A Tutorial on Sex Abuse: What Evangelicals Must Learn From the Leadership Journal Debacle

"I should meet many people who do not know anyone personally who has been raped or molested as a child. But I can't remember seeing a newspaper without a rape or molestation charge in it somewhere, and when I ask groups how many people know someone personally with a history of molestation, almost always, every hand in the room goes up." Ann Salter link

 

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=47550&picture=woman-sitting-alone-on-a-benchalone on a bench

*Trigger Warning*
Discussing sex abuse of teens

Note: I want to make it clear that we believe that the girl in this story is not to blame for anything that occurred. She was fully the victim. TWW sends out our heartfelt prayers to her and her family. May the God of all comfort give her peace.

Last week, there was a veritable Twitter firestorm on an article posted in the Leadership Journal. The reports indicated that a former youth pastor, who is a convicted felon for statutory rape, was telling his story. Why was this a problem?  I began to read the story and I immediately became confused. The married man and father of two discussed a close friendship which eventually became sexual in nature. Throughout the story I kept wondering when the teen rape would come up.

As I soon discovered, this extra marital affair (which sounded like he was dealing with an adult woman) was actually statutory rape of a teen in his youth program! The title itself, My Easy Trip from Youth Pastor to Felon: "The spiral into sin that destroyed my life and ministry," indicates the problem. (Clue: the word "my") The post has since been removed from the Leadership Journal but can be read in its entirety here

I was flabbergasted. It was evident to me that this anonymous man was in complete denial as to the nature of his sin and crime. Worse, yet, was the apparent confusion of the editorial staff who decided that this would be a good article for church leaders to read. That's when it hit me. This is why there are continued problems with sex abuse in the evangelical church. Many evangelical leaders don't get it. Many evangelical journalists don't get it and many people in the pew don't get it.

This post reveals why Boz Tchividjian is correct when he says:

While comparing evangelicals to Catholics on abuse response, ”I think we are worse,” he said at the Religion Newswriters Association conference, saying too many evangelicals had “sacrificed the souls” of young victims.

Thankfully, after Time Magazine picked up on the story and Leadership Journal was inundated with texts, tweets and emails, the story was removed. Kudos to the growing effectiveness of social media and those who care about this issue. BUT we must not let this post slip off into internet oblivion. We need to understand why this post is wrong and how it can point us to a man who has not repented. In fact, this post points clearly to a man who is, in my opinion, without further intervention, highly likely to reoffend.

This post is lengthy since I want to point out details that might be overlooked on a cursory reading. There are many clues as to this man's state of mind along with indicators as to why there continues to be a serious problem of child sex abuse in today's evangelical church.

Sequence of events

Here is what I put together from his post. I am not claiming that it is accurate. The youth pastor indicates that he knew this girl from his early days in the church when she was most likely a middle schooler. She went on to be part of a tight knit, intimate group of high-schoolers. I am guessing that she was under 16 when the abuse began. He probably started texting her when she was still in middle school.

  • 2007- Abuser starts in youth ministry. He is newly married. Describes the teen as a "core student"," involved from the very beginning."
  • 2010- Begins more intimate contact the victim. He is in his early 30s. There is no indication when this turned sexual.
  • ​2012- Wife discovers his abuse of the teen (via his texts) and immediately leaves him. They have two young children at this point. He does not see his children from this point forward.
  • 2012(late)-2013-He sees his wife in court but does not talk with her. Perhaps she was a witness against him? He pleads guilty to two felonies. 
  • 2015 (fall) Will be released and will be a registered sex offender for the rest of his life.

The focus of the repentant abuser should be on the welfare and comfort of the victims and not on himself.

Years ago, Barbara Dorris of SNAP said something to me that everyone should remember when evaluating an abusive situation. She said that we can become sidetracked with all sort of issues. When that happens, remember the victims and put them first. It will put things into perspective. Apply Dorris' sage advice to this situation. The title of the story indicates this is all about the felon and his loss. 

"The spiral into sin that destroyed my life and ministry." 

Read the post and see if you can find any expressions of concern for the victim. Then look for an indication of concern for his wife and kids. He only conveys regret for his losses. A repentant abuser will demonstrate remorse over the pain caused his victim and his family.  It appears that he mainly regrets getting caught and losing out on his job and his seminary degree. It is almost scary that he does not talk about his children, even to express his love for them.

This lack of expressed concern is enough for me to say that this man is at high risk of reoffending. He is more concerned about his feelings, something that got him into trouble in the first place.

So, the next time you that you meet an abuser who claims to be repentant, without coaching him/her, encourage him to tell you his story. If the long term welfare of the abused, along with expressions of remorse, are not a part of his narrative, the abuser is not repentant. He is just sorry that his precious life got ruined. 

The abuser subtlety places blame of his wife and family ( aka "The Driscoll Deflection.")

The abuser said:

  • I felt unappreciated at home.
  • Since I felt I was not being rewarded at home…
  • We quit so many times but the temptation proved too strong.

Mark Driscoll expressed anger to his wife for the fact that she had sex as a teenager with another teenager at the same time she was having sex with the teenage Driscoll (while not married). You can read this sordid tale here. See, anything bad that happens to Mark is Grace Driscoll's fault. This felon appears to channel Driscoll and suggests that he wasn't being adored at home.

This guy is still not taking responsibility and is suggesting that such "unappreciation" caused him to seek solace in a young teen girl. That's normal, right?

By the way we should applaud the abuser's wife who responded swiftly and appropriately after confronting him. She got his young children out of that house and away from him. She also did not return to the home. She obviously realized that she was married to a dangerous man. Good for her!

The abuser portrays the girl as almost adult-like with equal power in the relationship.

Here are some words he used to describe their relationship.

  • extra-marital relationship
  • friendship
  • We tried to end our involvement with each other many times.

This allowed him to pretend that they were on equal footing in this relationship. He really does not want you focusing on the age of his victim. The question to ask is "What is a 30 something year old guy doing with a 14 year old girl?" That's not normal!

Oddly, he likens "trying to quit" (having sex) to trying to quit smoking. Is he trying to put his abuse of the teen on the same footing as an addicted cigarette smoker? It is definitely not on the same level and it shows, once again, his attempts to minimize his abuse.

How many smokers have quit smoking only to cave in at the next opportunity for a cigarette,

This "we were in this together" defense reminds me of Jack Schapp who is now serving time for abusing a minor. He wants a retrial because he claims his victim was equally to blame. He is going after her.

According to Charles Murray, Schaap's attorney, the defense wants to present new evidence casting the victim as an alcohol and marijuana user and one who met Schaap with "prior extensive sexual experience," reported NWI.com.

"No doubt exists that (Schaap) should have resisted (her) advances, but (Schaap) submits his actions did not serve to destroy (her) in the manner that often occurs when underage individuals are victimized," said Murray.

I believe that Schaap and this anonymous abuser are at high risk for reoffense and are clearly demonstrating their lack of repentance.

The abuser cleverly portrays himself as a youth leader extraordinaire. 

He says of himself:

  • The ministry grew.
  • Students were accepting Christ getting baptized, and serving.
  • The gospel was being taught
  • Other youth ministers would ask me for tips on how to connect with students (ed note: good night!)
  • My youth group was the largest

In some respects this is his way of saying "See, it wasn't so bad. Kids were being saved." At the same time, he suggests that he is truly a good leader. But, he inadvertently shares a problem. He was needy.

I wanted the students to love me.

The fact that he turned to young students for love is a problem. He has some serious underlying issues that need to be addressed.

The abuser wants to portray himself as "selfish" instead of an abuser.

This abuser quotes from 2 Samuel 11:1

In the spring, at the time when kings go off to war, David sent Joab out with the king’s men and the whole Israelite army. They destroyed the Ammonites and besieged Rabbah. But David remained in Jerusalem. (NIV Bible Gateway)

He said that David was pursuing leisure instead of fighting alongside his countrymen. This, he claimed, led to adultery etc. He completely overlooks the problem of David using his power as King to have sex with Bathsheba. This went way beyond selfishness to misuse of power which this abuser does not seem to want to discuss. Again, he minimizes his issues.

Where the Leadership Journal went wrong

The editorial staff made the same mistake that many churches make in dealing with pedophiles. They focused on the perpetrator and overlook the abused. Had they put the victim first in their analysis, they would never have published this piece. However, they are not alone. This goes on in churches and organizations through the evangelical world. And this is where the problem starts.

At one church that we know, the pastors and church surrounded the abuser with care and said they would get counseling for his victims. Some church members actually sat in the court room on the side of the abuser, ignoring the victims. The church did not get the victims counseling until a brouhaha ensued. 

Sadly, this church and many others forget the main thing. First get help and comfort for the victims, after calling the police. In a post Bikers vs Neo-Calvinist leaders: The Gospel and Child Sex Abuse, we featured a video of bikers who seemed to care more about child sex abuse victims than gospel™ leaders or church members. Watch the following video. At the 32 second mark, you will see some church members who went to the court to "support" a Baptist pastor convicted of molesting two teens. They refused to speak to the reporter. 

The second mistake the Leadership Journal made was deleting negative comments.

As hard as it is to accept strong criticism, we who publish online must do so. Sometimes, those critiques are warranted as we have seen in our short history online. Once an entity starts deleting comments (and not explaining why) it loses the battle. This only enflames people who truly care about issues such as child sex abuse.

The third mistake were the tags associated with this post. These revealed the lack of understanding of the Journal.

The following tags were listed at the bottom of the original post which has now been deleted. These tags are proof positive that the editors did not understand what they were posting. Note: there are no terms like "abuse" or "rape." Mistake? Good night!

Accountability ;  Adultery ;  Character;  Failure ;  Mistakes ;  Self-examination;  Sex;  Temptation 

After posting a weak explanation by the abuser and then attempting to change some wording, the editors gave up and removed the article.

Here is their apology and explanation.

A note from the editors of Leadership Journal:

We should not have published this post, and we deeply regret the decision to do so.

The post, told from the perspective of a sex offender, withheld from readers until the very end a crucial piece of information: that the sexual misconduct being described involved a minor under the youth pastor's care. Among other failings, this post used language that implied consent and mutuality when in fact there can be no quesiton that in situations of such disproportionate power there is no such thing as consent or mutuality.

The post, intended to dissuade future perpetrators, dwelt at length on the losses this criminal sin caused the author, while displaying little or no empathic engagement with the far greater losses caused to the victim of the crime and the wider community around the author. The post adopted a tone that was not appropriate given its failure to document complete repentance and restoration.

There is no way to remove the piece altogether from the Internet, and we do not want to make it seem that we are trying to make it disappear. That is not journalistically honest. The fact that we published it; its deficiencies; and the way its deficiencies illuminate our own lack of insight and foresight, is a matter of record at The Internet Archive (https://web.archive.org/web/20140613190102/http://christianitytoday.com/le/2014/june-online-only/my-easy-trip-from-youth-minister-to-felon.html).

Any advertising revenues derived from hits to this post will be donated to Christian organizations that work with survivors of sexual abuse. We will be working to regain our readers' trust and to give greater voice to victims of abuse.

We apologize unreservedly for the hurt we clearly have caused.

/signed/

Marshall Shelley, editor, Leadership Journal

Harold B. Smith, president and CEO, Christianity Today International

What I wish Leadership had done instead.

This may surprise all of you. I wish the post had been left up but prefaced by a long piece written by Boz Tchividjian explaining why this abuser was wrong in his entire presentation. Then, a piece could have been written by a victim of pastoral sexual abuse (there are plenty out there. ) Then there could have been links to excellent resources. I fear that there are still many people out there that read the article and believe that this abuser is on the right path. There were a number of comments that supported this abuser's narrative which is worrisome. Some of these people lead churches! Also, as you know, nothing ever leaves the Internet and this will be available in web archives.

 A couple of readers' comments about this post which need to be addressed.

I have a complete list of the comments originally associated with this post. I did so because I knew that all of this would be deleted as the firestorm spread. There were some great comments which discussed the pain associated with pastoral sex abuse. But, there were two themes which appeared to minimize the abuse and showed a poor grasp of the theology of sin, along with a minimization of pain associated with child sex abuse.

1. All of us are capable of this sin.

I have heard this time and time again when it comes to sexual abuse and it is wrong, wrong, wrong. Believe it or not, I saw comments on Christian blogs after Sandy Hook, saying this same thing. We had one such comment on our blog. If you think that you are capable of using power to sexually abuse another human being, you need help. We are all capable of sin but not all of us are capable of sexually abusing a teenager or child.

2. Sin is sin.

All sin is a form of rebellion from God. But not all sin has the same consequences. For example, there are degrees of punishment for different sins listed in the Old Testament. Even US laws treat someone breaking the law by speeding far differently then someone who kills another human. Also, this statement unfortunately minimizes the pain caused by abuse and should never be said to anyone who has been harmed.

A caution about "repentance"

Finally, be careful when you brag about how you are best buddies with a murderer or a rapist. There is this really weird thing that I have observed amongst evangelicals. They get all excited when they point to someone who has done something terrible (like Ted Bundy) and announce loudly how they have become Christians. There is a lot of hoopla when the "worst murderer that everyone knows" becomes a Christian. 

Before you start hauling them around to the Christian talk shows, you need assess if they have truly shown remorse when it comes to their victims. For example, Ted Bundy, who allegedly became a Christian, never fully admitted to the number of women he killed. Many families asked that he tell them where his victims were buried so that they could have closure. He went to his death allegedly withholding information that could have brought solace to some families.

Was he saved? I always leave that question up to God. But he certainly did not fully show caring for the pain of his victims and their families.

So before you introduce your friend, the newly minted Christian and former child sex abuser, to your Sunday school class, make sure you know how he feels about his victims. In fact, if you haven't inquired after his victims, you need to ask why. Why would you support a rapist and not ask after his victims?

When you read this, please take a moment to pray for this abuser's victim, wife and children. May God grant them peace and healing.

For more information on this situation:

Mary De Muth: Dear Man In Prison

Time Magazine Opinion: Christianity Today Should Not Have Published a Rapist’s Story

Friendly Atheist: Christian Publication Apologizes for Posting Pedophile’s Essay, but Wrongly Removes Piece from Website

Hope.Fully.Known.: Because Its Time to Take Down That Post

Suzannah Paul: The Smitten Word: Because Purity Culture Harbors Rape and Abuse

Boz Tchividjian: 5 Common Characteristic of Child Sex Offender: Eliminating the Edge

Lydia's Corner: Daniel 4:1-37 2 Peter 1:1-21 Psalm 119:97-112 Proverbs 28:17-18

Comments

A Tutorial on Sex Abuse: What Evangelicals Must Learn From the Leadership Journal Debacle — 395 Comments

  1. I hear what you’re saying and appreciate your voice, but as I’m sure you are aware, since you linked to my post, I disagree pretty strongly that the post should have been left there. Please remember the criminal talked about an actual, real-life teenage girl and blamed an actual woman out there in the world with kids and everything–you even describe how offensive it was to both here. He talked about these real-life people in ways they should never have to read or have others they know read. It was bad enough that the post was up for 5 whole days.

    I’ll share with you what I shared with the bloggers at Friendly Atheist who wanted it left up too. If a billboard out on some country road is offensive toward some REAL LIFE people–pick any kind of offensiveness–and we raise our voices in protest, most of us would not then force the company that put it there to keep it up as part of some strange shaming process for them, even after they see it was wrong. That would be counter-effective to the whole idea that it was a hurtful and cruel and ignorant billboard, even if it IS just way far out there on some country road. (The way that post would just be out there deep in cyberspace.) And leaving it up would also continue to shame the real life victims of that hypothetical offensive billboard. But to put an apology there instead? Brilliant.

    And that’s what CT/LJ has done. Let’s hold them to keeping THEIR GOOD APOLOGY there forever and turning toward more abuse issues with proper authorities on the issue speaking up. That post, however, should never have seen the light of day.

  2. @ Tamara Rice:
    Thank you for your input. I certainly understand what you are saying. And I enjoyed your post very much. That is why I linked to it. It is good to hear differing thoughts on the matter.

    You and i agree on this.Tamara Rice wrote:

    That post, however, should never have seen the light of day.

    The fact that it did shows that we have a lot more work ahead of us in the church.
    Blessings.

  3. While I appreciated the editorial leaders’ apology overall, I still wonder whether this indicates a far deeper underlying organizational problem to deal with, and not just that they messed up on this one issue. They’ve given us substantial reason not to trust their discernment level, editorial processes, and ability to “lead” leaders.

    ** Sexual abuse and rape are not just about girls and women, but do they even have women on their editorial board or otherwise vetting articles? If this article was a barometer of their editorial awareness of major realities of women in the world or the Church, I’m not impressed.

    ** I’d ask the same about the personal and social issues involved, because they seemed ill informed on tactics of those with neither compassion nor conscience. Are they vetting their articles with practitioners who have applied theology and counseling backgrounds, not just with theologians or “pastors” who have systematic theology and teaching backgrounds? (These days, “pastor” can still mean anything from true pastoral care and spiritual formation leaders, to a managerial CEO who dictates policies and procedures in the church, to a jack-of-all-trades who does a lot of stuff that is because of the job description and not because of spiritual gifting.)

    ** How will they change internal editorial processes — if at all — to avoid this with future articles on topics where real people have been victimized?

    ** How will they change their policies/practices — if at all — of comment moderation and deletion, or quelling responses that minimize or silence victims?

    By eventually seeming to “get it” about some deeper problems with their product and their process, and acting as responsibly as they perhaps knew how to at the time on Friday with their apology, it seems that *Leadership Journal* has at least earned a second chance to prove they are worth our entrusting them and to improve their tarnished reputation. I suspect there will be many more social-eyes watching them — and other media sources. I hope for better from them.

    I also hope those in the Church community who don’t see what the big deal was, or who railed against what they saw as yet-another-twitter-outrage-fest, will eventually come to understand that the hashtag endeavor of #TakeDownThatPost was not some flashmob for fun or for spurious outrage. Instead, it was a righteous push-back on what was seen as a severe lack of discernment and discretion that inflicted serious wounds on survivors of sexual abuse, their families, and their advocates — and actually trained leaders to be duped, not discerning.

    FWIW, I believe the environment for this kind of response has been growing especially for the last two years, after about a five-year period of very significant building of a support networks for survivors. Also, the number of public scandals has multiplied, and the amount of online documentation of various kinds of abuse of power in the Church has grown exponentially. The limit’s been reached on staying silence in the face of ongoing victimization.

    So, from here on out, I expect this barometer of public opinion to continue tracking the many current situations of alleged or already proven sexual abuse, sexual harassment, clergy failure to report sexual assaults, and other forms of cover-up in the wider church and ministry horizon in America. We may be faced with many organizations and media outlets whose leaders don’t deserve to be listened to or their strategies supported. Expect push-back where it is deserved … so the Church can embrace being the safe ministry environment it always should have been.

  4. Even if I live to be a hundred, I will never understand how the editors, in any way, thought this was an appropriate article. And they are adults, with jobs, and responsibilities? I hope like h—, they are not Sunday school teachers, elders, deacons, youth leaders or anything else in their churches. I’m not ususally an angry person but the rage I feel over this is immense.
    We HAVE to somehow blow this problem of clergy sex abuse and its cover up sky high, so hopefully people/churches will notice and be forced to change. I, for one, am starting by discussing this, in depth, with my four children ages 15-21. I want to get involved and do something to effect a change, but what? There are some ideas percolating in my mind… Can we make a grass roots effort, each of us in our hometowns, to respectfully approach churches and inquire as to what measures they have in place to protect children and what they do when abuse is suspected? Can we offer to educate them, their staff and members regarding this? Or are those bad ideas? I don’t know. I’m no expert in any of this, but I cannot sit idly by. If anyone knows what I can do, please let me know. I will only have one child living at home in the fall and am ready to work!

  5. I mentioned this in another thread where this was being discussed, but it was near the end and I think it got lost. There was a youth group “situation” at the ELCA church I was raised in, in which the youth pastor got one of the girls pregnant. It was a joint youth group with the Episcopal church on the next corner, and the girl in question was from that church and not mine; she was also NOT a minor when this happened. The youth pastor married the girl and was quietly let go. That’s all I ever knew about it. Looks pretty tame next to the LJ story, but I guess we’ve all heard one somewhere.

