Readers, if you've ever wondered what it looks like when a public figure issues a heart-felt, genuine apology for hurtful words spoken in public, watch the video below of talk-show host Ed Schultz publicly apologizing for calling conservative commentator Laura Ingraham a "right wing slut" on his national radio show.
I can't recall ever seeing a more genuine, unscripted, unconditional apology by a public figure for a misdeed. You really have to see this.
What a strange day we live in, when famous, very public Christians who misbehave, or say and do hurtful things, can't issue public apologies for their public misdeeds. They negotiate settlements, or they remain silent, let their friends defend them, make themselves the victim, or slink away to another church or ministry.
Thank you Ed Schultz for giving our country an example of what it looks like when a broken man issues a public apology for hurtful words. You have taught Christians more about humility and forgiveness and repentance in this five-minute video than most mega-church pastors will in a lifetime.
Ed Shultz is full of it as is the WD.
He might be full of "it", but he sure did give a genuine apology. Something you will never, ever see from a mega church pastor.
I don't know the show (don't watch cable) nor do I know this man, but what he said sounded very sincere and heartfelt.
I can't remember ever hearing a pastor say something of this magnitude.
Good for him! Maybe some pastors won't apologize because they are full of pride?? And you know what God thinks about that...
Please, your naive if you think that was genuine and not merely a good act. He had to save his job.
OK, great act. He acted the part of what true repentence and sorrow looks like and he did it very well.
He didn't say his detractors were jealous, didn't say that he knows that he is doing God's will when people attack him, etc. etc.
He should have used a word other than "slut". Hack, nutjob, wackjob. Have a nice day.
It was obvious his employer gave him motivation to make public apology - question is, would he have done it if his job was not on the line. Doubt it, but at least he was man enough to apologize.
To bad Brusnon, Soud, Blount, King, Ward & the rest of the discipline committee, the godly men they portray themselves week after week aren't men enough to apologize to Mrs. Rich. Shameful men whom people have lost respect for.
It would be interesting to know who pressured him. I bet it was his wife and daughter in laws and not his employers. I have listened to the Ed Show many times and he can get extremely ugly. He has really been ugly in the past towards Palin and other conservative women.
Knowing the quality woman that Laura is I was shocked he made such a statement.
As far as preachers are concerned, they like everyone who claims to be part of the human race are just players on the stage of life with feet of clay and probably would have a hard time humbling themselves in certain circumstances.
Ed Shultz is full of it as is the WD.
Mac Brunson, watch your manners sir. Ha Ha Ha.
In this situation, Mr. Schultz slandered another individual on national radio. This calls for a public apology.
In Mr. Caner's situation, he slandered no one. He only lied about details of his own life, hurting only himself. No apology is necessary to anyone.
Caner owes an apology to the Marines, at least.
Speaking at churches, he's an entertainer. He's a comedian.
At that engagement, he was a trainer of troops getting ready to put their lives on the line defending our country. He posed as an expert on Turkish culture.
He owes them an apology.
This struck me as very sincere. It moved me.
When someone does wrong to someone else, multiple parties tend to get involved. When one of my kids is mean to me, their siblings and their father get involved to bring about an apology. When I yell at one of my kids unnecessarily, they all get involved to bring about an apology. The same happens in extended family & friendship, when someone is wronged in the observation of others. All parties have a vested interest in bringing things back to a peaceful & productive level.
We can assume that other parties were involved in facilitating Mr. Shutlz's public apology -- they all had a vested interest in bringing things back to a peaceful & productive level, just like our famlies & friendships.
This in no way cheapens the apology.
It's funny how those who are responding negatively seem to believe that they possess the ability to read Schultz's heart and/or discern the actual quality of a soul's repentance. Indeed, he said that the only restitution he can make is to never do it again.
As I understand scripture, the Lord reads the heart. What Schultz did is what is required of all of us, repentance, apology, restitution. If you are as critical of someone who has performed the first step this well, I wonder how well your own PUBLIC apologies for the wrongs you have publicly committed [on your job, at the school, in groups, at church, before others outside your immediate family] would compare.
Ah Butcher Priest...
Caner portrayed or held himself as, if you will, an ambassador or messenger of the King. As such,he may not have "hurt" himself but that does not trump the fact that the Kings representative was not and is not honest or reliable.
The spokesperson for any product or cause must be believable. No one with any iota of reasoning power would ever believe him, from henceforth.
So he hurt the One that sent him.
Pity, Caner has no remorse.
Ed Schultz would make better representative.
Off Topic: Under Much Grace [Cindy Kunsman] > Ernest Willis Found Guilty of Aggravated Sexual Assault of Tina Anderson ... FBC Jax Watchdog > Posts on Trinity Rape
Caners lies were public. They were told to THOUSANDS over TEN YEARS in multiple PUBLIC venues: churches, conferences, schools, universities, trainings, etc.
Therefore, his repentance and apologies should be likewise, i.e., PUBLIC, MULTIPLE VENUES, LIVE BEFORE THOUSANDS, OF LIKE DURATION.
Quite a bit of pride going on in this blog. I'm as undeserving of God's grace as anyone, and this isn't me trying to push my agenda (which seems to be what this site is dedicated to), but why should anyone be surprised that a member of the "liberal media" issued a genuine apology? You suddenly become the authority on mega-church pastors and their ability to give genuine apologies?
I'm sorry but that is just a ludicrous statement to make. I might be able to respect this site if it had anything edifying in it, but whatever good you may be pushing, you're drowning yourself out with all of your senseless bashing on fellow Christians.
The church today has definite flaws, major ones, but it isn't because of certain people, it's because of all people. Sin doesn't just inhabit those morally bankrupt pastors of large churches, (who I am sure are quite capable of giving a heartfelt apology) but it also inhabits men like Ed Shultz (that is to say, unchurched people/deniers of Christ). Why glorify one over the other? We shouldn't spend our time punishing people for not going about church/Christianity exactly how one person wants it, we should be encouraging one another.
"Christians" apologizing....never happens. I've been to many different churches and most people there are so narcissitic that they don't think that they need to apologize for anything they say. "They" in their self-righteousness feel justified in what they say to others.They themselves are delusional and think that they are above everybody. They are completely blinded to their own sinfulness.
The only way to deal with these type of people is to avoid them. You cannot reason with them because they have arrived and you haven't.
Post a Comment