Churchill and His Critic A story, perhaps apocryphal or embellished, has long been told of an intoxicated Winston Churchill, the British WWII prime minister, being confronted by a woman at a dinner party. “Sir Winston,” she exclaimed, “you’re drunk!” Churchill retorted, “That may be so, madame; but you’re ugly, and tomorrow morning, I’ll be sober.” It is hard to suppress amusement at such repartee, but perhaps some more sobering thoughts are in order. First, while there might be something to admire in Churchill’s quick and nimble wit, truth and falsehood remain what they are regardless of how effectively (or ineffectively) they are packaged and presented. Satan is ingenious at devising ways to obscure the truth or distract people from it. For instance, some people seem to think that shouting is a good argument. Of course, falsehood shouted is no truer than falsehood whispered. Likewise, humor can be an effective tool in the devil’s hands to mask sin. Error seems so much less threatening, even downright innocent, if he can couch it in a way that brings laughter. For instance, the reader can get so caught up in the humor of Churchill’s response to his critic that it requires a conscious effort to think about it beyond that. It is told, and intended, as a joke! It is practically counterintuitive to see it otherwise. To analyze it for anything else just spoils the fun. Yet, a little more reflection might prompt the reader to ask, “What did he really say to her???” He managed to respond with an insult so witty and cutting that nobody cares if he was drunk or the woman was not really ugly! He was so hilarious that it does not even occur to the reader that he insulted her! No, Winston Churchill got caught shamelessly drunk, and all he could think to do was deflect his critic with the insult that she was incurably ugly! Second, casting blame on others is rarely, if ever, an appropriate response to criticism. Peter said not to return “… insult for insult” (1 Pet. 3:9). Whether the woman was really ugly or not, Churchill’s riposte surely shut her down. Yet, none of that changed the fact that she was right that Churchill was drunk! Nevertheless, this is often the way sinners respond when they are caught. The “golden rule” among wrongdoers, rarely violated, is: “do or say anything but admit you are wrong. Lie about it, minimize it, shift the issue, offer excuses, pass the criticism off with a joke, find fault with your critic — but, whatever you do, don’t admit you’re wrong.” There is only one thing worse than sin to the sinner, and that’s admitting it. It is characteristic for sinners, if they cannot escape blame, to find some way to share, or shift, the blame. It is a school yard ploy to say, “He did it, too,” but one which adults find hard to outgrow. Churchill could not deny he was drunk, but he did something else so effective that, to his critic and everybody there and since then, he might as well not have been drunk. It is hard to imagine a meaner, harsher thing to say to a woman. Whether his critic’s face was ugly is not certain, but it is certain that his own spirit was. She may not have been pretty, but neither was he really half as “cute” as he thought he was. “Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised” (Prov. 31:30). Churchill was probably sober the next morning, and the woman, if ugly was still so. But the “sober truth” for Churchill was that ugliness is not a sin; drunkenness is! A person can be ugly and still go to heaven, but he will never get there drunk (1 Cor. 6:9-11). Churchill might have regained his sobriety in the morning, but not his character. He was still a sinner, an “ugly truth” hardly relieved by his sobriety, and that was true, whether the woman was ugly or not!