    He completely overlooks the problem of David using his power as King to have sex with Bathsheba. This went way beyond selfishness to misuse of power which this abuser does not seem to want to discuss.

    Yeah, a lot of people overlook the consent aspect of that story, just like they do with Esther and Ahasuerus. They tell themselves that Bathsheba agreed to it, David loved her, etc., when none of that is actually there. All that’s said is that David ordered Bathsheba brought to the palace, and then he had sex with her. Somehow I suspect she had basically no say in the matter.

    But man, if you want a totally over-the-top version of making David and Bathsheba about nothing more than selfishness, watch Veggie Tales’ King George and the Ducky. It’s a simultaneously hysterically funny and pitifully sad illustration of objectification in the extreme. For best results, while watching the movie, mentally replace every instance of the word “ducky” with “woman.”

  6. What I am gravely concerned about is the fact that this “youth pastor” will get out of prison in a little over a year. He clearly is charismatic enough to persuade someone from LJ to pay him for this published article. I think it’s likely that he will want to continue to work in the church sector once he’s released. Why wouldn’t he? It’s where he’s been successful. How’s that all going to work? I think that if he was REALLY repentent, his article would have had his real name in it. Otherwise…anonymous talk is cheap and probably earned him a nice little check from the publisher.

  7. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    While I appreciated the editorial leaders’ apology overall, I still wonder whether this indicates a far deeper underlying organizational problem to deal with, and not just that they messed up on this one issue. They’ve given us substantial reason not to trust their discernment level, editorial processes, and ability to “lead” leaders.

    ** Sexual abuse and rape are not just about girls and women, but do they even have women on their editorial board or otherwise vetting articles? If this article was a barometer of their editorial awareness of major realities of women in the world or the Church, I’m not impressed.

    ** I’d ask the same about the personal and social issues involved, because they seemed ill informed on tactics of those with neither compassion nor conscience. Are they vetting their articles with practitioners who have applied theology and counseling backgrounds, not just with theologians or “pastors” who have systematic theology and teaching backgrounds? (These days, “pastor” can still mean anything from true pastoral care and spiritual formation leaders, to a managerial CEO who dictates policies and procedures in the church, to a jack-of-all-trades who does a lot of stuff that is because of the job description and not because of spiritual gifting.)

    ** How will they change internal editorial processes — if at all — to avoid this with future articles on topics where real people have been victimized?

    ** How will they change their policies/practices — if at all — of comment moderation and deletion, or quelling responses that minimize or silence victims?

    By eventually seeming to “get it” about some deeper problems with their product and their process, and acting as responsibly as they perhaps knew how to at the time on Friday with their apology, it seems that *Leadership Journal* has at least earned a second chance to prove they are worth our entrusting them and to improve their tarnished reputation. I suspect there will be many more social-eyes watching them — and other media sources. I hope for better from them.

    I also hope those in the Church community who don’t see what the big deal was, or who railed against what they saw as yet-another-twitter-outrage-fest, will eventually come to understand that the hashtag endeavor of #TakeDownThatPost was not some flashmob for fun or for spurious outrage. Instead, it was a righteous push-back on what was seen as a severe lack of discernment and discretion that inflicted serious wounds on survivors of sexual abuse, their families, and their advocates — and actually trained leaders to be duped, not discerning.

    FWIW, I believe the environment for this kind of response has been growing especially for the last two years, after about a five-year period of very significant building of a support networks for survivors. Also, the number of public scandals has multiplied, and the amount of online documentation of various kinds of abuse of power in the Church has grown exponentially. The limit’s been reached on staying silence in the face of ongoing victimization.

    So, from here on out, I expect this barometer of public opinion to continue tracking the many current situations of alleged or already proven sexual abuse, sexual harassment, clergy failure to report sexual assaults, and other forms of cover-up in the wider church and ministry horizon in America. We may be faced with many organizations and media outlets whose leaders don’t deserve to be listened to or their strategies supported. Expect push-back where it is deserved … so the Church can embrace being the safe ministry environment it always should have been.

    Brad, well said. A big piece of this IMO is education. I’m a penn state grad, and never really thought too much of this stuf pre Sandusky. It wasn’t until then that I realized that perps are some of the smartest, most charismatic, and most devious people alive, not the creepy guys in the corner. The church needs to humble itself and get smart on the issue, which means realizing these guys can feign repentance like none other and that the church isnt equipped to handle this stuff in house. Sadly, it seems like humility isn’t a mark of today’s church…

  8. BarbaraK wrote:

    I think it’s likely that he will want to continue to work in the church sector once he’s released. Why wouldn’t he? It’s where he’s been successful. How’s that all going to work? I think that if he was REALLY repentent, his article would have had his real name in it.

    Wouldn’t a database be helpful for churches in a case like this? If he applied for a position as Youth Pastor based on his success in the past, a careful check would expose his prison term and sexual felony.

  9. Not all churches even check databases. In our small town, the majority of the churches don’t have any precautionary measures in place at all. A lot of youth groups are just grateful when an adult shows up who claims to “have a heart for kids.” Sadly, I suspect it’s easier to fly below the radar than most of us like to think.

  10. The Christianity Today / Leadership Journal fiasco is similar to this:

    Why did the Good Men Project publish a blog by an unrepentant and unconvicted rapist?

    December 2012

    The intentions of the gender issues website may have been good, but their action was foolish in the extreme

    As I was saying on Julie Anne’s blog the other day about this, I could have perhaps found value in CT/LJ publishing the guy’s post as an object lesson for the rest of us, to educate us how perpetrators think, if CT/LJ had done something like had a lengthy introduction explaining to the reader what was going on and why the guy’s thinking is skewed.

    I used to watch ABC’s “20/20” program and the occasional Oprah Winfrey show, where they would interview serial killers and other violent offenders, and it was meant to be educational, so you could learn how those type of men think so you could spot red flags and avoid them.

    So, I think pieces like the one at CT could possibly be useful (as a deterrent) if it had been presented differently.

    As it stood, with no corrective introduction by another party, it read like one big defense and rationalization for why it’s okay for a grown man to pick up teen aged girls.

  11. BarbaraK wrote:

    Not all churches even check databases. In our small town, the majority of the churches don’t have any precautionary measures in place at all. A lot of youth groups are just grateful when an adult shows up who claims to “have a heart for kids.” Sadly, I suspect it’s easier to fly below the radar than most of us like to think.

    It’s insane and terribly irresponsible to the children to not do a background check and reference checks on paid and unpaid volunteers.

  12. Bridget wrote:

    It’s insane and terribly irresponsible to the children to not do a background check and reference checks on paid and unpaid volunteers.

    I couldn’t agree more. I just think that there are a lot of churches, especially smaller ones, that either don’t think they can afford to set up those safeguards or don’t think they NEED to set up safeguards for folks they’ve known for years. Never mind that predators can groom for years before offending.

  13. BarbaraK wrote:

    especially smaller ones, that either don’t think they can afford to set up those safeguards

    But aren’t the names of predators listed on the internet? How big a system other than that is needed?

  14. Jesus said that it would be better for one who causes one of these little ones to stumble that he have a large millstone tied to his neck and that he be cast into the depths of the sea. This has effectively been begun with the man who wrote the self-serving comfession in CT.

    He’s been silenced, and we probably won’t hear from him again. His place in the community of prisoners, according to what one hears, will be the lowest of the low. Whatever comfort this may bring to his victims and to others who have suffered sexual abuse will certainly be welcome, although real satisfaction in this sort of matter often remains elusive. We can only hope for real healing in the lives of all involved.

  15. Victorious wrote:

    But aren’t the names of predators listed on the internet? How big a system other than that is needed?

    If there has been a conviction. What is listed is what they were convicted of, which is sometimes pled down to a lesser crime. Locally there seems to be an epidemic of indecent liberties, which my informant says is pretty worthless as an indicator of what actually happened. Not that it matters for church purposes; whatever it was that happened was too much.

  16. When I worked at the Women’s Shelter, we used to do a background check on any man who wanted to volunteer with the agency. Pretty sure we contacted the local law enforcement to request one.

  17. If you think that you are capable of using power to sexually abuse another human being, you need help. We are all capable of sin but not all of us are capable of sexually abusing a teenager or child.

    I appreciate you saying this. I think this is a throw-away line that people use to sound Christian or something, but seriously – if you believe for a moment that you you could do something like this get help now. And to this twerp and anyone else like him: I have a shotgun, a shovel, and a back yard. You might not get the chance to tell “your side of the story”. Get help.

  18. One other thing about listings of convicted sex offenders. The local list, replete with a map of the city and little indicator things showing where the person lives is scary. I mean, the map looks like a christmas tree. How can there even be so many convicted sex offenders? And that is just those who have been convicted and whose address is also know. They don’t always register with the local law as they are required to when they move.

  19. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    And to this twerp and anyone else like him: I have a shotgun, a shovel, and a back yard. You might not get the chance to tell “your side of the story”. Get help

    While I understand the sentiment, I don’t find the notion that threats of violence to stop another form of violence will encourage a perpetrator to get help. Do you have any non-violent suggestions for us to consider?

  20. b>brad/futuristguy wrote:

    While I appreciated the editorial leaders’ apology overall, I still wonder whether this indicates a far deeper underlying organizational problem to deal with, and not just that they messed up on this one issue. They’ve given us substantial reason not to trust their discernment level, editorial processes, and ability to “lead” leaders.

    ** Sexual abuse and rape are not just about girls and women, but do they even have women on their editorial board or otherwise vetting articles? If this article was a barometer of their editorial awareness of major realities of women

    brad, I only quoted the start of your post as a means to reference it. I want to say thank you for every word you said. I would love to see this post of yours on every comment section of the articles linked. I think especially boz’s readers would be blessed by your words. Thanks again for posting this comment

    [MOD:Edit per request of poster.]

  21. I think that instead of donating the advertising dollars to sex abuse ministries that the proceeds should have been given to the victim. The article re-victimized the young girl and probably led her to question how much of the abuse was her fault because the rapist repeatedly said “we” “we tried to withstand the sin” “we knew it was wrong” etc. a girl that is groomed from pre-adolescence or adolescence has no way of knowing what is wrong when being seduced by a man who is over 30. the victim has been slandered and her character defamed by the printing of this article. It also appalls me that this man is leading Christian ministry in prison or anywhere. It also appalls me that he is mourning the loss of his life. Seriously? two years in jail leading church? This young womans life has been forever harmed, her family is forever going to live with this. Great that the guys wife left with her kids, but did she call the police or report this?

  22. sam h wrote:

    hey my last post put my comment into the quoted box. can someone please get me out of the box? thanks.

    Thanks for the affirmation earlier, *sam h*.

    And as to getting you out of the box, mebbe you aren’t in it if you’re here at Wartburg Watch …

  23. @ Lisa:
    Hi!

    Please investigate the info at this link:
    http://www.nhcconline.com/open-your-eyes-conference-video-and-powerpoint/

    There is a pdf of the binder….It’s a great set of info.

    And the talks are just super.

    A simple thing to do would be to have someone from the local sheriff’s office come by and give a talk about how child abuse allegations are handled.

    The lawyer named Victor at that conference gave the most informative talk, I think….He gave a fair amount of info about how to prepare a community for handling this…

    Also, maybe your churches can get together and create an advocacy group like this one???

    http://missionkidscac.org/

    Its purpose is to create a safe place for children to go if there is a sexual abuse allegation. They get to videotape a statement one time. Specially trained police officers, social workers, nurses, and so on, meet with the children. When the child delivers the statement, parents and relatives are not allowed to be present.

    In most communities now, unfortunately, a child gets interviewed repeatedly, and relives the experience. Police ask questions, family members and friends ask things, then there is the medical exam, possible lawyers, the District Attorney, etc etc etc.

    Hopefully this gives you some ideas to start with. 🙂

  24. @ Marie2:

    Here is hoping that a service like this becomes available to all children all around the world who have to go through this process:

    Your Visit to Mission Kids
    Mission Kids is a 501 c 3 non-profit organization that coordinates child abuse investigations and provides appropriate referrals to victims and their non-offending family members.

    Before the Interview: What Should I Tell My Child?

    Give your child enough notice so he/she doesn’t feel the appointment is a surprise, but don’t give him/her too long a period to worry about it. Usually a day or two is enough time.
    Tell your child he/she will be meeting with a person who a specialist in talking to children about difficult things and whose job it is to help protect children.
    Give your child permission to talk to the interviewer; i.e., “It’s OK to tell the interviewer what you told me (or whomever they told) happened to you.”
    Say that you want him/her to answer all the questions the best they can and to tell the truth.
    Reassure your child that he/she has not done anything wrong, and that you love and support him/her very much
    Can I watch my child’s Mission Kids interview?

    Only professionals who are directly involved in the investigation are allowed to watch the interview. After the interview you will get the opportunity to speak with those professionals. They can help to answer any questions you may have.
    How long does a Mission Kids interview take?

    There is no one answer to this question. The amount of time the interview takes will depend on your child. Each Mission Kids interview is unique so the lengths of time will vary.
    Who will be speaking to my child?

    At Mission Kids, your child will be speaking with a specially trained Forensic Interviewer. They are trained to talk to kids in an open-ended, age appropriate way. It is their job to talk to children and keep them safe.
    What happens when we arrive?

    You will be asked to have a seat in the child- friendly waiting room that contains toys, books, a TV, and a computer with child appropriate programming. The interviewer will come to the waiting room and introduce herself to your child. Shortly after, the same interviewer will return to bring your child back to the interview room. You must remain with your child at all times in the waiting area, and must remain at Mission Kids while your child is being interviewed. If you need to bring other children who are not being interviewed, they must be under your supervision at all times. You may not discuss your case in the waiting room with anyone, including Mission Kids staff and volunteers.

    What services are available to families of children coming to Mission Kids?

    During your child’s interview, our family advocate will take time to speak with you in more detail about your time at Mission Kids and will help to guide you through the entire process. The Mission Kids Family Advocate is there to provide you with support and connect you with various services including referrals for specialized medical exams and counseling.
    After you leave Mission Kids, our Family Advocate is available to follow up with you through the healing process and provide additional support, information, and referral services, victim’s compensation assistance, court support, and other assistance as needed.
    After the Interview:

    When the interview is over, the interviewer will return your child to you in the waiting room. You will have an opportunity to talk to a member of the investigative team. You can ask questions and raise any concerns. Mission Kids may make medical or therapeutic referrals.

  25. Absolutely, so much to do in the church and still at Leadership Journal AND (I believe from experience) CT itself. They have bungled the reporting on the ABWE MK situation twice and missed opportunities to cover it other times. I’ve been very disappointed in their lack of interest in their potential to be a light in dark situations of abuse mishandling.

  26. @ Marie2:

    We have an organization where I live that is similar and I have often wished it could be replicated all over the country.

    Here is their website – they bring everything in under one roof, counselors, law enforcement (police, DA, etc.), specially trained nurses (SANE nurses), all so that the child only has to do the interview/exam once and in a neutral and friendly environment.

    http://www.wscchildren.org/

  27. @ brad/futuristguy:

    Regarding my earlier post, I felt it was important to bring as much perspective – both historical and contemporary – as possible to the current situation. This extended Leadership Journal incident is more than just a snapshot of something gone wrong that was put relatively right. It’s a piece in a larger series of snapshots, a continuing collage that’s got a trajectory to it. Where is this picture of the Church and of our society taking us? I had some other thoughts. This is lengthy, but hope it’s got helpful information that might be hard to locate quickly elsewhere.

    I’ve been wondering for a very long time when we’d hit some kind of a threshold or potential tipping point like what we’re now experiencing. Related to issues of violence and sexual abuse, I learned a lot from talking with my sister and being supportive of her ministries for 35+ years. She began helping survivors of domestic violence in the mid-1970s, and from there volunteered as a rape crisis advocate and was on the statewide board of directors for an advocacy network. And from there it seemed only natural to add prevention training on child sexual assault to the intervention work she was already doing with survivors.

    From probably the very late 1970s through the late 2000 decade, she offered prevention trainings in church and community settings. Sadly, she consistently found theologically conservative churches were among the most resistant organizations to sponsoring any kind of staff or congregational training. Was it because she was a woman, and they didn’t want her teaching men? Or just because they didn’t want to face the issue of sexual abuse? It didn’t deter her, but she did wonder what it would take before these church leaders would see the importance of prevention.

    The longer this issue has gone substantially unaddressed, the worse the social situation has gotten – in both church and community. This evening I unearthed an article that I wrote in 1996 as part of a potential training for seminary students. Here’s a key paragraph that compiles the progression of estimates on childhood sexual abuse that I collected pretty much at the time, most of which were used by social workers in those decades:

    “The estimated rates of sexual abuse and incest have grown tremendously over the last 20 years. For instance, in 1975, the estimates were that 1 of 5 girls and 1 of 7 boys would be the victim of inappropriate sexual contact by age 18. In 1985, the estimates were about 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 5 boys. In 1995, the estimates were about 1 in 3 girls and boys.”

    Another article noted that social workers in the mid-1990s were estimating that half of the incidents of sexual abuse would be cases of incest. Meanwhile, it looks like current estimates are still around 1 in 3 for girls and 1 in 3 to 1 in 5 for boys.

    In the late 1980s and early 1990s, I also worked with several recovery-oriented ministries on gender, sexuality, and addiction issues. One was a group of about 20 adult men, at least a third of whom were victims of childhood sexual abuse. The other ministered to men and women. Over 85% of the women had been the victim of sexual abuse, incest, or rape; as had been 30-40% of the men. For men, part of the difficulty in those decades was that you weren’t allowed to define what happened to you as abuse. It was typically talked about in terms of “horseplay,” as Jerry Sandusky seemed so fond to put it. But when you start describing sexually abusive behaviors, men often realize that they had been victimized.

    Anyway, sexual abuse is a sin problem, a social problem, and, all too often, a church or ministry leadership problem. It isn’t going away. But when I look at the long run, which is part of my perspective as a futurist, I’m looking for points of hope. And I suspect the tide may be turning. With the many sexual abuse criminal scandals and cover-up lawsuits of the past five years especially, maybe we’re finally reaching the threshold point where public push-back won’t be ignored, and where those responsible for the spiritual oversight of others will become trained – whether by choice or by graduation/certification requirement.

    I wish my sister were still here with us, so she could witness how the faithful work that she and many, many others invested in creating safer spaces for ministry and spiritual growth has made a difference. I’m thankful for those who have pioneered a way forward in the Kingdom, and trust it will lead to the healing of many survivors and the prevention of many becoming victims.

    Meanwhile, I’ll be looking forward to hearing from the editorial staff of Christianity Today and Leadership Journal just how they plan to address issues of sexual abuse, healing for survivors, clergy responsibility for mandatory reporting, encouraging the lifting of statutes of limitation, etc. If they would like to earn my trust, I’d like to see how they really start living out a concern for survivors and for prevention. Seriously, it’d be great to see some plans – preferably a minimum 5-year plan, say from 2015 to 2020?

  28. I like the post, with its constructive criticism— that is, it says what CT *ought* to have done, rather than just slamming it. I wish there had been a little encouragement to CT too, though. The apology quoted from http://www.christianitytoday.com/le/channel/utilities/print.html?type=article&id=118972 looks fine to me, even it was slow in coming. It was good to write about the slowness, but also would have been good to say that they seem to have come out OK, even if one might argue that they should kept up the article in conjunction with a commentary on it. A lot of people who should know better, don’t, and we need to encourage them by heavy criticism when they publish things like this, but praise once they do the right thing instead of digging in their heels and refusing to admit error.

  29. Dee, thank you for this article and for getting it. There are so many in the church that do not (will not?) understand that any time someone (male or female) is in a position of ‘spiritual authority’ – whether real or perceived, deserved or not – there is no such thing as mutually consenting. The statutes of many states (including, thankfully, mine) recognize this and include clergy/ministers in the counselor classes regarding sexual relations with clients/congregants. In my state, it is a class 4 felony for a pastor/priest to have sex with one of his congregant/parishioners. And that is an adult. If it is a child….it is a far worse thing.

