’s experiences in evangelical culture has played a big role in helping Nate question the ideas around gender he grew up with. “For us boys, the teachings were always very internal, policing our thoughts and feelings,” he said. Katy, on the other hand, was taught from an early age to not tempt men to stray, to always dress modestly and never do anything that could be misconstrued as flirting: “It sounds like so much pressure, having to monitor your surroundings.”
This is all linked to a mindset in our wider culture, and reflected in religious institutions, that 'boys will be boys' - remember 'locker room talk'? There's just nothing boys and men can do about their aggressive need for sex, other than try to control it or channel it in the context of marriage. The onus is on those to whom they are attracted to stay buttoned up and be physically unavailable.
I agree with you that simply presenting sexual assault as a 'sin' absolutely downplays how serious this is, and in the Christian world, there is a sense then that all the accused has to do is ask forgiveness, and we can all move on.
This is predatory behaviour. Bill Cosby is a predator, Donald Trump is a predator, that Quiverfull reality guy is a predator - and Michael Tait is a predator. It's unlikely they stopped/will stop willingly. In every case, they targeted vulnerable - in different ways - people. Many of Michael Tait's targets had already experienced sexual abuse when they met him, AND THEY CONFIDED THIS in him. He and the others listed above weren't tempted by those they assaulted, they preyed on them.
That means that while his actions were sinful, they were also crimes. He's free to seek forgiveness from God and those he hurt - and I hope he does - but he should also be prepared to offer himself up to face legal consequences and make actual reparation - not wait to be sued or for the law to come after him.
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2025/jun/17/evangelical-sex-marriage
I think people forget that the John James, the original lead singer for Newsboys, left the band in 1996. CCM/Newsboys said John left for ministry opportunities. In reality he left because of substance abuse and marital issues.
The band needs to really sit down and think about how they wish to proceed because there is clearly an ongoing problem and they’re ignoring it.
Actually working on a piece about that. James’ departure and the band’s double talk about it puts them even more firmly in “what did they know and when did they know it” territory.
I don't think it's just the Newsboys who need to sit down and think about how they want to proceed, unfortunately. Given Tait's position in the industry and that this has been going on for two decades (plus the fact that according to the reports, he was openly taking these young men to bars and getting them drunk), I'd bet there were a WHOLE lot of people who knew or suspected something and did nothing, or possibly helped to actively cover it up.
Agree completely.
This shouldn't devolve into "seven degrees of Every Nation," but while Newsboys and Tait have apparently distanced themselves from Every Nation Church, they (and previous Newsboys lead singer Peter Furler) were very much involved in Every Nation's orbit during the time period when allegations first began to surface... coinciding with Tait's becoming Newsboys' lead singer. Newsboys' manager Wes Campbell was also very much involved. Remember Seward Hall?
It does add to the number of people who may have some explaining to do.
"Covering" or cover up?
A fair question.