Every few weeks, the internet finds a new church clip to argue about. A pastor says something wild from a megachurch pulpit. A moment meant for a congregation gets chopped into a two-minute video. The comments explode. Think pieces follow. And the cycle repeats.
The easy conclusion is to blame social media. But that’s lazy. Social media didn’t create church controversy. It just turned the lights on.
That truth has been sitting in plain sight, and it’s something Mark JP Hood articulated during his conversation with The Quintessential Gentleman. “I think that there’s nothing new under the sun. So things that are being shown are things that have been happening in churches.”
That framing matters. Because what we’re witnessing online isn’t some sudden moral collapse inside faith communities. It’s exposure. Cameras didn’t invent questionable theology, power imbalances, or charismatic leaders saying too much with too little accountability. They just made it easier for everyone to see.
Nowhere is this clearer than in the ongoing discourse around megachurch culture. Large congregations, massive platforms, and pastors who function as CEOs, influencers, and spiritual leaders all at once have always existed. What’s changed is the audience. What used to be contained within four walls now circulates endlessly on X, TikTok, and Instagram, often stripped of context and packaged for outrage.
Hood acknowledges the tension without dismissing the value of access. “I think that some of these cameras probably need to start shutting off at some time. But I think it’s important, though, to have the reach of streaming and social media, because if I could be frank, I don’t get to church that often, but I stream every Sunday. And that has worked for me since the pandemic.”
That contradiction sits at the center of today’s church culture. Streaming has expanded access, especially for people navigating faith differently post-pandemic. At the same time, constant visibility invites scrutiny and not always fair scrutiny.
The biggest casualty in this dynamic is nuance. “Context and nuance are something that we don’t consider on social media,” Hood said. “Pastors are responsible for their flock. Their flock generally understands their teachings, and what goes on in their house.”
Social media doesn’t care about sermons as a whole. It thrives on moments. Soundbites. Shock value. A clip ripped from a 45-minute message can easily misrepresent intent, tone, or theology. That doesn’t mean pastors should be immune from critique, but it does mean the internet often critiques without full information.
Mega Church Pastors LOVE Money 😂😭 pic.twitter.com/oku5IQE01N
— DRUSKI (@druski) January 13, 2026
Which brings us to Druski’s recent megachurch parody, a skit that struck a nerve precisely because it felt uncomfortably familiar. The exaggerated theatrics, the prosperity messaging, the spectacle, it wasn’t just comedy. It was commentary.
The reaction exposed how normalized certain behaviors have become inside church spaces. The skit didn’t invent those archetypes. It mirrored them. And the reason it landed is that audiences recognized the truth beneath the satire.
That recognition was echoed by Lecrae, who offered one of the most grounded responses to the backlash.
“My first reaction was actually not offense. It was recognition,” Lecrae said in a video posted on Instagram. “Because… there’s a lot of churches out there with these blind spots. There’s wolves in the pulpits. There’s theatrics for attention and money and influence and leaders are manipulating God’s name for gain.”
In other words, Druski wasn’t creating a caricature out of thin air. “When a comedian is shining a light on it, he’s not inventing something out of thin air. He’s actually reflecting what people have already seen,” he added.
That’s the part many critics are struggling with.
Lecrae also addressed why the reaction feels so intense. “I think the reason people are upset is because we think the church is the sacred ground where no one is allowed to critique, criticize, or make fun of.” But reverence, he argued, should come with responsibility. “If it’s sacred ground, then we should not be allowing wolves in sheep’s clothing to be up here making a mockery because it is sacred ground.”
The solution, according to Lecrae, isn’t outrage; it’s introspection. “So the work needs to be done internally. I think there needs to be more leaders, and teachers, and pastors warning people about these false leaders and false teachers.”
That perspective aligns closely with Hood’s critique, especially when it comes to leadership. Hood didn’t mince words: “Some of these pastors, they’ve never led anything in their lives. And now they’re leading congregations of hundreds of people, essentially a big business, and they don’t know how to be leaders.” He added, “That would never fly if I was trying to be a leader at Goldman Sachs or Target or any of those types of places.”
That’s not a social media issue. That’s a structural one.
Lecrae also pushed back on the idea that church scandals should push people away from faith altogether. “This is not the opportunity. People say, ‘This is why I don’t go to church.’ This is the opportunity.” He offered a simple analogy: “If I see a restaurant that’s filthy and dirty… it doesn’t make me say, ‘I never want soul food again.’ It makes you say, ‘I’ll never eat at that particular soul food restaurant.’”
His point is clear: critique the dysfunction, not the faith itself.
At the end of the day, social media didn’t corrupt the church. It exposed weak leadership, unchecked power, and systems that haven’t kept pace with their influence. It also exposed how quickly outsiders and insiders are willing to judge without full context.
Both can be true.
The cameras aren’t going away. Neither is the scrutiny. The real question is whether church leadership will evolve or continue acting shocked every time the mirror gets held up.
Because the controversy was always there. We’re just all watching now.
Photo Credit: DepositPhotos.com