    I cannot understand how people can not see that the child is a victim (I have experienced, first hand, the brunt of this thinking – and I still don’t understand it). In the case of an adult and a child and sex, the child is always a victim. Never consensual, even if the child has been convinced and believes it is. It is precisely because children can be groomed and manipulated into believing they are the problem the we need to stand up for them and defend them. They have no power or understanding to do so themselves.

    And I could rant on this for a good while…..

  30. Is anyone aware of the article about Hillary Clinton laughing about how she got a 40 something year old man acquitted for raping a 12 year old girl? Just do an internet search. It’s all over the place.
    It is mind boggling to me how this country acts in regards to sexual violence and abuse.

  31. A story of Sexual abuse that flew under the radar for decades: If you’ve heard of Jesus Culture or Bethel Worship/Bethel church (both popular worship bands), they were involved with a “prophet” who was caught telling women to undress before prophesying. Bob Jones kept on going as if it was a hiccup, and churches kept him in business until he died.

  32. When I read this perpetrator’s ill-conceived ‘article’, red flags went up on almost every sentence – starting with the subtitle. He was so concerned about his own life and ministry — not one word about the damage done to his church, his victim, or his family. I fired off an email to the editor immediately, and suggested (among other things) that they could cover this man’s story in a much better way — I hope they’ll do that. And I just read that they’ve posted Mary DeMuth’s powerful reply to the perpetrator today. If you haven’t read it, check it out.

    After reading the perp’s article, I immediately wondered how many other young girls he had groomed or attempted to seduce. Statistics would indicate that he had more than one victim. (I mentioned this in my letter to the editor as well.) It’s clear that he does not see himself as a predator. He spent the entire article minimizing, normalizing, & justifying his ‘sins’ without ever mentioning that they weren’t just sins, but CRIMES. FELONIES, at that.

    I’m willing to bet he’s not incarcerated in NC, because if he were in NC Central Prison, there’d be no computer on which to type and probably no paper on which to write. I wondered how he was able to write the added disclaimer to the article so quickly and get it to them. CT’s attempt at making the article less smarmy by changing ‘we’ to ‘I’, etc., was a day late and a dollar short.

    It occurred to me that if this ex-youth leader had admitted to ‘having an extra-marital relationship’ with a male member of the youth group, they’d never have published the article.

    The only reason CT was correct in hiding the man’s identity was to protect the victim, her family, and his wife and kids — but it served to protect the jerk as well.

    I’m disappointed that his sentence is so short. And sad to see that the LJ propped up his reputation by mentioning that he does good things in prison. No matter what good he does in prison, it does not negate the crimes he committed or the damage done to the innocent child.

    Whoever made the decision to publish this article apparently knew nothing about perpetrators and less about victims, but he/she just got a good start on an education via blogs, twitter, and emails. I hope the result is that this editor will become a huge advocate for victims and a voice for teaching the church about the problem that so many leaders are loathe to talk about. CT’s apology seems to indicate that they realize their inadequate knowledge and are willing to learn. This could have a great outcome in alerting / educating the evangelical church, and that’s what I’m praying for!

  33. Nancy wrote:

    The local list, replete with a map of the city and little indicator things showing where the person lives is scary. I mean, the map looks like a christmas tree. How can there even be so many convicted sex offenders?

    These lists encompass a broad set of charges. Someone who is drunk and whizzes in the bushes can get on the list in some states. Plus you have people in the 50s who did something in high school with a girl who was under the age limit. And the guy might have been not that much older. (And yes I know it can also be the reverse.)

    So the lists need to be read as as to what actually happened. And that’s not always information that’s easily available.

  34. Lisa wrote:

    Is anyone aware of the article about Hillary Clinton laughing about how she got a 40 something year old man acquitted for raping a 12 year old girl? Just do an internet search. It’s all over the place.

    Please put up a link to a first level source story. Not a story about a story about a story.

  35. While it is important to have checks and safeguards in place in ANY facility that looks after children, it is more important in my opinion to educate ones children. I have watched with dismay over the last decade (and maybe it was always there, but I didn’t notice it until my daughter was in the youth group), the practice of placing any and all blame for this kind of behavior on the young girl. Statements about not causing ones brothers to stumble by your dress and conversation, even if you are fully covered and have interacted with the same boys since early childhood, as if magically at the age of 12 you suddenly turn into a femme fatale, tempting both male youth and adults alike. I find it very upsetting that at such a difficult time in a young girls social development, that rather than encourage and build them up, we are more concerned about placing the entire responsibility for appropriate behavior on them, as if the boys and men can’t be relied on to have self control. It is especially disgraceful that this perpetrator and the editorial staff lacks the insight to know that this is a crime. A minor can NEVER give consent.

  36. @ Nancy:

    One of the problems is who gets on the list as being a sex offender. Have a little pornography on your computer (even unknowingly!) and you can end up on the list. Be 17 and unbutton your 16 y.o. gf’s blouse, and in some states, you can be put on the list for the rest of your life. Out hiking and take a pee in the woods, and if seen, you can be convicted and put on the sex offender list for the rest of your life. And for all of the above, I am aware of actual cases where that was exactly what happened, not some plea bargained reduction of offense level.

    We need the authorities to be serious about the list, break it into sub lists that are consistent across states, and have a mechanism, wth checks and balances, to remove people from the list who should never have been put on it to begin with.

  37. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    A lot of people who should know better, don’t, and we need to encourage them by heavy criticism when they publish things like this, but praise once they do the right thing instead of digging in their heels and refusing to admit error.

    Actually, my thesis of this post is precisely that. We assume that people “should know better” but it is obvious that they do not.

    I do not know they have learned their lesson. I know one church which messed up in handling in a pedophile situation. They lost members over it. So, they instituted a training program in how to keep kids safe. Good, right? Shortly after that they had CJ Mahaney has the featured speaker. This was after the Second Amended Lawsuit.

    So did that church learn or did they merely mouth some words to get people off their back? The only way we can see if those in charge really get it is to wait for the next incident.

  38. Jeannette Altes wrote:

    In the case of an adult and a child and sex, the child is always a victim. Never consensual, even if the child has been convinced and believes it is.

    Do you know that there are pastors who go after the child and say they contributed to it?

  39. @ Tired:
    Blaming women for men’s sins is as old as Genesis. Not that that’s an excuse for it to keep going, on the contrary the fact that this problem has been around for so long is exactly why it needs to be curbed.

    In the context of church groups a little re education is needed, for example Jesus’ statement that a man who looks at a woman with sexual intentions is already sinning. It’s HIS fault, not hers. The verses that tell us to hold thoughts captive, to guard our hearts and focus on that which is good an honourable, the fruit of self control, we need to remind teachers that men and boys are not exempt from these instructions. I agree that women and girls should dress with modesty, yet we need to teach men and boys that if they have a lustful thought in their own heads, it is up to them to control their own minds like it is up to them to control their arms and legs. No matter the state of a girls dress. Self control is a virtue and purity of thought is not gender exclusive. And it is not up to women to control men’s thoughts by way of their clothes and actions or even their existence, because that is simply impossible and preposterous.

  40. @ An Attorney:

    I hear you. In NC that 16/17 illustration does not apply (not enough age difference) but I know what you are saying. But there are other “victimless” public sexual behaviors that are prosecutable, or so the newspapers tell us with tales of who did what where. I don’t know what to do with those people, but even they ought not be around children in the church setting.

  41. @ Lisa:
    I once asked a defense attorney how he could justify defending some clients who were obviously into bad things. He said that we live in a country that you are innocent until proven innocent. That means you need proof. He said it is important to present all of the proof and evaluate if it is sufficient. If it is not, the person goes free.

    In some cases that is sad-think Casey Anthony or OJ Simpson. But also think about a country when anyone could be thrown in jail, willy nilly, without sufficient proof.

    It is an imperfect system of justice.

  42. Nickname wrote:

    Statistics would indicate that he had more than one victim. (I mentioned this in my letter to the editor as well.) It’s clear that he does not see himself as a predator.

    I am so glad you brought this up. I forgot to mention it. It is possible that he had other victims. On the other hand, he could be on of the obsessive individuals who stalk and prey on one person.

    I, too, wondered about the “update.” Did they have a direct line to the guy or did they write it for him?

  43. Tired wrote:

    Statements about not causing ones brothers to stumble by your dress and conversation, even if you are fully covered and have interacted with the same boys since early childhood, as if magically at the age of 12 you suddenly turn into a femme fatale, tempting both male youth and adults alike.

    I find this whole thing bizarre. They blame the way girls dress for causing their brothers to “stumble.” I have news for them. I read an article about how Middle Eastern men, who live in countries in which women are required to wear burkas, who get all hot and bothered about an exposed ankle.

    There is not enough cloth in the world to cover women sufficiently to keep the “brothers” from stumbling. This is a problem that they must deal with and not turf it to the “sisters.”

  44. An Attorney wrote:

    We need the authorities to be serious about the list, break it into sub lists that are consistent across states, and have a mechanism, wth checks and balances, to remove people from the list who should never have been put on it to begin with.

    Good suggestion.

  45. @ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
    That is a normal response and I wish more people understood it. Our first response to a 30 years old guy who has been sexually abusing a young teen so to want to protect the child. We should be angry.

    In some Christian communities, that normal desire has been supplanted by the “sin is sin” theory and we need to uplift the “offending brother.” The “Don’t forget the victims is also a sinner” approach.

    The person who does not feel angry by a situation needs to do a heart check. Righteous anger usually involves being angry on behalf of another who is being harmed. Today, “righteous anger” seems to be relegate to doctrinal issues and “the world out there.”

  46. There is a local Youth Pastor here in our county who served in that position at both a SBC Church and a fairly large Non-Demoninational Church. He recently pled guilty to six counts of sexual abuse against 2 teenage girls. (15-16 yrs old)
    He is married with 6 kids.
    He asked for a jury to sentence him land that will happen later this summer. I wonder how he will appeal to the jury? Jesus forgave me and you need to also? My 6 kids need me?
    I have not been on a jury in a while….maybe the sheriff will send me a summons for that week….I’m sorry teachers, preachers who abuse kids sexually need the max.

  47. I think many Christian leaders are blind because they follow an unwritten belief that the church is a country club for those who are spiritually superior.

    All others (the complainers, the victims) are losers and need not apply.

    They are the ones bringing down the church in this generation and don’t even realize it.

  48. dee wrote:

    I read an article about how Middle Eastern men, who live in countries in which women are required to wear burkas, who get all hot and bothered about an exposed ankle.

    Years ago while discussing modesty with a Christian brother, he said it didn’t really matter how much clothing a female wore, some men will still be imagining what’s underneath. 🙁

    Regarding the burkas…I read of instances where men donned them to both gain access to women and go undetected following sexual assault.

  49. @ dee:
    There are some Muslim clerics that think even a woman’s eyes should be covered. Because you know, our default facial expression is “come hither ;)”

  50. So much of evangelical Christianity is infatuated with ‘repentant’ sinners that they don’t even bother to determine if there’s even a hint of real repentance. A tale of downfall, a few tears, a mention of God, is all it takes for many evangelicals to celebrate them. These evangelicals seem completely incapable of of recognizing someone, like the writer of that letter, who is nothing more than a psychopathic sexual predator whose entire world consists only of himself and incapable of any concern at all for others. Worse yet, these evangelicals celebrate these unrepentant individuals to the complete exclusion of the victims of the individual. To them, the victims are mere some nameless, faceless whose only role in life seems to be to bring the perpetrator to ‘repentance’. It is just sad beyond belief the extent to which they lack a truly Christian heart.

  51. Thanks for linking to my post. What surprised and saddened me about this whole debacle was how sloooooowly it took for LJ to respond to valid outrage. The deletion of comments and the rewriting of the piece to make the abuser look less narcissistic or sociopathic is a problem too. Why do we prefer perpetrators and malign victims? Is it because we just don’t like being uncomfortable with the reality of sexual sin in our midst? I don’t know, but I do know it’s time we say things straight.

    Thank you so much for your thoughtful commentary here.

  52. JeffT wrote:

    So much of evangelical Christianity is infatuated with ‘repentant’ sinners that they don’t even bother to determine if there’s even a hint of real repentance. A tale of downfall, a few tears, a mention of God, is all it takes for many evangelicals to celebrate them.

    Standard Testimony(TM).

    “But it warms my heart to hear Salvation testimonies…”

  53. @ K.D.:

    Tired wrote:

    A minor can NEVER give consent.

    What you folks have brought up, including the age of the girls, has given me the opportunity to say some hard and difficult stuff to a readership which may tear me apart for it, but which I feel the need to say. Everybody understand that I come from a family of front-liners. Out in the public, not the church, most of the time. Dealing with stuff that some folks have not dealt with maybe, and most of us would rather have a world in which some stuff was not there to be dealt with. That gives us a little different (not better or worse, just different) perspective on some things.

    Part 1

    There is no excuse, in a civilized society, to forever blame the less powerful person in the situation and excuse the more powerful person. However, and I say this as someone who has a female grandchild living with her (to document day to day observation opportunity) who will be 12 in just a couple of months. Also an eight year old (who will be 9 in just a couple months). The fact is that the human male does react positively to females when they reach puberty, and sometimes when they just look like they might reach puberty at any minute. This is regardless of how they dress or how they act. It happens. It is biology. It may be good for the species in its reproductive capacities, but it does not work well when out of control. It does not help to blame it on the pubescent female, but one must recognize the reality of it. The females need to be aware of this, the mothers and fathers need to be all over this issue, and there is no help in saying that it is not so. (Not saying that you said that–just making broad statements here.) In our society at this time we have what we term “adolescence” in which we prolong societal childhood for a number of good reasons, but societal childhood and biological childhood do not necessarily equate.

    There is another complicating issue here. As I have said, probably ad nauseum here, my daughter teaches in a public high school and she deals primarily with three distinct ethnic groups. These three groups have distinctly different ideas about adolescent sexuality and what is or is not appropriate behavior at what age. One group, for instance, has right many young women of 16 who are having their first babies while they are young and doing it deliberately and purposfully, with the full approval of segments of their culture, with or without some permanent relationship with the baby daddy. One group has a celebration of the girl at 15 and declares her, how can I say this, more grown up than the third ethnic group who declares 15 year olds more still like children. In a society like ours, with all these different ideas out there, and with most of the children all dealing with this at school if nowhere else, I think we need to quit telling adolescents that they are children. I think we need to tell them that they are being seen as young (and vulnerable) women by the larger society, and they need to think and act in ways that protect themselves. And not just in how they dress, though that is an issue at the schoolhouse for some adolescent females.

    At the same time adolescents, and other males, need to know that fire from heaven will rain down on their heads if they cross the wrong line with the wrong female. Now why would I say “the wrong female?” Because nobody is going to get anywhere trying to tell other ethnic groups what values to have and what behaviors to condone, or not. Just try that, some time, and see how far you get with that. Not one ethnic group including my own would tolerate that for one minute. Regardless–right, wrong–doesn’t matter. People go to the mat for ethnic stuff, including each of our own ethnic groups.

    (continued in part 2)

  54. @ JeffT:

    The problem is that sociopaths are so convincing when they repent. You’re dealing with the best actors in the world. And they are genuinely sad to be caught, but once they have your sympathy they start spinning their past, their actions, and their victims.

    The book, The Psychopath Next Door says that their highest goal is to get you to pity them. Once you pity them and see THEM as the victim, you’ve given them carte blanche to do anything they want.

  55. dee wrote:

    The person who does not feel angry by a situation needs to do a heart check.

    Whether the Gnostic Pneumatic (so SPIRITUAL he’s ceased to be human) or a Progressive Activist too enamored with his Philosophical Big Picture to notice the bodies among the foundations, it’s usually part of preening your own Moral Superiority.

    Righteous anger usually involves being angry on behalf of another who is being harmed. Today, “righteous anger” seems to be relegate to doctrinal issues and “the world out there.”

    And HOMOSEXUALS(TM). Don’t forget HOMOSEXUALS(TM).

  56. Part 2

    In the following paragraph I am not expressing any personal opinion. I am saying how some people think. To illustrate, in NC a person can get married at 14, with parental consent and court approval. She can marry a man of any age. So, the actual thing is that she can marry an older man, but if she has not married him she cannot have sex with him or else he can be charged with statutory rape. That is a bit difficult to explain to a lot of people. The issues can be reduced to: she is / is not sexually mature; she can / cannot give consent. How can it be one way one minute and a different way the next minute. And the state sends mixed signals as some see it. Again, the business of the state can / cannot tell people what to do in their own bedrooms (they can tell the homosexuals they can do whatever they want but they are trying to tell “me” what to do–I don’t think so) attitude. Besides my grandmother married at 13 but they would not let that happen today. (Actual case my son dealt with.) All of this may be wrong in our eyes, but the wrongness of it does not make it go away.

    At our house the soon to be 12 year old is a smart and serious and attractive asian female. Her body and her bodily movements and her self-awareness as someone who knows she is attractive already attract attention. There is no way to make that go away. Who would want to make it go away, it will be a good survival mechanism all her life. So we teach her how to be a “young lady” and a bit ferocious and we pray a lot. And we pour into her every bit of reality about the world that we can. Does that stop “childhood” for her? Maybe in a lot of ways. Is that a bad thing? Each one will have to make his own decision about that. We want to see her safe and successful. And since large segments of the population do define the end of childhood a lot younger than my particular group does, we think it is better to go ahead teach adolescents to learn how to live in such a civilization as safely as possible.

  57. Janey wrote:

    The problem is that sociopaths are so convincing when they repent. You’re dealing with the best actors in the world. And they are genuinely sad to be caught, but once they have your sympathy they start spinning their past, their actions, and their victims.

    I grew up with a probable sociopath. Nobody is as concerned as a sociopath, as sincere as a sociopath, as innocent as a sociopath, as cheerful as a sociopath, as helpful as a sociopath, as compassionate as a sociopath — until the instant you have outlived your usefulness.

    The book, The Psychopath Next Door says that their highest goal is to get you to pity them. Once you pity them and see THEM as the victim, you’ve given them carte blanche to do anything they want.

    It’s called the Reality Distortion Field. Or the Mutant Power of Induce Guilt. Not only do they get you to pity poor poor innocent them, they make you feel so GUILTY and sinful for NOT rolling over and letting them have their way. Sociopaths are masters at guilt manipulation.

    But the most infuriating trait of a sociopath is their incredible self-control. They NEVER lose their temper, NEVER show any reaction other than maturity and wisdom — only the total self-control of the situation and butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-their-mouth rationality and reason and self-control and spin as you melt down with rage and become The Evil One.

    And I’ve got to stop now before I go suicidal with flashback.

  58. Janey wrote:

    @ JeffT:
    The problem is that sociopaths are so convincing when they repent. You’re dealing with the best actors in the world. And they are genuinely sad to be caught, but once they have your sympathy they start spinning their past, their actions, and their victims.
    The book, The Psychopath Next Door says that their highest goal is to get you to pity them. Once you pity them and see THEM as the victim, you’ve given them carte blanche to do anything they want.

    So true! They are so expert at painting such a sad portrait of themselves that people are drawn to their story and they can spin it so listeners/readers completely ignore the trail of traumatized victims they left in their wake.

  59. dee wrote:

    That is a normal response and I wish more people understood it. Our first response to a 30 years old guy who has been sexually abusing a young teen so to want to protect the child. We should be angry.

    I agree; we should be angry. And (not “but”: and) we should not sin.

    I know I’ve used this example before, but cf Jesus’ cleansing of the temple. He arrived in Jerusalem in the evening, looked around at everything there – including the den of thieves – and went to Bethany. We may reasonably assume he was moved to anger by what he had seen, and also that he pondered and prayed overnight. The next day he came back with a weapon (home-made, but by a carpenter) and a battle-plan. In other words, after properly processing his anger, he responded more, not less, vigorously.

    The verse “be angry and do not sin”, in a church culture that doesn’t know how to deal with anger, is usually mistaken to mean “It’s OK to be a little bit angry, but just gently wait until you’ve cooled off, so that the nasty feelings can all go away and everything can carry on as normal”. That’s certainly how it’s pushed by those who are comfortable with the status quo.

    I want to learn to get angry like Jesus does. I’m more likely to bring about change.

  60. @ Nancy:

    Your two comments are interesting. The truth is, the body and mind develop at different rates in an individual AND at different rates in other people. The body starts to develop around 12ish, but the medical world is telling us that the brain is far behind that. For some people the brain isn’t complete until mid 20s. This can create some serious messes, divorces, children too early, etc.

    It all creates some crazy laws . . . not an adult and no drinking until 21, but vote, sign up for war, emancipated from parents at 18. And your state may vary.

  61. There’s something about victims that many US Christians can’t handle. I don’t understand it, so I’ve been speculating.

    Perhaps the inability of victims to fully recover feels like a stick-in-the-eye to their idea of an all-powerful God. Maybe it is too frightening for them to acknowledge that healing doesn’t always completely occur when people believe in Christ, so they question the faith of the victims who don’t recover as much or as quickly as they think appropriate to their idea of a sovereign God.

    If that is the case, then it makes sense that they also believe perpetrators when they say they are sorry (no matter the sincerity or what aspect of the wrong is admitted). “I am sorry” magically erases all sin as-if-it-never-occurred, because if God is all-powerful, to think otherwise would be a sign of doubt.

    I don’t know, what do you think?

  62. @ Daisy:

    Clinton was a new young lawyer appointed to represent the alleged perpetrator. She is obliged by the law and the rules of ethics to do everything legal or ethical to get the best outcome for the accused. She did. Most lawyers who do criminal defense will tell you there are cases they have won where they believed the accused was guilty, but did the job they were required to do, by law and to keep their license.

  63. The first big problem with the offender’s youth group was that everything revolved around the pastor. Even small churches should have at least two or three leaders,and they don’t necessarily have to be paid staff. My high school leadership 40 years ago had two wonderful couples, and the girls spent time sharing their issues with the adult female leaders, not with the men. My current church has a similar style of leadership for junior high and high school. It will never solve all problems, but multiple leadership can help prevent one person taking all the accolades for success and violating his/her boundaries (sexual predators are female, too).

    Churches also need to get better about being firm with perpetrators and helping victims. Leaders caught in sexual sin do need restoration and forgiveness, but they should never be seen as “victims” of their own crimes,nor should they ever be allowed near any more minors in any area of ministry. Victims need long-term care and support so that they can rebuild their lives. More than anything, churches need to be better about developing excellent youth ministries with built-in checks and balances to make sure that people are never in danger. Background checks are a good start, but they sometimes only tell you about who has never been caught.

    I’ve been involved with teaching and children’s ministry for almost 35 years. I am very careful with my children and leaders, and I resigned from one position when I knew something would happen due to lack of safeguards. Unfortunately, I was right, and some people paid dearly for very poor decisions.

  64. Nancy wrote:

    Part 2
    In the following paragraph I am not expressing any personal opinion. I am saying how some people think. To illustrate, in NC a person can get married at 14, with parental consent and court approval. She can marry a man of any age. So, the actual thing is that she can marry an older man, but if she has not married him she cannot have sex with him or else he can be charged with statutory rape. That is a bit difficult to explain to a lot of people. The issues can be reduced to: she is / is not sexually mature; she can / cannot give consent. How can it be one way one minute and a different way the next minute. And the state sends mixed signals as some see it. Again, the business of the state can / cannot tell people what to do in their own bedrooms (they can tell the homosexuals they can do whatever they want but they are trying to tell “me” what to do–I don’t think so) attitude. Besides my grandmother married at 13 but they would not let that happen today. (Actual case my son dealt with.) All of this may be wrong in our eyes, but the wrongness of it does not make it go away.
    At our house the soon to be 12 year old is a smart and serious and attractive asian female. Her body and her bodily movements and her self-awareness as someone who knows she is attractive already attract attention. There is no way to make that go away. Who would want to make it go away, it will be a good survival mechanism all her life. So we teach her how to be a “young lady” and a bit ferocious and we pray a lot. And we pour into her every bit of reality about the world that we can. Does that stop “childhood” for her? Maybe in a lot of ways. Is that a bad thing? Each one will have to make his own decision about that. We want to see her safe and successful. And since large segments of the population do define the end of childhood a lot younger than my particular group does, we think it is better to go ahead teach adolescents to learn how to live in such a civilization as safely as possible.

    Dr. Nancy,

    I spent 30 years in the world of 16-18 year old females. It was at times very, very scary. You have to remember in this day and age, even thought I was fat and bald, ( no longer fat, I have lost 120 lbs in the last year…) I was ” targeted” by at least one teen girl to be their ” buddy.” This was especially true if there was no father figure in the household.
    It wasn’t just me, the Chairman of the Science Dept. had the same problem. He and I became very close friends and remain so today.
    At any point I could have had an affair with an 18 year old senior girl…..but as my friend said, and I agree, ” how could you live with yourself?”
    Look, we certain people are given certain responsibilities, pastors, teachers……our job is to protect the kids, not to use them for our personal carnal desires.
    When people in our profession step over the line they need to be punished to the max, and those who allow it to happen or cover it up, school administrators, lead pastors, need to be held resposible too….

  65. Re: the other side of things.

    There was a family in a nearby locale who had a foster child who was 15-16 during the time in question, who could pass for older by several years, as in early 20s. Also living with them was a niece of similar age and apparent age. Men with paid for nice vehicles were targeted, and the girls would try to get them to have sex with them. Then the man would be blackmailed with the threat of jail to get the vehicle title signed over. They would use different ERs and emergency clinics to have the “rape kit” done but would not name the perp unless he was uncooperative about turning over the car. There were several prosecutions before the DA figured out what was going on. The son of an acquaintance was prosecuted even though the rape kit showed not his DNA, but another man’s, and there was a denial and perjured (proved and ruled by the judge) testimony by the other girl, as the “victim” refused to testify. All because of the stat rape law and the attitude against anyone accused. So, though very rare, it sometimes is that the “victim” is really a “perp”.

  66. An Attorney wrote:

    Re: the other side of things.
    There was a family in a nearby locale who had a foster child who was 15-16 during the time in question, who could pass for older by several years, as in early 20s. Also living with them was a niece of similar age and apparent age. Men with paid for nice vehicles were targeted, and the girls would try to get them to have sex with them. Then the man would be blackmailed with the threat of jail to get the vehicle title signed over. They would use different ERs and emergency clinics to have the “rape kit” done but would not name the perp unless he was uncooperative about turning over the car. There were several prosecutions before the DA figured out what was going on. The son of an acquaintance was prosecuted even though the rape kit showed not his DNA, but another man’s, and there was a denial and perjured (proved and ruled by the judge) testimony by the other girl, as the “victim” refused to testify. All because of the stat rape law and the attitude against anyone accused. So, though very rare, it sometimes is that the “victim” is really a “perp”.

    That also goes through a man’s mind teaching school…..how strong are you to ” reject” an 18 year old girl’s advances? You don’t want her mad at you and her make up a ” story ” about you……
    Man, I miss the kids, I miss teaching, but in truth, I am so glad I am retired…..

  67. @ An Attorney:It does happen and I wish it wouldn’t. That said, if and when I get involved in an online debate about rape culture in modern society, there is almost always one person who pops up in the comments and says that false rape claims are 1) common (they’re not, they stand at about 5% of cases like other crimes) and 2) being falsely accused of rape is as bad as rape if not worse. As much as it is an good thing to bear false claims in mind, the almost consistent reference to it in any discussion on rape leads to decreased chances of a victim being believed when they come forward . Leading to a decreased number of victims coming forward.

    Not that I’m targeting you, attorney, I’m just saying. I know you were just giving an anecdote.

  68. @ Patrice:It could also be that everyone likes to think they have a good sense of judgement, for their own safety’s sake. If one of their closest coworkers, partners or even their friend is found guilty of an abhorrent crime, everything they thought they could discern about a person is thrown up in the air. That’s scary, and there is of course the discomfort of cognitive dissonance. The person you thought was pure and integral, the person you have a firm relationship with, is actually someone capable of terrible sin and you should probably re evaluate your friendship. It’s uncomfortable and painful. unfortunately too many people would rather listen to a bad apology so they can reclaim their old “good guy” perception of their buddy and feel at peace again, than listen to wisdom and righteousness and take the hard road of disciplining and rejecting the person they thought they knew so well.

  69. @ K.D.:

    Absolutely. I spent my whole life in health care. There are lots of rules about what not to do. Procedures about when to not be alone with a patient (basically never if possible.) But and also on the first day of nurses training ( most of us were 18) one of the first things we learned is that some patients are sexually aggressive and here is what you do and here is how to handle it. My concern is that we not exclusively focus on the responsibility of potential abusers and neglect to teach the adolescents skills and attitudes to help keep them safe in the first place, including young adolescents.

    And yes, I am sure some of the girls came on to you. This must not be overlooked or discounted, either, in discussions such as we are having now. This happened recently in one of the local schools. The e-messaging on both their phones clearly showed that she tracked him down, targeted him, and pursued the course to the end. She was actually a sexual predator. He was a dunce. He is in prison and will never teach again. She is not. All of this splashed all over the news here abouts, and “everybody” knows this can and does happen. He should have known better–no excuses. But when some abuser claims that the teen was the initial aggressor, that may well have been so. And when some abuser may claim that the girl in question was already sexually active with other males, that may also be so. These are not acceptable as excuses, but we must not think that such does not happen. And we must not forget that the whole population out there knows these things happen. It is called the media. Once it goes to trial the cat is out of the bag. Our approach should be that, regardless of the details, that is no excuse. But to try to deny that this happens does not solve anything.

    And you lost what? Great day, that is awesome. Congrats.

  70. @ An Attorney:
    @ An Attorney:

    These are really important points worth noting. There are many other, real-life, cases that illustrate them too. Putting it crudely to make a point, trivialising sexual abuse and hang-first-ask-questions-later are not the only two possibilities. Nor is it inevitable that we will replace one set of innocent victims with another.

    The reason I think this is important is that, as Futuristic Brad ably stated above, we are approaching a tipping-point in the attitude of the protestant church towards sexual abuse. Albeit belatedly, insofar as we’ve already seen one in secular society. The trouble with tipping-points, though, is that once Things start to tip, they carry on tipping past the balance point and over to the other extreme. The point at which they should ideally stop tipping is the very point at which they have the greatest onrushing momentum.

  71. Nancy wrote:

    @ K.D.:
    And you lost what? Great day, that is awesome. Congrats.

    Dr. Nancy,
    Before someone asks, no surgery, I did it the ” old fashion ” way, exercise and diet.
    I walk 2-3 miles a days. ( depends on my back) and the biggest think I gave up?
    The ” Official” drink of East Texas, Dr Pepper. I had one the other day just to see, and it tasted like Mrs. Butterworth’s Syrup. I wondered how I drank it for 50+ years…..and I could do a 2 liter a day….

  72. I am not entirely surprised by CT/LJ’s response. I felt sick when I read it but child sexual abuse in not high on their radar. Look at the lack of coverage into the SGM mess and the subsequent lack of coverage by CT….then you can see why they would publish such a piece like they did. Their other coverage of “Christian” scandals, problems, etc.. is noticeably. Lacking but child sexual abuse is a problem and they are largely silent. Plus it should be noticed that abuse of women is now the rage among Neo-Cals…I mean especially since John Piper is the 67th book of the Bible, and his young padawan learner Matt Chandler is eagerly becoming the 68th book of the Bible. And we both know what Piper and Chandler teach and believe about domestic abuse of women.

  73. K.D. wrote:

    The ” Official” drink of East Texas, Dr Pepper.

    Before Mountain Dew became the official drink of gamers, there was Dr Pepper — the “elixir of life” for early D&D. (This was in the pre-HFCS days….)

  74. Eagle wrote:

    Plus it should be noticed that abuse of women is now the rage among Neo-Cals…I mean especially since John Piper is the 67th book of the Bible, and his young padawan learner Matt Chandler is eagerly becoming the 68th book of the Bible. And we both know what Piper and Chandler teach and believe about domestic abuse of women.

    1) They’re CALVINISTS. It’s all Predestined, God’s Will, In’shal’lah.
    2) Not 67/68th books of the Bible. Additional Volumes of Calvin’s Institutes (which superseded the Bible in Geneva long ago).

  75. Anna wrote:

    That said, if and when I get involved in an online debate about rape culture in modern society, there is almost always one person who pops up in the comments and says that false rape claims are 1) common (they’re not, they stand at about 5% of cases like other crimes) and 2) being falsely accused of rape is as bad as rape if not worse.

    It may be only 5%, but it’s a very visible 5% and as a guy I can attest that it’s commonly thought to be much higher. I remember growing up with horror stories about girls falsely accusing guys of rape out of spite or to cover that they were the ones putting out, and gold diggers who’ll pick the guy with the most money when they go for the paternity suit. And gold diggers working divorce for fun and profit.

    It probably played a large role in the deep distrust of women I’ve had most of my adult life.

    And when you combine that distrust on the guy’s end with rape culture and fear of rape on the girl’s end, I can’t see how that could possibly end well.

  76. Bridget wrote:

    Your two comments are interesting. The truth is, the body and mind develop at different rates in an individual AND at different rates in other people. The body starts to develop around 12ish, but the medical world is telling us that the brain is far behind that. For some people the brain isn’t complete until mid 20s. This can create some serious messes….

    And if you’re a REAL late bloomer? My brain wasn’t complete until I was probably in my 30s.

    Also remember different parts of the brain/personality might also develop at different rates. In my own experience as a 160+ IQ kid genius, I got the emotional/social/personality retardation side effect. HARD.

  77. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    ** How will they change their policies/practices — if at all — of comment moderation and deletion, or quelling responses that minimize or silence victims?

    By eventually seeming to “get it” about some deeper problems with their product and their process, and acting as responsibly as they perhaps knew how to at the time on Friday with their apology, it seems that *Leadership Journal* has at least earned a second chance to prove they are worth our entrusting them and to improve their tarnished reputation. I suspect there will be many more social-eyes watching them — and other media sources. I hope for better from them.

    Brad – Keep-on-a-hopin…
    Isn’t part of Spiritual Abuse, any Abuse, SILENCING your critics? SILENCING the victim?

    Hmmm? *Leadership Journal* has at least earned a second chance???

    Well – I thought they earned a second chance at a SECOND APOLOGY… 🙂
    A chance to apologise to those commenters Leadership Journal SILENCED.
    To those commenters Leadership Journal Deleted. And for Re-Editing.

    This comment was posted at Leadership Jounal Monday about 1pm est, the 16th of June.
    ——–

    @Marshall Shelley. Thanks for the apology. In it you say, “That is not journalistically honest.”“There is no way to remove the piece altogether from the Internet, and we do not want to make it seem that we are trying to make it disappear. That is not journalistically honest.” Is it “journalistically honest” to Delete Critical Comments? Edit the article? Is there another apology due the commenters you SILENCED? One of the signs of Spiritual Abuse is when Hyper-Authoritarian Church Leaders SILENCE His Sheep. And B J, your moderator tried to SILENCE folks when he said “LAY IT DOWN” “show some Grace to LJ” “Now let it go.” Leadership Journal, says their mission is “To Serve Christ’s church.” And, an apology would be nice for those you Deleted and SILENCED. You did end your apology with, “We will be working to regain our readers’ trust and to give greater voice to victims of abuse.” Another apology might be helpful in the trust department. And to the victims of Abuse you SILENCED.
    ———

    NOPE – I do NOT believe Leadership Journal, CT, “Gets It.” – Because…
    The above comment, @Marshall Shelley, was, by Tues morn, the 17th, 10am, – DELETED. 🙁
    So much for the “Stop the Bleeding” apology from Marshall Shelley, Leadership Journal, CT.

    The comment, @Marshall Shelley, was, at one time, the first one posted after Marshall Shelley signed off for the weekend and opened the comments section Monday.

    But – it’s okay…
    I re-posted Tues morn about 10 am… As of 12 noon, it is still there… 🙂 😉 😉

    With more comments from others asking about Deleted Comments… 😉

    But – NO apology from Marshall Shelley, Leadership Journal, CT, for Deleting Comments…

    Hmmm? Trust? Leadership Journal? – NOT likely…

  78. Patrice wrote:

    Perhaps the inability of victims to fully recover feels like a stick-in-the-eye to their idea of an all-powerful God. Maybe it is too frightening for them to acknowledge that healing doesn’t always completely occur when people believe in Christ, so they question the faith of the victims who don’t recover as much or as quickly as they think appropriate to their idea of a sovereign God.

    This exaggeration-to-absurdity of “New Creature in Christ” is a common theme over at Christian Monist’s archives.

  79. @ A. Amos Love:

    Rebuilding trust is why I suggested I’d be interested in seeing a reasonably long-term plan of at least five years for how this incident affects their everyday functioning on content, comments, who is included in vetting articles, what they cover/don’t cover, etc.

    If they don’t pull through on all these areas and others that aren’t even on my radar yet, then I’d say you’re right and that they just bleeded any lead out of *Leadership* Journal. And the same goes for the parent organization of Christianity Today.

  80. By way of an idea, should we conclude that somebody on the editorial staff thought the article would be accepted by the readership? I would think so. Which says something about what they think, and what may be accurate, about some folks opinions in issues like this.

    We keep saying, why has there been no groundswell of action in SBC, for example, in the matters of abuse and its management. I am thinking that there are opinions out there lots worse than anything we have talked about before, and untold stories galore (some of which we might not want to hear) and attitudes and ideas at which we would be shocked beyond belief. I have heard some attitudes expressed, not in a church setting, that are appalling. I am thinking there is probably more of that than I know about.

    For example, and I am not saying the worst of it, “what is the big deal; lots worse than that happened to me and nobody saw me make a big deal of it.” This is somebody whose adaptation to whatever happened includes denial of the awfulness of it. This person has personal reasons to downplay the whole issue.

    There a lots more attitudes out there, not for putting in print.

  81. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    I grew up with a probable sociopath. Nobody is as concerned as a sociopath, as sincere as a sociopath, as innocent as a sociopath, as cheerful as a sociopath, as helpful as a sociopath, as compassionate as a sociopath — until the instant you have outlived your usefulness.

    Oh my goodness — as someone currently dealing with a person like this — this sentence is so well-put and so true. Sadly so. But true nonetheless.

  82. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    But the most infuriating trait of a sociopath is their incredible self-control. They NEVER lose their temper, NEVER show any reaction other than maturity and wisdom — only the total self-control of the situation and butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-their-mouth rationality and reason and self-control and spin as you melt down with rage and become The Evil One.

    And I’ve got to stop now before I go suicidal with flashback.

    I am so so sorry that you had to experience this.

  83. Nancy wrote:

    In the matter of sex abuse, whether it be children or teens, what would you say is the other extreme to guard against?

    Good question, and I should have made that clear.

    The extreme we are, thank God, escaping from is the cultural meme that doesn’t care about child abuse and looks the other way when it happens. Common excuses as Dee pointed out: we’re all sinners, they’re no worse than us. Oh, and: she probably led him on – that last one most common with an older teen who is, in a positive sense, on the cusp of adulthood but where that is used, in a contemptibly negative sense, to excuse the behaviour of a man who apparently does arithmetic with his brain but makes vital decisions with his reproductive organs.

    The other extreme is where anybody accused of, or rumoured to be accused of, child sex abuse is presumed guilty and condemned/fired/ostracised (in practice this will usually mean [s]he is also brutalised) without trial and regardless of guilt or innocence. Common excuse phrases: you can’t be too careful, and the favourite: there’s no smoke without fire.

    Personally, I would love to see a widespread cultural repentance from the idea that casual sex is fun and OK, and that sex overall is to be taken lightly. That would weaken the “she consented” excuse for data-rape but, more importantly, it would certainly mean fewer women being data-raped in the first place. “Fewer” isn’t as good as “none” but would be good nonetheless.

  84. Anna wrote:

    Patrice

    Yeah, we’re all frightened by how powerful evil can be and how insidiously it can hide, so we do what we can to avoid facing it.

    But whereas most humans are appalled when they are finally forced to face it, many in the US Evang community instead flip the situation upside down, giving the perp a pass and the victim the blame. Whatever is at work in them, it has to be quite powerful to trump what the human instinctively understands.

    I mean, even the prison population understands where the blame lies in pedophilia, but many of us don’t/won’t. That’s bizarre.

  85. Anna wrote:

    It could also be that everyone likes to think they have a good sense of judgement, for their own safety’s sake. If one of their closest coworkers, partners or even their friend is found guilty of an abhorrent crime, everything they thought they could discern about a person is thrown up in the air. That’s scary, and there is of course the discomfort of cognitive dissonance.

    Oops, don’t know what happened to quote in earlier comment, so here it is.

  86. @ An Attorney:

    I was providing the link because the poster above me seemed to want one and did not have the time or knowledge to make a link. I was not trying to argue either way about Hillary Clinton.

    (FWIW, I am a very right wing Republican and do not support Democrats, though… so it doesn’t bother me much if she’s being dragged through the mud over something.)

    For the other guy who complained that the first poster above did not provide enough links about it, you can try going to Google News and using Hillary’s name to find many articles and editorials about it

  87. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    It may be only 5%, but it’s a very visible 5% and as a guy I can attest that it’s commonly thought to be much higher. I remember growing up with horror stories about girls falsely accusing guys of rape out of spite or to cover that they were the ones putting out, and gold diggers who’ll pick the guy with the most money when they go for the paternity suit. And gold diggers working divorce for fun and profit.

    It probably played a large role in the deep distrust of women I’ve had most of my adult life.

    And when you combine that distrust on the guy’s end with rape culture and fear of rape on the girl’s end, I can’t see how that could possibly end well.

    False rape claims happen and I agree how destructive they are and how wicked the women are for doing it. But for some people to say that most rape claims are false AND that being falsely accused is worse than being raped, well that’s just plain incorrect. It really doesn’t help the justice procedure.

  88. Mary DeMuth (@MaryDeMuth) wrote:

    Why do we prefer perpetrators and malign victims? Is it because we just don’t like being uncomfortable with the reality of sexual sin in our midst? I don’t know, but I do know it’s time we say things straight.

    People do not want to believe that bad things can happen to them (or their family).

    So, they live in a world of denial where they believe if they are good or follow all the rules, they won’t be assaulted, get diseases, become a sexual assault victim, etc.

    As I have noted on this blog, and over at SSB, this view of mine (which I had long suspected) was borne out and confirmed in several books I read about workplace harassment and abuse years ago: rather than defend victims of job abuse, most bosses, co-workers, and HR, will defend the bully and blame the victim.

    People don’t want to believe they could be bullied out of the job, like they see happen to their bullied co worker.

    They find it safer to believe that the victim surely must have done something to deserve getting picked on.

    IMO, it’s the same with sexual abuse or most other issues. People would rather believe the victim “asked for it,” or did something wrong that could have easily been avoided, rather than to accept that bad things can and do happen to good people.

  89. @ Bridget:

    Speaking of brain development you also have issues with ADD and ADHD, those brains developed slowly from what I have read also.

  90. K.D. wrote:

    At any point I could have had an affair with an 18 year old senior girl…..but as my friend said, and I agree, ” how could you live with yourself?”

    Are you sure that is not all in your head?

    I think a lot of males are very egotistical, thinking all women who so much as say “hello, how are you today” are “warm for their form.” I’ve had many males over my life, from my teen years, to adult years, mistake platonic friendliness on my part with flirtation.

    I also tire of married (unattractive to boot) middle aged men who say they cannot be left alone with an un-married woman, because they know they would end up in bed with the woman. Says who?

    Most women (single, married, age 16 or 35) are not attracted to bald, double chinned, and/ or dweeby-looking, middle aged men. The attraction and possibility of an affair is in the man’s mind only.

  91. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    My brain wasn’t complete until I was probably in my 30s.

    Also remember different parts of the brain/personality might also develop at different rates. In my own experience as a 160+ IQ kid genius, I got the emotional/social/personality retardation side effect. HARD.

    HUG, there are also the ideas in “Developmental Trauma Disorder”, that traumatized children have to bypass development in order to survive their experiences, and then, when adults, still need to learn what normal kids learned a long time ago. I’d bet that your sociopathic sibling also did a real number on your normal development. When added to the probs accompanying high IQ, it makes even more sense that it took a long time to catch up to yourself.

  92. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    This exaggeration-to-absurdity of “New Creature in Christ” is a common theme over at Christian Monist’s archives.

    I’ve seen some Christians misuse the “New Creature” (and/or “Christ is sufficient to meet all your needs”) to shame, argue, or guilt Christians who have clinical depression or anxiety from not seeking psychological care or taking medications.

    I’m not sure how or why some Christians arrive at this conclusion, since you see plenty of “new creations in Christ” who still have to wear eye glasses, use a pace maker, take insulin, or whatever.

  93. Anna wrote:

    False rape claims happen and I agree how destructive they are and how wicked the women are for doing it. But for some people to say that most rape claims are false AND that being falsely accused is worse than being raped, well that’s just plain incorrect. It really doesn’t help the justice procedure.

    I’ve noticed that these points come up on feminist sites.

    An off-shoot of this idea that because a tiny fraction of rapes may be false claims that all should be doubted are the M.R.A. (Men’s rights activists) guys who jump in to feminist discussions about rape to insist, “but not all men are like that,” which caused the feminists to start the hash tag #NotAllMen.

    Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude’s Favorite Argument

  94. Daisy wrote:

    (FWIW, I am a very right wing Republican and do not support Democrats, though… so it doesn’t bother me much if she’s being dragged through the mud over something.)

    I do not think that being a criminal defense attorney is wrong. My heart would not be in the doing of it for a living, but sometimes the defense is right. And always a good defense shifts the balance at least a tad in the direction of the accused. This is necessary for justice to prevail Having a legal system like we do, adversarial, depending on evidence, innocent until proven guilty, jury trials with jury selected from the general population; that is an essential protection we all have. Can things go wrong? Sure. But the idea behind the system if a good one.

    Story (proud of my kid story.) When my son was in law school they were selecting students to argue some issue about which my son felt strongly. He wanted to argue for the proposition. He did not get picked to argue for it, but he did get picked to argue against it. So he declared to his buddies, just watch me; I can argue against my own strongly held position and win. And thus he did. He got a standing ovation from the classroom. Nobody saw anything wrong with that. That is how they are supposed to be able to do. I tell this story to say that just because some lawyer does whatever in the courtroom that does not mean they think that or not. It does mean that they are doing their job according to how the system works. I am all for that.

  95. Eagle wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    Speaking of brain development you also have issues with ADD and ADHD, those brains developed slowly from what I have read also.

    To add to the problem mentioned by you and Patrice, are the affects of drugs and alcohol on the developing brain. Yes this is self induced, but often (but not always) induced as the result of dealing with some other childhood issues. Either way it plays a role in brain development.

  96. Daisy wrote:

    K.D. wrote:
    At any point I could have had an affair with an 18 year old senior girl…..but as my friend said, and I agree, ” how could you live with yourself?”
    Are you sure that is not all in your head?
    I think a lot of males are very egotistical, thinking all women who so much as say “hello, how are you today” are “warm for their form.” I’ve had many males over my life, from my teen years, to adult years, mistake platonic friendliness on my part with flirtation.
    I also tire of married (unattractive to boot) middle aged men who say they cannot be left alone with an un-married woman, because they know they would end up in bed with the woman. Says who?
    Most women (single, married, age 16 or 35) are not attracted to bald, double chinned, and/ or dweeby-looking, middle aged men. The attraction and possibility of an affair is in the man’s mind only.

    I’ll tell the 17 year old red-haired cheerleader, it’s okay to sit in my lap….it’s all in my mind.
    I’ll tell the 18 year old blonde that not wearing panties and sitting in the front with a short skirt in class that it’s okay….it’s all in my mind. ( I had to move my podium to the corner of the room)
    I’ll tell the 17 year old brunette not to flash her cleavage as she bends over my desk asking ” what are you doing after school today?” …..it’s all in my mind….
    Do I need to continue?
    I think it’s all in my mind…..

  97. Look, I taught a very difficult class. You had to pass it to graduate. I was as Indiana Jones said of his father, ” he was the teacher the kids hoped they didn’t get.” Yet, I was the only one teaching the class…..
    Ego? No.
    Truth….I am afraid so….

  98. Daisy wrote:

    Most women (single, married, age 16 or 35) are not attracted to bald, double chinned, and/ or dweeby-looking, middle aged men. The attraction and possibility of an affair is in the man’s mind only.

    Daisy, you are missing the bigger picture. KD was a teacher and a married man. It is a real feather in some girl’s cap if they can get it on with a teacher. I read in a novel (so it is not good evidence) that some women target priests because of the challenge of it. Besides he sounds like a really nice guy. What do you want, already? Now it is true that if you so much as nod at some male co-worker passing down the hall he may think “she wants me.” But mostly, any man who is sane, bathed and available can get some action, whether he goes for it or not, just so he is not too picky about it. It will track him down and make the offer, for sure. Telling some high schooler “no” is not being too picky, that is just good sense. My former husband is/ has been massively obese since middle age but he is smart and a good conversationalist, employed and jovial. And he treats women well. That is so rare that it sells on the market like diamonds. He has had four wives so far, and I have no doubt will maintain that pattern of female acquisition to the grave, should his current situation fall through.

    I am real sorry if whatever you are experiencing is not what you want. But some of the rest of us loved and, yes, felt challenged by the interaction with men back in the day. We would use the occasional male attention as an affirmation that we still had something going for us. Just saying.

  99. Dee/Debs thanks so much for publicising this, in such a clear & critical way. That article was so cleverly phrased, with lovely Bible quotes & little hints of sorrow that many readers would have been totally taken in. All in all I have to say that popular Christian culture is absolutely in thrall to simplistic thinking about complex issues. When an article like this is broken down by those who are able to address its complexity it is amazing what else emerges- here false repentance, narcissism & victim-blaming. This ‘man’ is liable to offend again in my opinion, & may well have before the offences that got him jailed.
    The Christian world could do with a big wake-up call when it comes to how human emotions work over time. Bizarrely, despite God creating us as a species which requires many many years to mature into adulthood, in all ways, including emotionally, many Christians seem to think we should have an entirely different emotional speed. For some reason victims of sexual abuse seem to be expected to get over appalling emotional damage in time others get over being disappointed over not getting their first choice appointment at a restaurant. It’s inhuman.
    Keep flying this flag ladies, keep educating the masses.

  100. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Personally, I would love to see a widespread cultural repentance from the idea that casual sex is fun and OK, and that sex overall is to be taken lightly. That would weaken the “she consented” excuse for data-rape but, more importantly, it would certainly mean fewer women being data-raped in the first place. “Fewer” isn’t as good as “none” but would be good nonetheless.

    Really Nick? This disappoints me. If I understand you: a return to the pre-1960’s role of sex as something dirty people do in secret and never, never, never talk about would prevent date rape? I don’t think so. Rape is as old as humanity.

  101. @ Beakerj:
    There is quite a strong notion in Christian culture that Forgiveness Heals Every Pain! Do It Now! While forgiveness is extremely important in the healing process, it can take years for it to happen in the heart (which is where it’s most important) and years more for the pain to actually fade. It took me a while to forgive my parents for some damage that shaped my childhood for the worse, and I’m only now actually dealing with the wound itself (they know I forgive them and they’re helping me in the journey, they’re also aware that deep lasting pain doesn’t disappear overnight like a stained shirt in baking soda). But so eager are some to put dirty laundry behind them that they try to rush the process without mercy or understanding just to get back to what they had before. Everyone’s Happy In My Church! My Church Is Successful! No Problems Here!

  102. @ nmgirl:

    Well, it is true that when we went out for a date we did not plan to end up in bed before the night was over. But other than that your characterization of that era is way off base.

  103. @ nmgirl: I don’t think that’s quite what he meant. I’d like to see a movement away from casual sex too, but no reason why we can’t keep up a healthy discourse about bedroom activity within marriage or relationships. It won’t necessarily decrease rape though, in fact some will use the excuse that she DID consent because “she’s my girlfriend”. A particularly charming and manipulative rapist could date and rape several “girlfriends” at once.

  104. Daisy wrote:

    Most women (single, married, age 16 or 35) are not attracted to bald, double chinned, and/ or dweeby-looking, middle aged men. The attraction and possibility of an affair is in the man’s mind only.

    You focus quite a bit on the physical aspects of attraction, neglecting the very weighty emotional and psychological components.

    By your rationale, “unattractive” men should never have girlfriends or wives. I think we all know that this is not the case…

  105. @ Mr.H: As a 25 year old woman, the only problem I have with being hit on by older men is the creepy way that some of them do it. I too wonder what makes an older man feel he can pull a young twenty something. But that’s as far as my thoughts go on the matter. As for the creepiness, it’s usually assumed that the older men want the younger women just for sex, and some of them make their intentions so obvious while trying to hide it at the same time. That is the official definition on a creep – someone who only has sexual intentions (and they reek of it) but they act all innocent and casual. Think of Bill Gothard: King of Creeps.

  106. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I would love to see a widespread cultural repentance from the idea that casual sex is fun and OK, and that sex overall is to be taken lightly. That would weaken the “she consented” excuse for data-rape but, more importantly, it would certainly mean fewer women being data-raped in the first place.

    I know what you mean, Nick, and I agree that casual sex demeans the intimate relationship over time, but I’m not sure that is the basic issue here, because rape and pedophilia isn’t about sex, really, but about power-over via sex.

    I think these crimes are very old stories that simply didn’t get mentioned before, because much of both rape and child sex abuse are done by people who are friends/family, same as it ever was.

    I suspect (but have no data) that there is more of a relationship between these crimes and the in-your-face objectification of the female in commercials/ads, the way women are presented in so many tv/movies, the underlying violence that is in so much of what we see, the increase of “otherizing”(which gets worse when economic times are harder), and the gigantic porn industry.

  107. Daisy, sorry I kinda got you into this. I first posted about the Hillary story. I should have made myself clear. I was actually looking for info. With so much on the Internet these days, and with so many people with an “agenda”, I was not really sure if it was believable or if any of the sources were believable either. Many of the posters at TWW seem to be really well read, intelligent people and i thought i might get a good answer from someone pretty quick. I was wondering if anyone knew it there was any truth to it or not. Coming as it it did on the heels of the CT debacle, Terry Richardson in the fashion world, and the SBC refusal to address abuse, i was thinking IF it’s true and Hillary really did believe the guy was guilty and she got him off on a technicality and laughed about it, then wow! We who do “get it” have our work cut out for us. To say I was shocked and stunned is an understatement. I understand lawyers have to represent their clients, and Hillary was young at the time, but i would hope and expect that many years later she would have been grieved by it and by her blaming of the victim and say something to the effect that as a powerful person and a policy maker she sees the issue more clearly now and will work to address those issues. Again, I reiterate, idk if any of this is true. Before linking to a story or sources, I was wondering if any WW readers knew anything about it. For anyone who thinks I brought this up because I don’t like Hillary, that’s not true. I am not a rabid Republican and don’t hate Democrats. What I do hate is when powerful people, be it a pastor, youth leader, or politician, get a pass just because they are in leadership or in power. As another poster asked “where is this taking us and our society?” The lack of appropriate responses to abuse does not seem to be just in the church, but in the fashion industry, and now among lawmakers as well.
    My 17 year old daughter just went away to camp last week and some of my parting words were: “there will be male teachers there. Do not let yourself be alone with one. If you find you are alone with one and you are raped or groped, it is NOT your fault. Tell me. Tell someone. Do not keep it bottled up. I will believe you and not doubt you ever.” I never imagined I’d have to say these things to my children, but it is as necessary as feeding them their vegetables.@ Daisy:

  108. W@ Lisa:

    I agree with you, Lisa. The issue for me wouldn’t be that she had to defend such a person, but her later attitude (if true) about it would be a big flag to me. I already have some flags up regarding Hillary and power. If my husband went where Bill went, I don’t think I’d still be married to him. Maybe she stayed for love, maybe for power. If she stayed for the power and future possible positions, that would be an issue. So, flags are up. And since I know how Deebs feels about politics being discussed, I’ll not go down the road any further. OTOH, the desire for power always plays to abuse situations.

  109. Mr.H wrote:

    By your rationale, “unattractive” men should never have girlfriends or wives. I think we all know that this is not the case…

    Living proof here, Mr. H!

  110. An off-shoot of this idea that because a tiny fraction of rapes may be false claims that all should be doubted are the M.R.A. (Men’s rights activists) guys who jump in to feminist discussions about rape to insist, “but not all men are like that”

    MRAs are terrible. In fact they’re so terrible that I preemptively banned all comments in support of men’s rights from my blog. You may know this already, but it’s not just false rape claims they’re on about, they’ve also come up with things like “Slap a Violent B**** Month” (because apparently most women’s claims of being abused are fake too).

  111. @ Hester: The most irritating feature of MRA culture is their tendency to blame women for their lack of getting laid. It’s never an issue of them being too creepy, or boring, or painfully arrogant, no its the fault of the wimminfolk for not spreading their legs when asked.

  112. @ nmgirl:

    Er um…. Not to be snippy, but I had my teen years in the 70’s, and even back then, there was a noted difference regarding societal perception of virginity.

    Is it possible to separate the two, rape statistics, and sexual mores, over time? ?

  113. @ Anna:

    I guess it also depends on what you mean by “older.” The guideline formula I’ve heard for determining if someone is too young for you to date is to cut your age in half and add 7. (1/2x + 7 = dating is math! 😀 ) You reverse this to figure out if someone is too old for you. So I guess for me, as long as a man is a decent human being (i.e., a non-creep) and within these age boundaries, it would be fine. I’m 23 so that puts my upper age limit at 32. I’m sure somebody would find that creepy, though.

    Per what constitutes attractive, I guess that’s different for everybody. There are some who are bizarrely picky. For instance I once saw a woman online who blamed eHarmony for sending her men who were 2″ shorter than her. Granted, I won’t ever have that problem at 5’3″ (unless I go looking the Shire), but it still made me scratch my head. As for the claim that women aren’t attracted to bald guys, it seems like voluntary baldness is some kind of fashion statement among 20-30 something guys now, so I assume it must be getting them somewhere. 🙂 (Though among 30-something Neo-Calvinists I suspect it has more to do with copying C.J.)

    So yeah, I agree with general consensus here that there’s no reason to disbelieve K.D.’s story. (This is a general comment, you didn’t say you didn’t believe him.)

  114. @ Marie2:

    Hmmmmmm. .. Then there is rape reporting statistics. ..I could believe it if there has been a steady increase of rape reporting over time, as public awareness has increased. ..

  115. @ Anna:

    You read me quite correctly – to paraphrase myself, orgiastic promiscuity and Victorian prudery are not the only two possibilities *.

    Can I be certain that a change in the attitude to casual sex would reduce the incidence of rape? Well, no, not until it is tried. But there are causes for optimism there. What we do have now that did not exist pre-60’s is a clear public debate about the problem of rape, and of what sexual abuse is. “No means No” is a well-known phrase and, although a sizeable proportion of men still refuse to believe it, I think that proportion is inching downwards. Spousal rape, which has in living memory been considered an oxymoron, is now a criminal offence in the majority of states (though not covering the majority of the human population yet) – this is a very recent improvement. And a very important one, because it means that the presumption that one’s wife/girlfriend is one’s sexual property can begin to be eroded. At least, perhaps some celebrity church CEO’s can be re-educated on that point.

    Homophobic abuse – which, though not the same as rape, is culturally very closely related – remains rife, if we’re honest, but is under sustained attack now. To the degree that sporting icons, when they address homosexuality publicly, increasingly speak against homophobia and often in support of specific sportsmen who have come out as gay.

    So yes, I believe that a change in attitude to casual sex would have an overall benefit. If there are 100,000 instances of rape in the UK every year (there may well be more), then something that makes rape even 0.1% less likely could, on balance, prevent 100 rapes. That’s not much, but it’s something, and a journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step.

  116. @ Hester:

    I agree with you too on the subjectivity of this. On the other hand, my husband insists that I am way better looking than he is. He overcomes the fact that he does not look like Cary Grant by being generous, courteous, and kind.

    Perhaps the disgust a young person feels about being hit on by a subjectively unattractive man is the perceived ignorance about how much such a man would have to be generous, kind, chivalrous, to overcome the not so stellar looks.

    As the quote goes in Pulp Fiction, Arnold would have to be a charming !^&&# pig for him to be appealing. 😉

  117. @ Anna:

    no its the fault of the wimminfolk for not spreading their legs when asked

    …as they simultaneously bemoan that every woman under 30 has “ridden the (ed. note)” and is now damaged goods by the time they get to them. Yeah. Sense, made fresh daily at A Voice for Men. *bangs head against brick*

  118. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Awwwww, Nick! Always the humble little bugger. But your post made me remember another cool thing about my husband: rapier sharp wit. I bet your wife appreciates yours very much. 🙂

  119. @ nmgirl:

    I can understand your comment up to the bit where you said If I understand you:, but thereafter you lost me.

    I must also crave your pardon for doing you the discourtesy of replying to your comment and then signing off for the night – it’s midnight in Blighty the noo, though still light as this is Scotland in June – but I’ll check back in tomorrow morning…

  120. Hester wrote:

    @ Anna:

    So yeah, I agree with general consensus here that there’s no reason to disbelieve K.D.’s story. (This is a general comment, you didn’t say you didn’t believe him.)

    I wish I would have never said anything now. Seriously.
    That same Science Dept. Chair I mentioned earlier, and I often joked about all the nutty stuff that has happened to us throughout or teaching careers, and we should write a book together….he’d always conclude our discussion by saying, ” they’ll put it in fiction, no one will believe us.”
    ( BTW: 99% of the stuff did not involve teen girls……)

  121. dee wrote:

    In fact, here is Tim Bayly
    Are we so intimidated by our culture that we refuse to help victims experience the love and forgiveness of God for their own sin? Must we allow the pagan mantra that one must never “blame the victim” cause us to deny victims’ moral agency that is so integral to their own grief and pain?

    This kind of mind-numbing, childhood eviscerating bull**** is why I will keep reiterating that the child is never, never, EVER to blame. Seriously. How on earth would a 4 or 5 or 6 year old even know anything about the mechanics of sex unless someone showed them?

    ***Trigger Alert***

    There is no way a 5 year old child would have any concept that something – anything – should be insert there unless she is shown. And there is no way on earth that a child being shown that is the child’s fault. Grr….

  122. Jeannette Altes wrote:

    How on earth would a 4 or 5 or 6 year old even know anything about the mechanics of sex unless someone showed them?

    Ways a young child might get to know about sexual matters include: somebody did it to them, they observed adult sexual activity at home (or elsewhere), or somebody explained it to them.

    If somebody explained it to them it might be other kids at school or it might be some parent at home. In my children’s case I was the one who explained to the children, everything their brains could absorb from the youngest age they could absorb it. About sex, religion, danger, money, manners, diseases and injuries, and on and on.

    In the first grade my daughter went to school and told what she knew. It scared me to death. I thought they would run me out of town. Not so. Kids used to say “ask your mother” so I became sort of the source of such information for some kids. Nobody ever objected, and once one kid said her mother said ask your mother. I sent back the information. Some parents find talking about sex with their children difficult. I never did. Of course, my oldest says that growing up in a medical family and listening to the conversation around the supper table has basically ruined her for life, especially the stuff about “what I saw today” which was medical and a bit gory sometimes. But we never scared them or shamed them about sex. We just informed them. Young. Not 4 years old, but certainly before they started school.

  123. @ Daisy:

    Never discount chemistry Daisy. Sometimes its power can override any combo of generally agreed upon standards of physical attractiveness and accoutrement.
    I knew a guy at the last church I went to who ditched his young-nubile-trophy-blonde-fiance for a lady he met in choir who was 14 years his senior.

  124. posted the link too soon, sorry, it goes with this:
    first let me say that the following is my opinion and not the opinion of the wartburg watch or its moderators, but mine alone.

    I havent been online in a while following christian news sites or blogs but recently began reading here about this story of the poor rapist in jail for molesting a girl in his youth group and was pretty upset that the Leadership Journal printed his article. I have never heard of LJ and today I went to LJ and CT and read the editorial “Dear Man in Prison” by mary demuth. I think her editorial is great and I wanted to share it on my facebook page.
    I didn’t share it though because I didn’t want to provide my name/emailaddy to the LJ which is part of CT. when I scrolled down the page the first face I saw on contributing writers was Mark Driscoll. I don’t want mark driscoll or ed stetzer having my email addy because I would probably receive via email links to pornographic sex toy web sites to enhance my bedroom activities. Also I was amazed by the similarities to the story of the pedophile retelling how it all affected himself and Mark Driscolls telling how his wifes sexual assault affected Mark and nothing about how it might have affected his wife, both during the abuse or how it might affect his wife by him telling about it publicly to glorify himself.
    also I noted that the link at the bottom of their apology is about how to keep their youth ministers safe from “inapropriate relationships” the same type of bs that the guy in prison wrote, minimizing the pastor and leader sin. Those pastors and leaders need protection from those inapropriate relationships jumping out at them instead of “how to tell if you hired a pedophile as a youth minister cause he is so wonderful and you will do anything to get more kids to come to your church.” I noted that the first insight offered is from lawyers. and the last line that says “to keep your youth program safe for everyone” implies that it is not safe for those poor youth pastors to be in a room with young women that are trying to get in their pants all day long. I am not going to order or even bother to see what kind of tripe they are selling in this book, I can already guess, by who wrote it.

    “The Church Law and Tax Group, a division of Christianity Today”

    “An excellent resource for protecting student/minister boundaries is Draw the Line: Relational Boundaries for Safe Youth Ministry, available from our friends at Church Law and Tax.
    “OVERVIEW
    Draw the Line: Relational Boundaries for Safe Youth Ministry
    Churches rarely think about student-leader boundaries—until the unthinkable happens. Don’t wait until something happens. Use this resource to proactively protect leaders and pastors at your church from entering into inappropriate relationships students… blah blah blah blah

  125. I do understand that false accusations of abuse are made by women sometimes, I think it is important to keep the pendulum from swinging from no belief that abuse occurred to every accusation is true. my previous post is only mocking the need to keep youth pastors safe because of the context the editors of CT view sexual abuse of a minor child in. A person in authority and power over children that cannot set boundaries in their job has no business being in that job and needs no protection. they can have more than one adult in the room at all times, the church can set up a plan for if a youth member is trying to seduce a leader, they can resist the urge to sext young people in their groups, they can confess their sinful thoughts before they become actions, they can quit their jobs, they can go see a therapist, they can cut it off. if the urge to abuse is too strong for them to resist. And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. 43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
    Mark 9:42-43 (KJV)

    the ct book intro said nothing about false accusations against staff, it said “protect leaders from entering into inappropriate relationships”. and that is what I was addressing

  126. I wasn’t there, but did many participants at the SBC annual meeting speak to the SNAP protestors? I have attended churches where congregants were told not to speak to protesters, and it wasn’t about this issue. I dont tow a party line so I would probably get in trouble with the deacons. I like protesters. They care enough to feel strongly about an issue and I like to hear ” what is up?” So I would speak to them.

  127. @ Daisy:

    When I was a 30 y.o. professor at a state university, with a good head of hair, in great physical shape, and single, there were three young women in my sophomore class that would sit in the second row (no one ever sat in the front) and with the seats staggered in front of them, would spread their knees apart so that I could have seen their underwear if they had been wearing any. I was a target. I had no desire to pursue any relationship with any of them, and maintained an open door policy (no meeting with a student with the door closed, ever). And I often heard the “I would do anything for a better grade” from students in my office, some of them also showing me their (lack) of unders. I did not date students, period.

  128. sam h wrote:

    I do understand that false accusations of abuse are made by women sometimes, I think it is important to keep the pendulum from swinging from no belief that abuse occurred to every accusation is true.

    I meant to address this subject in the post and I think I will do so in the near future. I bet that you know that the percent of false accusations in child sex abuse are quite low. Most of those occur when an acrimonious divorce is in play.

    This gets brought up every time another serious sex abuse situation is reported. It is one of those “assumptions” statements like “sin is sin.” There is little reason for a child to report such abuse since the report is followed by intrusive and embarrassing comments. Then, the court trial often puts the victim on trial.

    I think we should be far more concerned about the majority of reports that are true and the numbers of reports are growing. As evangelicals, we should be hanging our heads in shame. We look just like the Catholic church which has been excoriated by evangelicals who claimed it was “celibacy” that caused this.

    Well, this situation proves that celibacy does not “cause” sex abuse. Sick individuals cause sex abuse and there seem to be a lot of sick individuals who target churches and are pastors and youth workers in churches.

    Frankly, the problem that you bring up-the poor pastor who is falsely accused- is quite easily remedied by making sure that pastors are never alone in a room with children or teens. Doctors now do this with their patients.

    Then, if a pastor gets ‘falsely accused” one must ask why he was alone with a kid to begin with.

  129. An Attorney wrote:

    had no desire to pursue any relationship with any of them, and maintained an open door policy (no meeting with a student with the door closed, ever).

    Good move.

  130. i was deep into a picture of the countryside of Jerusalem when Jesus was ministering, the beautiful hills, flowers blooming, a gentle breeze in the air. Jesus walking in the village and coming upon a young virgin woman who was nervous about her marriage which was occurring the next day. “Jesus will you help me to know how to be a good wife and comfort my fears?” she asks him. Jesus says yes my child, let us sit and I will explain it to you, and he pulls out mark driscolls book real marriage and proceeds to tell her what she is expected to do.
    Not one single Christian could ever believe that anything in that book is something that Jesus would tell a young woman because they know it is not written by the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit of a Holy God would never say anything like that.
    the answer to why people in the church don’t say anything about sexual abuse of young girls or boys is that they are drenched in lust themselves and have been convinced that it is of God. the things happening at MH church are bad but my question is why wasn’t there a mass exodus when Driscoll preached those types of “sermons” My question is why is any ex member of MH wanting to reconcile with that sort of doctrine preaching man anyway. Jesus didn’t say we could tell them by their gifts, or how many people got “saved” or how many times they spoke scripture with a twist or manipulated it to mean things it doesn’t. Not by their charisma.
    Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
    Matt 7:16-17 (KJV)

    What fruit does Jesus always refer to?

    But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. Gal 5:22-23

    (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Eph 5:9

    what is or ever has been the fruit of CT, Mark Driscoll, Matt Chandler, and a whole bunch of other preachers that Christians have flocked to?

    we don’t speak up because we don’t want to be ostracized, because others must know better than us, because we feel stupid that we fell for it in the first place and don’t want to be admitting it now, or like daisy pointed out we will have to accept that bad things happen to good people. That will make us afraid that something bad might happen to us. we say things to ourselves like “because gosh they wouldn’t be preachers in this big wonderful church if they weren’t servants of Jesus,” “if there was abuse it must have been the victims fault cause I have been listening to this guy preach for years and I like him and that would mean I was wrong.”
    if we don’t start picking up our crosses and following Jesus we cant be His disciples. I think people finally having had enough of watching innocent children be abused has been a great incentive for true Christians to pick up that cross even if it means the Pharisees wont fellowship with them anymore.

  131. I would also like to weigh in on the “puritan” idea I think our country has of marriage relations in God’s eyes.

    And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, Gen 1:28

    Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. Gen 2:24-25

    this was before the great sin in the garden of Eden. This is how God made man and woman. He could have kept on making people this way, from dirt and ribs, but He didn’t.

    Marriage was intended to be permanent and a caring, loving relationship between two people that love each other more than themselves. Marriages have problems when one partner doesn’t love the other more than themselves. Sometimes one partner has lust that causes them to seek their own pleasure more than their partners. Even if they don’t intend it, they fulfill themselves and leave their spouse feeling empty and unhappy. That is what lust does, it seeks its own. If both partners have lust, then their sex life can become exciting physically for a season, but it soon becomes empty emotionally. This also causes one or both people to seek more and more, either in variety or frequency, it becomes addictive.

    That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; 5 Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 1 Thess 4:4-5

    Not (to be used) in the passion of lust, like the heathen who are ignorant of the true God and have no knowledge of His will, 1 thess.4:5 amplified

    Often when people think about having a sex life with no lust they think boring, unfilfilling, no fun at all, no passion. If a man seeks to come together with his wife and is being patient and kind, not jealous, not haughty or arrogant, rude or self seeking and seeks only to please her, and the wife comes to the bedroom in the same spirit seeking only to please him, you may never get them to come out of there again because it will be so passionate.

    So it in marriage it isn’t the act of sex that is wrong, it is the spirit it is done in. It is whether we come together in true Godly love or in lust. Lust is self gratifying and self seeking.

    and it aint boring

    …see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 1 Peter 1:22

    excerpts from
    http://littlesanctuaryministries.org/sexualimmorality/maleandfemale.html

  132. please edit last comment “and it aint boring” to read, “and it aint boring to be with your wife in the bedroom when it is done without lust”

  133. Daisy wrote:

    K.D. wrote:

    At any point I could have had an affair with an 18 year old senior girl…..but as my friend said, and I agree, ” how could you live with yourself?”

    Are you sure that is not all in your head?

    I think a lot of males are very egotistical, thinking all women who so much as say “hello, how are you today” are “warm for their form.” I’ve had many males over my life, from my teen years, to adult years, mistake platonic friendliness on my part with flirtation.

    I also tire of married (unattractive to boot) middle aged men who say they cannot be left alone with an un-married woman, because they know they would end up in bed with the woman. Says who?

    Most women (single, married, age 16 or 35) are not attracted to bald, double chinned, and/ or dweeby-looking, middle aged men. The attraction and possibility of an affair is in the man’s mind only.

    Daisy. This is NOT about appearance attraction much of the time. Maybe most of the time. As some other posters have mentioned in many cases it is about “sleeping with power”. Look at how many politicians, corp execs, celebs, and star athletes have sexual relations with 100s of women. Some with 1000s. There have been some studies (but it’s hard to do scientifically detached double blind studies in this area) and men of power seem attract women who want to have sex with them. Define power broadly. Maybe fame is a better word.

    And I suspect that the reverse is true. Women of power and/or fame attracting men. But since women of power have been fairly rare compared to men for most of the history of the planet, there are very few examples to look at.

  134. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    If you think that you are capable of using power to sexually abuse another human being, you need help. We are all capable of sin but not all of us are capable of sexually abusing a teenager or child.

    I appreciate you saying this. I think this is a throw-away line that people use to sound Christian or something, but seriously – if you believe for a moment that you you could do something like this get help now. And to this twerp and anyone else like him: I have a shotgun, a shovel, and a back yard. You might not get the chance to tell “your side of the story”. Get help.

    THANK YOU!!
    I am so sick, sick, sick of sin-levelling. Normal people–including normal people who are utter pagans and/or atheists–manage to go through life without raping children. Normal people know it is wrong, evil, depraved, to assault children.
    Christians ought to be the last people to be fooled by sociopathic & psychopathic behaviours. Sadly, a lot of us seem to have fallen so hard for “cheap grace”, that we can’t see the evil that is parading in our own churches.

  135. @ K.D.: I believe you, K.D. Would just like to put that on the record. ( I know it’s a late response, I was asleep).

    And Hester, what I meant by “older man” in my earlier post was a man 45-60 years old. Practically double the age of the woman he’s trying to woo. As much as there are SOME women who date a man 20 years her senior, it’s not common. Which is why I don’t get the idea how more than a few middle aged/older men (the creepy ones anyway) think they can be the next Hugh Heffner. I mean, what the hell was going through Bill Gothard’s mind when he did what he did?

  136. Nickname wrote:

    When I read this perpetrator’s ill-conceived ‘article’, red flags went up on almost every sentence – starting with the subtitle. He was so concerned about his own life and ministry — not one word about the damage done to his church, his victim, or his family.

    Yup, this was my reaction too. You know what it reminded me of? That passage in Isaiah 14:13+14 where “Lucifer” is saying “I,I,I” over & over….The passage has for years on end been seen as referring to satan’s fall through–narcissism! The whol;e thing was all about “me” & “my” and how terrible it was for him. Never mind the victims!!
    Ted Bundy did the same thing in his interview shortly before his execution; he spoke with James Dobson & JD was buying into Bundy’s whole “poor me, I was exposed to porn by my stepfather, my mother never understood me, & here I am”, & my mother was totally furious,sputtering “Listen to him make excuses!! Why is Dobson believing all this whining?”
    And here we are still, listening to the same old, same old “I,I,I” from narcissists, & compulsive liars. Aaaaarrrrggghhhhh!!!! [See Zooey banging her head against the wall in frustration].

  137. Anna wrote:

    I mean, what the hell was going through Bill Gothard’s mind when he did what he did?

    I don’t know, and I don’t want to know. Knowing what went through Gothartd’s mind can’t be good for you.

  138. @ Anna:
    You make excellent points. Please keep commenting! 🙂 You are right that we should be having the kind of sex where one seeks to please the other and vice versa. I am unmarried myself but I know that I’d much rather “give my body” to a man I deeply love and trust and know that he deeply loves me.

  139. On an unrelated note:

    @ Anna: German flag at 4:52pm TWWT;
    @ Anna: UK flag at 6:23pm TWWT

    Do we have two Anna’s commenting in a similar manner, or was there some travelling involved here?

    Just curious!

  140. OT: I need prayer please. Mr. Hoppy announced last night he is no longer a Christian. I feel like I’ve been punched in the gut. I have my doubts about being a spiritual “single” mother. My kids are little now, but in the long run, they will notice.

  141. dee wrote:

    sam h wrote:

    I do understand that false accusations of abuse are made by women sometimes, I think it is important to keep the pendulum from swinging from no belief that abuse occurred to every accusation is true.

    I meant to address this subject in the post and I think I will do so in the near future. I bet that you know that the percent of false accusations in child sex abuse are quite low. Most of those occur when an acrimonious divorce is in play.

    This gets brought up every time another serious sex abuse situation is reported. It is one of those “assumptions” statements like “sin is sin.” There is little reason for a child to report such abuse since the report is followed by intrusive and embarrassing comments. Then, the court trial often puts the victim on trial.

    I think we should be far more concerned about the majority of reports that are true and the numbers of reports are growing. As evangelicals, we should be hanging our heads in shame. We look just like the Catholic church which has been excoriated by evangelicals who claimed it was “celibacy” that caused this.

    Well, this situation proves that celibacy does not “cause” sex abuse. Sick individuals cause sex abuse and there seem to be a lot of sick individuals who target churches and are pastors and youth workers in churches.

    Frankly, the problem that you bring up-the poor pastor who is falsely accused- is quite easily remedied by making sure that pastors are never alone in a room with children or teens. Doctors now do this with their patients.

    Then, if a pastor gets ‘falsely accused” one must ask why he was alone with a kid to begin with.

    Exactly right.
    Thanks, this needed saying.

  142. I also haven’t been doing any international travelling in the last 24 hours so the location system must be off. I do travel locally for work though.

  143. HoppyTheToad wrote:

    OT: I need prayer please. Mr. Hoppy announced last night he is no longer a Christian. I feel like I’ve been punched in the gut. I have my doubts about being a spiritual “single” mother. My kids are little now, but in the long run, they will notice.

    Ow. That has to hurt. I will pray for you, certainly. There have been some outstanding christians come from homes where the mother was christian, like St. Augustine, and apparently Timothy. This need not be disastrous for the children, but one can’t help but worry about them because that is what mothers do. Keep us informed.

  144. dee wrote:

    I meant to address [false accusation] in the post and I think I will do so in the near future … the percent of false accusations in child sex abuse are quite low. Most of those occur when an acrimonious divorce is in play…
    Frankly, the problem that you bring up-the poor pastor who is falsely accused- is quite easily remedied by making sure that pastors are never alone in a room with children or teens. Doctors now do this with their patients.

    Point 1 of 3

    Abuse is a very large topic, and in fact the incidence of false accusation varies enormously with context – for instance, government figures in the UK estimate that more than half of all accusations of assault made by pupils against teachers are false. But that is a very different context. There are many well-grounded and specific reasons not to apply those figures to the context of sexual abuse of children in church environments – where the incidence of false accusation is indeed much lower – nor would I ever seek to do so. But that does underline how important it is to take every case seriously and individually, based on the actual evidence and not on any archetype.

    Point 2 of 3

    Your excellent point about acrimonious divorce cases, Dee, contains a quiet sub-text that deserves to be shouted from the rooftops: many false accusations of abuse do not come from children but from self-interested adults.

    In the infamous McMartin preschool case
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Legacy
    for instance – to cut a long story short – it emerged that children repeatedly insisted that nothing had happened, but were pressured or otherwise manipulated into supporting allegations that essentially the adults present had concocted themselves. The moral: Listen to the children themselves. When a child says abuse happened, we must take the child very seriously. When a child says that abuse didn’t happen, we must take the child very seriously. And although we should set the child’s testimony in the context of all the other evidence, we’d better have very good, and impartially corroborated, reasons to over-rule it. One of the key protections against false allegation is to keep looking for better and better ways to let the children themselves speak.

    Point 3 of 3

    I entirely agree about setting standard procedures. (In the McMartin case, standards of all kinds were repeatedly flouted at every turn; had they been applied, the whole sordid business need never have happened.) The simplest and commonest child-protection rule is the one you cited: a member of (e.g.) pastoral staff should never be alone with a child or vulnerable adult. There are other simple rules too, of course.

    The thing is, even that isn’t as simple as we might think. That very subject came up here on TWW about a year ago (I think) – specifically, Billy Graham’s efforts never to be alone with a woman other than Ruth, his wife. I forget exactly whom – my apologies – but at least one commenter here was strongly offended at the implication that any woman – herself included – be regarded by default as a likely temptress. Well… most sexual attacks on children are carried out by adults, and the above child-protection rule recognises that. I have never personally done anything of the sort. But I’m willing to take the hit there, because it helps protect all of us.

    [MOD: Link formated edited]

  145. @ HoppyTheToad:
    That’s painful and it probably feels like a rejection of you personally. Sometimes when people reexamine their faith, they start throwing away the parts they reject.

    Perhaps they reject a deterministic god, then a dispensationalist god, then a 6-day creation god, then an American exceptionalism god, then a white capitalist god, then a patriarchal god, etc. (I’m indebted to an interview on RHE’s blog for this line of thinking.)

    And some of these so-called gods really do need to be rejected in order to know who the real God is.

    And I agree with Nancy’s advice.

    Here’s a bit of comfort that someone else gave me once as I agonized over someone who had walked away from his Christian family: “He’s not dead yet.”

    Hang in there and keep being faithful. Many of us have have been spiritually single and raised children who love the Lord and serve his people.

  146. Anna wrote:

    I’ve no idea why the TWW system decided I am German when my email address ends in co.uk!

    TWW uses a free community supported database and plugin to put up the flags. The “staff” here has nothing to do with it. Apparently someone updated the data base with corrected information between your comments. Plus location isn’t determined by email address, but by IP address. And that’s going to get very messy as things change from IPv4 to IPv6. But now we’re getting too deep in the technical weeds.

  147. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    In the infamous McMartin preschool case

    Here in NC we had the Little Rascals case. But here they were convicted. Eventually most of the convictions were over turned but it was a travesty what the local legal system and news reports did to those people.

    And I can’t even imagine what the lives of those kids in these situations are now like. Some now truly believe the stories implanted by the interviews back then, others have got to have a warped view of society.

    Some of the testimony include things such as: babies ritualistically killed, victims taken out on boats and thrown overboard, and inappropriate trips in hot air balloons.

    See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rascals_day_care_sexual_abuse_trial#Case_overturned

    and

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day_care_sex_abuse_hysteria

  148. NC Now wrote:

    Some of the testimony include things such as: babies ritualistically killed, victims taken out on boats and thrown overboard, and inappropriate trips in hot air balloons.

    Magic hot-air balloons (and labyrinths of Satanic Ritual basements and tunnels) were part of the McMartin circus as well.

    And guess who believed every single word of it (especially the Satanist Witchcraft Conspiracy angle)?
    Born-Again Bible-Believing CHRISTIANS.
    (Even to the point of how the Satanists(TM) had suppressed even more damning evidence.)

  149. Janey wrote:

    Here’s a bit of comfort that someone else gave me once as I agonized over someone who had walked away from his Christian family: “He’s not dead yet.”

    Funny when it’s Monty Python doing Mary Queen of Scots.
    Not so funny IRL.

  150. HoppyTheToad wrote:

    OT: I need prayer please. Mr. Hoppy announced last night he is no longer a Christian. I feel like I’ve been punched in the gut. I have my doubts about being a spiritual “single” mother. My kids are little now, but in the long run, they will notice.

    Praying for you and your family Hoppy. Be patient with yourself and your spouse. It is an odd road you walk. Your exact predicament occurred in our former church several years ago. The children (4) struggled with the announcement as well. Hugs, hope, and comfort cross the internet.

  151. @ GuyBehindtheCurtain: I knew that the staff has nothing to do with it, when I said “system” I meant computer system. Should have clarified, sorry. I also only remembered that nationality is shown via IP address after I hit submit. Next time I’ll re read before I post things like that, heh.

  152. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    In the infamous McMartin preschool case
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Legacy
    for instance – to cut a long story short – it emerged that children repeatedly insisted that nothing had happened, but were pressured or otherwise manipulated into supporting allegations that essentially the adults present had concocted themselves. The moral: Listen to the children themselves. When a child says abuse happened, we must take the child very seriously.

    And McMartin damaged the credibility of “when a child says abuse happened”; ever afterwards, there will ALWAYS be the suspicion of False Memory Syndrome and/or just false testimony when a kid comes forward.

  153. Patrice wrote:

    There’s something about victims that many US Christians can’t handle. I don’t understand it, so I’ve been speculating.

    Perhaps the inability of victims to fully recover feels like a stick-in-the-eye to their idea of an all-powerful God. Maybe it is too frightening for them to acknowledge that healing doesn’t always completely occur when people believe in Christ, so they question the faith of the victims who don’t recover as much or as quickly as they think appropriate to their idea of a sovereign God.

    As someone who was sexually assaulted as a teenager and has struggled to even put words to feelings for ten years (…wow, It’s been that long…), I have to agree with this 100%. Not only was that the message I was getting, it was my own internal message. I know intellectually that victims from all backgrounds struggle to wrap their minds around it, but I can also say that my Christian background added some unique challenges. Just to be clear, I never thought of it as something that was “my fault,” I just completely minimized the experience and tried to define it as something other than assault. At the same time, I was furious with myself about my failure to heal and move on. And now, with only 2 months before I get married, I’m struggling to sort through the frankly devastating psychological and physiological effects.

    I’d realized something was wrong when I was diagnosed with a medical condition that frequently shows up in women who were assaulted (or who grew up in fundamentalist religious communities, as it happens) and I’d struggled with what I should do or say. And listening to my very good Christian friend and part-time accountability partner talk about how awful it was to be a victim just about killed me. She didn’t really think about the implications. She was just spouting back what she’d heard and picked up. Fortunately God has been using extra doses of heart softener on her and she’s my best supporter now. But for a while, it was either my own sense of self-worth or our relationship.

    Basically, the only thing that being a victim means is that someone else sinned on you. We need to remember that.

  154. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    To make it even more confusing, check this out from the Wikipedia article entitled: ” False allegation of child sexual abuse”

    First statement regarding frequency of false allegation: Studies of child abuse allegations suggest that the overall rate of false accusation is under 10%.

    Second statement, same subject: Findings of multiple studies performed between 1987 and 1995 suggested that the rate of false allegations ranged from a low of 6% to a high of 35% of reported child sexual abuse cases.

    Third statement, same topic: Of the millions of reports of each year to state protective agencies in the USA (including both substantiated and unsubstantiated reports), there is no formal determination as to what portion of those represent false allegations.

    So there we have it. less than 10%? range from 6% to 35%? or mostly we don’t actually know?

    I am so glad they cleared that up for me.

    Either way, the article has some interesting discussion of the material.

  155. Anna wrote:

    I knew that the staff has nothing to do with it, when I said “system” I meant computer system.

    That’s certainly how I read it. Doesn’t help that “Anna” is not an uncommon name in Germany!

  156. Anna wrote:

    I knew that the staff has nothing to do with it, when I said “system” I meant computer system. Should have clarified, sorry. I also only remembered that nationality is shown via IP address after I hit submit. Next time I’ll re read before I post things like that, heh.

    Sorry. My tone came through wrong. I was just explaining. For everyone. Not chastising. No need to be sorry.

  157. zooey111 wrote:

    Yup, this was my reaction too. You know what it reminded me of? That passage in Isaiah 14:13+14 where “Lucifer” is saying “I,I,I” over & over….The passage has for years on end been seen as referring to satan’s fall through–narcissism! The whol;e thing was all about “me” & “my” and how terrible it was for him. Never mind the victims!!
    Ted Bundy did the same thing in his interview shortly before his execution; he spoke with James Dobson & JD was buying into Bundy’s whole “poor me, I was exposed to porn by my stepfather, my mother never understood me, & here I am”, & my mother was totally furious,sputtering “Listen to him make excuses!! Why is Dobson believing all this whining?”
    And here we are still, listening to the same old, same old “I,I,I” from narcissists, & compulsive liars. Aaaaarrrrggghhhhh!!!! [See Zooey banging her head against the wall in frustration].

    I had the same reaction to that interview. And you know, a reporter tracked down that childhood friend of Bundy’s who was supposedly with him when he found that imaginary cache of pornography in the woods and he said that never happened.

    There was another interview with Bundy in which he said that he was lucky to have been born without empathy because feeling guilt would have made it hard to rape and murder. That’s the real Bundy.

    Why was Dobson interviewing Bundy instead of offering comfort to the parents of his victims? Bundy had already been extensively interviewed by competent psychologists. Why are so many pastors drawn to child abusers rather than abused children? They use the drama for self-aggrandizement. “I met with a serial killer or child molester and brought him to Jesus” makes for a great story in their minds and the perpetrator is quick to cooperate in the narrative.

    Apparently there is no ‘glory’ to be found in privately helping children to heal over a period of years.

  158. A lot of psychologists believe that abusers/rapists continue to talk about their actions as a means of still exerting power and control over a victim. It’s pretty much a way for them to psychologically still dominate a victim in their minds, while minimizing their own actions as “misunderstood” – pretty much a classic example here.

    It’s a damn shame Christian communities are so willing to be a part this whenever narcissistic predators try to paint themselves as repentant. We give them a venue for this power play and unintentionally legitimize their “me me me” attitudes.

    I’m probably preaching to the choir here, but I had to get it out.

  159. @ brad/futuristguy:

    Brad

    Well – The above comment, @ Tue Jun 17, 2014 at 12:19 PM…
    To Leadership Journal, @Marshall Shelley…
    Was deleted again… 🙁

    And, New Posting Guidelines was in it’s place… 😉

    B J
    Posting Guidelines: ‘We welcome disagreement and criticism and well as encouragement and testimonials. But we do not post comments that are vulgar or off topic or attack individuals or that come from orchestrated campaigns that duplicate comments, etc. We try to model honest, direct, and civil conversation.”

    But – They had to read it- To delete it.

    And I reposted the comment – with this question…

    “A. Amos Love
    B J – Can you tell me why this comment left Mon and Tues was deleted? Twice? Thanks”

    Wonder how long it will last this time… 😉

  160. @ Janey:

    “Sometimes when people reexamine their faith, they start throwing away the parts they reject…….

    And some of these so-called gods really do need to be rejected in order to know who the real God is.”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    you say it well, janey.

    in my observation, “Christian” means a mass of cultural accumulation adding unhealthy poundage that can be a disease-prone drag on one’s life.

    to come to a point of needing to strip oneself of it all can be a necessary step to finding Elohim in the purest sense.

  161. elastigirl wrote:

    to come to a point of needing to strip oneself of it all can be a necessary step to finding Elohim in the purest sense.

    It’s a beautiful thing to have happen and to witness. I’m seeing my fiancé discover Who this guy is he’s been hearing about tangentially for his whole life and my friend ditch the trappings of legalism to find where God’s been waiting for her this whole time. But it’s also painful and scary because it means being wrong.

  162. @ Caitlin:

    “But it’s also painful and scary because it means being wrong”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    and also kind of like leaving a culture of deep familiarity for a somewhat foreign one, perhaps feeling alone in a strange land.

    but there are good and kind people there, whose live their lives with integrity and compassion.

    and God is not the sounds and feelings of church and its meetings.

    God is just as available extra-ecclesia.

  163. @ HoppyTheToad:
    I hope the best for you, your husband and your family. Just know mixed faith marriages can work sometimes and there are many resources and people out there to support you all. I know from personal experience both some of what your husband is going through and also of growing up in a mixed faith household, I’m sure it’s not easy and is an unpleasant surprise to you all. My best wishes to you all.

  164. @ elastigirl: just as the body of Christ is made up of all who believe, regardless of where they go to church, or whether they go at all.

    Somehow I *don’t* think God keeps an attendance ledger on us, though it can be hard to shake the sense that there is one, somewhere. Finding out that it doesn’t exist is a tremendously freeing thing!

  165. @Anna thanks for your nice comments!
    I pray that the old sam, the womanizing lust filled alcoholic sam, stays dead in the grave where Jesus put him, and that the new sam learns more and more what it is to be like Jesus.

  166. I would say that one really great thing came from CT posting that story of the unrepentant pedophile.
    now all the gothard churches, all the piper churches that support Mark Driscoll, all the churches will have to honestly repent for not believing all those young boys and girls that said they were abused by people that were in leadership and married and had kids and were worhsiped by all the congregation. The story posted proves that that is sometimes exactly who molests children.

  167. sam h wrote:

    will have to honestly repent

    “Have to”

    True repentance comes from God and to get it, we have to be paying attention to Him and not our own egos. “Have to” but unlikely to.

  168. Caitlin wrote:

    sam h wrote:

    will have to honestly repent

    “Have to”

    True repentance comes from God and to get it, we have to be paying attention to Him and not our own egos. “Have to” but unlikely to.

    I thought our repentance comes from us, when we freely choose to ask God for forgiveness for our sins.

  169. Marsha wrote:

    I thought our repentance comes from us, when we freely choose to ask God for forgiveness for our sins.

    The realization that we need forgiveness in my experience doesn’t really come from ourselves. People like sin too much. I think God gives us literally everything we need, beyond just the forgiveness, He works in our hearts to impel us to seek it in the first place. Freely and widely available, sure, but from God 100%. Even though we choose to act on it, the nudge comes from God.

  170. @ Jeannette Altes:

    The law says consent is not a defense to statutory rape, but it does not deny that some people truly consent. Many do. That they truly consent, however, does not diminish the culpability of the older person. There even occur cases in which the child seduces the adult, though I haven’t heard of any actual cases of that in the church context. The adult is still culpable. It is simply not a defense to say that the child tempted you.

  171. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    in 1975, the estimates were that 1 of 5 girls and 1 of 7 boys would be the victim of inappropriate sexual contact by age 18. In 1985, the estimates were about 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 5 boys. In 1995, the estimates were about 1 in 3 girls and boys.”

    Whether it’s 1 in 5 or one in 3 doesn’t really matter. It’s hard to know how accurate such statistics are. If it’s even 1 in 20, though, it’s a giant problem, and one that any pastor doing his job can’t have been ignorant of.

  172. Tired wrote:

    as if magically at the age of 12 you suddenly turn into a femme fatale, tempting both male youth and adults alike

    You do become a femme fatale, though— that’s exactly the point that my daughter’s resisting now. And it’s not a bad thing— it’s one of the joys of womanhood. It’s just dangerous, and the 12-year-old girl, plain or pretty, has to recognize that she has a new influence on the non-fair sex. She has to recognize that, just as every male youth leader has to realize that even without him trying, his group’s girls might fall in love with him.

  173. Nancy wrote:

    when some abuser may claim that the girl in question was already sexually active with other males, that may also be so. These are not acceptable as excuses, but we must not think that such does not happen.

    Quite right. The first thing is to go after the adult, or, in general, after the man. It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.

    Second, attend to the spiritual state of the child or former child. If she (or he) reported the situation, then she is almost surely either a pure victim or repentant. In either case, she needs spiritual counsel. In fact, if not a victim but repentant, she needs assurance that the blood of Jesus covers her sin. She shouldn’t be told she didn’t sin in that case; she needs to be told that God forgives the repentant.

  174. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    You do become a femme fatale, though— that’s exactly the point that my daughter’s resisting now.

    It must be nice to live a life of male privilege that allows you assume we possessors of lady parts understand what you experience post puberty while you remain completely, blindly ignorant about what we experience. No, we don’t become femme fatales at 12, or any other age, and no we aren’t some sort of male kryptonite, at least no more than men are female kryptonite. Do your daughter a favor and stop screwing up her mind about such things.

  175. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.

    So all men are in headship over all women. I’d love to see the proof text for that.

  176. Hester wrote:

    I’m 23 so that puts my upper age limit at 32. I’m sure somebody would find that creepy, though.

    As I recall, Aristotle said that the ideal ages for marriage were 37 for males and 18 for females (but I could be wrong). But that’s for marriage— for honorable intentions. There’s no legalistic rule we can use. There’s probably some case where a man aged 60 and a girl aged 20 were just right for each other. But they’d better ask for pastoral counsel before they tie the know.

  177. Nancy wrote:

    I spent my whole life in health care. There are lots of rules about what not to do. Procedures about when to not be alone with a patient (basically never if possible.) But and also on the first day of nurses training ( most of us were 18) one of the first things we learned is that some patients are sexually aggressive and here is what you do and here is how to handle it.

    If only all teenage girls had that kind of training!

    Seriously: do you have a web page to which I can direct my 15-year-old daughter, since she’s the most beautiful girl in the world, and overconfident?

  178. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    @ Jeannette Altes:

    The law says consent is not a defense to statutory rape, but it does not deny that some people truly consent. Many do. That they truly consent, however, does not diminish the culpability of the older person. There even occur cases in which the child seduces the adult, though I haven’t heard of any actual cases of that in the church context. The adult is still culpable. It is simply not a defense to say that the child tempted you.

    lets say a child who was sexually abused when young gets a spirit of lust and starts acting promiscuous. lets say she tries to seduce a 30 year old youth group leader at her church. if he “consents” it is still his sin. She does probably not know how to act other than she does, Jesus will forgive her that she acts in lust. this does not take the culpability from the adult who choses to sin instead of counseling her with Godly counsel, referring her to counseling, telling her he is older and it is sin for him to sleep with her. WWJD? HE would never sleep with the girl and then intimate that it was her sin that caused him to do it!!!!!!!
    I honestly hope that if a young woman tries to seduce you, you will know what to do. I honestly hope that people realize that an adult having sex with a minor is never consensual even if its something she agrees to do or if she instigates it.

  179. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Nancy wrote:

    when some abuser may claim that the girl in question was already sexually active with other males, that may also be so. These are not acceptable as excuses, but we must not think that such does not happen.

    Quite right. The first thing is to go after the adult, or, in general, after the man. It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.

    Second, attend to the spiritual state of the child or former child. If she (or he) reported the situation, then she is almost surely either a pure victim or repentant. In either case, she needs spiritual counsel. In fact, if not a victim but repentant, she needs assurance that the blood of Jesus covers her sin. She shouldn’t be told she didn’t sin in that case; she needs to be told that God forgives the repentant.

    sorry for my tone in my last response. what caused it is your use of comments like “If she (or he) reported the situation, then she is almost surely either a pure victim or repentant. ”
    there are victims who are not pure victims?
    we are talking in your context to a situation where an adult has had sex with a minor child who may have been sexually active.
    and “In fact, if not a victim but repentant, she needs assurance..”
    any minor anywhere that has sex with an adult is a victim. this angers me greatly that people are still arguing that they aren’t, either because they are promiscuous, seductive, or any other reasons. if a child from another country where sex with an adult is considered normal comes to a youth group and wants to sleep with the adult, or any adult in the church. They are victims once again if the adult consents to do that. And I think that is exactly how Jesus sees it. that is why they made the statutory rape law in the first place. too many people are giving a pass to men, especially “Christian men” TM for having sex with minors.

  180. people that don’t see minors as victims in sexual contact with an adult have no business counseling victims of sexual abuse. they have no business trying to apply the grace and forgiveness of the blood of Jesus to forgive them their sins. People who have been victimized themselves are the ones that can do that because they see it for what it really is, they don’t hammer to the victim their part in the sin, they already know it and have been condemned and judged by everyone already. I rejoice that abused men and women are coming forward, they are almost the only ones besides Jesus that are truly able to minister to abused people in Christs Love.

  181. @ Eric Rasmusen:
    I don’t agree with telling a victim of sexual abuse that she has done anything wrong regarding her sex life, period. Victims always blame themselves in some way for what happened and she does not deserve to think it was her prior sexual activity that “caused” the abuse to happen, even if you tell her otherwise. It will not help in the healing process at all, just make it longer and harder.

    No 12 year old girl is a femme fatale in the meaning of the word. Not all boys will be attracted to her, she does not hold sway over the entirety of her male peers. Has every woman turned her head as you walk by, Eric? Even when you were a teen? No. Boys certainly didn’t do that with me when I was growing up, and they still don’t.

    Yes, some things move from child like to inappropriate as kids hit puberty, and they certainly need a decent sex education, but let’s not cross the line into suggesting to girls that their very presence causes boys to have “impure thoughts”. THAT is way more dangerous than her developing body could ever be.

  182. my last posts look like I was addressing what Nancy wrote because I quoted Eric’s post. my posts have nothing to do with what nancy said, but only with what eric said

  183. Eric, you do not understand consent. Only unimpaired adults can give consent to sexual activity. This is not just a legal matter but one of human development, ethics, and morality.

    Let’s look at consent in another context. Let’s say that a middle schooler has an illness for which there is no cure but his doctor knows of a clinical trial. The boy makes an appointment with the lead researcher at the hospital where the clinical trial is being conducted. Is it okay for the doctor to just ask the boy to participate? No, the boy is not mature enough to make the decision. The parents must give consent.

    Is it okay for the doctor to tell the parents that the trial will be a wonderful experience that will result in a cure, in other words to deceive or seduce them into signing up? No, it is not. It is okay for the doctor to just ask the parents without providing more information? No, it is not. There must be informed consent, meaning that the parents must understand the possible outcomes, potential side effects, etc. And these things cannot be explained in medical language if the parents don’t understand it.

    Minors are not capable of understanding the ramifications of engaging in sexual conduct either.

    And by the way, it is just as wrong for an adult woman to have sexual contact with a child even though complementarians would say she has no headship.

  184. @ Anna:

    Has every woman turned her head as you walk by, Eric? Even when you were a teen? No. Boys certainly didn’t do that with me when I was growing up, and they still don’t.

    I’ve never been flirted with, catcalled, wolf-whistled at, or any of the other things lots of people claim “all” women experience. (A teenage boy may have ogled my chest once when I was younger, but I was never sure even in the moment if that’s what was really going on.) Then again, I don’t usually walk on the street or initiate conversation with strangers either. I suspect it has more to do with being a short, somewhat overweight woman with short hair, though. I have female friends who are skinnier with long hair who get catcalled multiple times a day. All that’s not to say I’m unattractive, I just don’t fit the cultural definition of “hot.”

    As for 12yos, seconding your sentiment here. Some things become inappropriate, sure, but I never had any of my guy friends suddenly get weirded out/aroused/whatever by my presence after puberty. If anything their parents tried to pre-empt a problem that didn’t exist and got weirded out for them.

  185. Addendum @ Anna:

    Though as I’m sure you agree, teenage girls/women definitely do need to be self-aware to know when someone is going down that road with them. For instance, I have a drop-dead gorgeous friend who I love dearly, but she cannot tell when a man is flirting with her at all (which happens a lot, for obvious reasons).

  186. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Nancy wrote:
    If only all teenage girls had that kind of training!
    Seriously: do you have a web page to which I can direct my 15-year-old daughter, since she’s the most beautiful girl in the world, and overconfident?

    I was 16 and dressed in a t-shirt and jeans when I was assaulted. I’m pretty sure I didn’t do anything to invite or otherwise encourage the guy who did it, since he was already half-way done by the time I realized anything was happening at all. Please do not treat your daughters like they are asking for it.

  187. sam h wrote:

    my last posts look like I was addressing what Nancy wrote because I quoted Eric’s post. my posts have nothing to do with what nancy said, but only with what eric said

    Thank you for clearing that up. I appreciate that.

  188. @ Hester:
    Agree. And I second Caitlin’s point that the femme fatale mentality leads to victim blaming in the case of assault. But even if assault never does happen to the girl, the belief that her body is the cause of impure thoughts in boys, served with an large dollop of shame for it, will at best lead her to have awful body image issues. Nobody deserves to feel shame about their body for whatever reason. God created the female form and said it was good! Not “it’s good because it will please a husband one day” but simply “good”.

  189. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Hester wrote:
    I’m 23 so that puts my upper age limit at 32. I’m sure somebody would find that creepy, though.
    As I recall, Aristotle said that the ideal ages for marriage were 37 for males and 18 for females (but I could be wrong). But that’s for marriage— for honorable intentions. There’s no legalistic rule we can use. There’s probably some case where a man aged 60 and a girl aged 20 were just right for each other. But they’d better ask for pastoral counsel before they tie the know.

    Trying to figure out what Aristotle’s opinion has to do with this?

  190. Caitlin wrote:

    Please do not treat your daughters like they are asking for it.

    @ Eric Rasmusen:

    No, Eric. MY daughters are the most beautiful women in the world. And I do teach them how to manage their beauty, but not in the manner or from the point of view that I hear coming from you.

    Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain. Beauty is also fleeting.
    When a girl is beautiful, she can be lulled into a false sense of power. Or she can have her eyes open to how shallow our culture is. It is a culture that worships beauty.
    But my daughters understand that beauty is a gift to be managed in an appropriate manner. A manner that neither cheapens the girl with the gift nor manipulates those around her.

    And to men like you, who are supposed to be part of the church and NOT a part of our beauty-worshipping culture, I have to ask you to take a few steps back and ask yourself why you are allowing the culture to dictate to you what power and weakness are.

    We need to be as shrewd as serpents and harmless as doves. And we need to stop believing the lies of our culture.
    Here is a link to 12 minute talk that reveals the lies that our culture is telling our sons and out daughters about beauty.

    https://sftimes.co/?id=17&src=share_fb_new_17

  191. Bridget wrote:

    Trying to figure out what Aristotle’s opinion has to do with this?

    Well, he was a pretty hard core misogynist, so . . .

  192. This worries me. I hear a lot of talk about blame. Who is to blame. Who is not to blame. This concern about blaming to all well and good, and our laws are based on determinations of blame.

    That said, blame or no blame everybody should buy into the idea of staying safe. If I go alone to the Walmart at 2 AM, let’s say and get assaulted (robbed and bopped on the head) in the parking lot, I did not sin. But if I could have gone during the daytime and/or with somebody this may have lessened the chance of assault. What good does it do to proclaim that I have the right to be in the parking lot alone at 2 AM and that the law says I do if the exercising of that right increases the possibility of head bopping and money snatching?

    If that same thinking is transferred to sexual assault why say that this is blaming the victim? I don’t see why people get riled up when people say that teens need to be taught how to do things that will decrease the possibility of sexual assault. Does anybody really think that people who sexually assault other people care what the law says?

    The TKD masters taught the kids to first of all stay away from trouble. Stay in lighted areas, travel in pairs/groups, be alert to the surroundings, get out of Dodge at the first hint of trouble. Only if this did not work did one make a display of resistance and willingness to fight if necessary. But sometimes when this same idea is advocated for teenage girls regarding sexual assault there is an outcry that she is not to blame. How much better if she could have modified her behavior to decrease the chances of trouble in the first place, blame or no blame.

    But if someone ignores all the safety precautions, which ever and whatever kind of assault we are talking about, and then assault happens, what then? Do we say, that’s OK, the precautions were only good advice for everybody else but not for you. You just go ahead and take unnecessary chances because it is not a sin to do so. I just don’t get the common sense behind that kind of thinking.

    Now listen, i am not talking about little bitty kids here but high school aged teens. And one more thing, the church people may be getting bogged down in who is or is not to blame, but over at the school house a lot of the teachers and coaches are a lot tougher about this sort of thing, and a lot more realistic about human behavior.

  193. @ Bridget:

    Oops, I was talking about my reference to St. Augustine. Talk about confused. At my age I ought to be asleep in my rocking chair by not.

  194. This is a further statement to clarify something I said in a comment which is in moderation right now. I have not said nor meant to imply that all assaults can be prevented. I am not an idiot. (A tad senile, maybe, but idiocy no.) I am specifically talking about shifting the probabilities by safety measures whenever possible.

  195. @ Bridget:
    Aristotle pretty much invented gender essentialism as we know and love it to this day. But, hey, he thought we were above slaves on the hierarchy of value.

  196. In other news:

     Descartes was of course a closet neo-Aristotelean. And we all know what happened to him.
     For the first time since I can remember, the summer solstice has coincided with settled high pressure over Scotland, so we really will get the most out of the endless daylight up here.
     The downside is that it ain’t half light here at 3 in the morning, and I’m sleeping very badly as a result.
     The birds must be tired too, as the dawn chorus also begins at silly o’clock in the morning.

    I hope this is helpful.

     And finally: new research has shown that spiders eat fish. So there’s a lesson for us all. Do not see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27904153 if you’re arachnophobic.

  197. complementairinwhateverisms always seem to have a skewed view of women and their daughters in my opinion and it shows in their comments about women and children.

    men believe that they are saved from the curse of the law and the curse of the original sin in the garden but they don’t believe their wives are. the “headship” of the man came from the curse God spoke to eve, your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over thee.
    before that minute that God spoke that her husband did not rule over her.
    So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
    Gen 1:27-28 (KJV)
    men in churches often say that men and women are created equal but that the man is just a little higher or in a little more authority than the woman cause of that sin of hers.
    I pity the man that tries to bear that burden and yoke. If you are saved by the blood of Jesus but your wife is saved by you then you are her messiah. If you died on a cross today your blood would not save your wife or children. your actions as a husband and father will not save your wife or children. this is scripturally true. Ezekiel chapt 18, Jer 15:1, Micah 7:6 (Jesus quoted that one and assured us it will be true in the last days.)
    your actions as a husband and father can absolutely distort their view of God though, and turn them away from following the Lord. Why not take Jesus yoke in exchange for the ones that men say are ours and let wives and children do the same? Jesus forgives sin by His blood and He said there shall be One shepherd. The first instructions Jesus gave upon being resurrected was to the women and He told them to instruct His disciples to meet Him in Jerusalem. they didn’t listen to those women of course…

  198. Another thought here: it’s not as if we only have to worry about kids after puberty, because pedophiles are interested in them before puberty. And I know no one here would claim that young children have some kind “power” over pedophiles that they can abuse and thus be partially culpable for their own molestation. Well, except SGM, of course.

  199. Nancy wrote:

    Only if this did not work did one make a display of resistance and willingness to fight if necessary. But sometimes when this same idea is advocated for teenage girls regarding sexual assault there is an outcry that she is not to blame.

    Yeah. When I suggested once that that getting falling-down drunk at Spring Break in a party town (where sexual predators WILL congregate looking for easy prey) was not the most brilliant move, I got damned to Eternal Feminist Hell and accused of Patriarchy Rape Culture. (With appropriate slogans.)

  200. @ Nancy:
    Since most sexual assault is committed by people the victims know and trust not to hurt them, advice aimed at avoiding muggers is totally and completely useless. So, yeah, peppering victims with questions about what they did, what they wore, etc, then trying to cram it in to preconceived notions of what constitutes risky behavior (often based on a lot of assumption and little evudence) is worse than useless and shifts the prevention burden to the party with the least power to prevent the sexual assault.

  201. Dis wrote:

    A lot of psychologists believe that abusers/rapists continue to talk about their actions as a means of still exerting power and control over a victim. It’s pretty much a way for them to psychologically still dominate a victim in their minds, while minimizing their own actions as “misunderstood” – pretty much a classic example here.

    Don’t forget the opportunity to relive the actions over and over in memory. You find that dynamic in a lot of kinks and paraphilias.

  202. NC Now wrote:

    There have been some studies (but it’s hard to do scientifically detached double blind studies in this area) and men of power seem attract women who want to have sex with them. Define power broadly. Maybe fame is a better word.

    Check out any rock star’s memoirs about “groupies” sometime.

    Friend of mine calls it “StarF’er Syndrome.” (AKA “If I ***** (ed note)someone FAMOUS, maybe some of his Fame will rub off on ME!” Or bragging rights — “I ******* (ed.note) So-and-So!”)

  203. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Second, attend to the spiritual state of the child or former child. If she (or he) reported the situation, then she is almost surely either a pure victim or repentant. In either case, she needs spiritual counsel. In fact, if not a victim but repentant, she needs assurance that the blood of Jesus covers her sin. She shouldn’t be told she didn’t sin in that case; she needs to be told that God forgives the repentant.

    Wow! Again it doesn’t matter whether child reports it or not! A minor can NEVER consent. It will ALWAYS be a crime and the girl is thus a victim. She is not the sinner, but the sinned against. She does not need to repent, but instead requires counseling. Predators are known to groom their victims. This is exactly the mindset that causes problems for girls later in life. Men and boys need to take responsibility for their own behavior and exercise self control. Women are not responsible for the thoughts and behaviors of men. Good night!

  204. Secondly, I teach my daughters to be safe and aware of their surroundings. We have safe words if they want me to pick them up from a situation that they feel may be dangerous (not that we’ve ever used it yet since the older one is smart enough to know where and where not to go). The bottom line is even while you try and educate your children (both male and female) on appropriate behavior, you can’t protect them from everything out there. You can only do your best and pray.

  205. I stepped away for a few days and I missed a lot. So glad I did not see this article they posted on Christianity Today. I think if I had I might have been triggered. It breaks my heart to see the evangelical world refuse to see the truth of these types of situations. These young people are being manipulated and abused not inviting their abusers to have an adult relationship. They just aren’t capable, because they are NOT adults. I literally live about 20 miles from Hammond Indiana where Jack was a pastor at Hammond Baptist. This church prides itself as having the worlds biggest sunday schools. It is a breeding ground for pedophiles. There green buses travel all over my county, and into Illinois to pick up kids from homes of the lazy and disinterested. Parents are not really encouraged to come with their kids either. When I first moved to Michigan City, In a small group of young adults came to my door and asked if they could put my kids on their bus and take them down the street for a program they were doing. My kids were young the oldest was about nine. They all wanted to go because you see they were handing out prizes for the kids who came. Of course they wanted to go! My husband and I weren’t having it. We kindly explained that we would drive our kids to the church they were renting in the town for the big outreach they were having. They were surprised and not all that enthused that these two parents were coming with their own kids! I think they were surprised. Anyway we get there and all these kids are being shoved in pews, they then share the story of Noah’s ark with them and before we knew it started asking who is ready to be baptized? Kids everywhere were jumping up and down, it was crazy. At no time was the idea of baptism or salvation explained to them, nope just jump in the tub and get wet everyone and then we will draw names for the prize!!! They fill buses with these kids and leave god know who in charge. I wonder if they even do background checks, so I was not surprised when Pastor Jack got caught. I am really shocked however at his last court date. This man is the reason why we avoided that kind of church and lifestyle. It is very dangerous for kids there and I will not be shocked if a major scandal rocks Hammond Baptist again they have cultivated the perfect environment for abusers.

  206. I do have to say that the Hammond Baptist folks would not have welcomed us anyway into their world. I am covered in Hebrew tattoos and wear jeans everywhere and my husband used to have hair to his waist. We just weren’t their demographic. LOL

  207. dee wrote:

    I know one church which messed up in handling in a pedophile situation. They lost members over it. So, they instituted a training program in how to keep kids safe. Good, right? Shortly after that they had CJ Mahaney has the featured speaker. This was after the Second Amended Lawsuit.

    Did they know about the lawsuit? Not everybody is clued in. In any case, Mahaney has some things to say worth hearing— just not on church governance. I get your point, though. We need to get *deep* appreciation of the problem, and the right attitude, rather than just add a lawyer of bureaucracy such as training or ID checks.

  208. Nancy wrote:

    I don’t see why people get riled up when people say that teens need to be taught how to do things that will decrease the possibility of sexual assault. Does anybody really think that people who sexually assault other people care what the law says?

    I agree with your post. I think all young boys and girls should be talked to in this manner. I think that its not what your saying that is objected to, but when an assault happens and a well-intentioned Christian man says these things AFTER someone is assaulted it is only condemnation and guilt assigning to the victim. I am pretty certain that a young person that is assaulted by a grownup in a situation where they went somewhere alone with them knows already how unwise that was and that they might not have gotten assaulted if they hadn’t.
    the thing is teaching people the safety thing before abuse happens is good, using that after an abuse is common to place guilt on the victim. so I think its not what is being said but when and how its being said. a lot of feminist women say its always not the fault of a 20 something girl who got abused at a drunken party and I think anyone could conclude that the odds of someone not being raped are much better if they don’t go get drunk at parties. there was a post recently on facebook that really made me think about something that a lot of women are talking about “rape culture” I didn’t view the whole post because it noted that it was going to show nudity at the end. the captions were, am I asking to be raped? the first part though showed a woman in a long sleeve high neck ankle length dress, the next had somewhat of a shorter dress, and the next had a sleeveless dress, then a mini skirt, and it kept going but I quit viewing the photos. the last one that I didn’t view, had the caption that said something like, this is a naked woman, because she is naked doesn’t mean she wants to have sex with you and that you have the right to rape her. If you see a naked woman and cant resist raping her then YOU have a problem.

    that really made me think. sometimes those feminists are actually right lol

  209. burnrnorton wrote:

    So all men are in headship over all women. I’d love to see the proof text for that.

    I’m not keen on proof texts, and this is off-topic, but how can I resist?

    Most relevant to this thread’s discussion: Genesis 3:9: “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?” Adam was tempted by Eve, not vice versa, yet Adam is the one called to account.

    A couple more are:

    1 Timothy 2:12-13 “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.”

    1 Corinthians 11:3 “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

    A useful reference is “Was Male Headship and Female Submission Created by God?” Kelly Sensenig. http://www.bereaninternetministry.org/Papers/Was%20Male%20Headship%20and%20Female%20Submission%20Created%20by%20God.doc

  210. @ Tired:

    Suppose a 17-year-old girl seduces a 22-year youth group leader. What I see people saying in the comments is that she is purely a victim, because the youth leader should have resisted, and nobody should tell her she has sinned. He should indeed have resisted, and he should bear the primary blame, but if we have to assign one person to be the “victim” it would be him. In fact, suppose he’s the one to reveal the relationship, because he feels guilty? Should he be subject to church discipline, while everyone commiserates with the girl and tells her how awful it must have been? No. In such a situation both have sinned, and both need to understand that. The youth leader is as much at fault for not leading her away from her sinful desires as for letting her indulge them.

    This is just a hypothetical, but it shows that every situation needs to be addressed individually, and that sin is not something that has to put either on either one person or the other.

  211. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Most relevant to this thread’s discussion: Genesis 3:9: “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?” Adam was tempted by Eve, not vice versa, yet Adam is the one called to account.

    A couple more are:

    1 Timothy 2:12-13 “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve.”

    1 Corinthians 11:3 “But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

    Rather than restart this discussion on this thread, I would refer you to the comment thread here…

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/06/13/why-did-the-sbc-avoid-addressing-al-mohlers-concerns-about-the-third-way/#comments

    …on the previous article, with special attention to the discussion with “JP”.

  212. @ Eric Rasmusen:

    Eric, as a woman and a survivor of child sex abuse, I cannot tell you how heavy….and constant….and overwhelming….the church and society both have been (and, obviously, still are) in their obstinate choice to heap guilt and shame on the heads of children and women….both. I grow weary of trying to fight the voices (yours has now become included in this) that tell me that I was as much to blame for the sex as he was. Never mind I was was stopped (not started) when I hit puberty. It takes two to tango and it was as much my fault…..I have heard this all my life. By the way…when the second round started, I was 7.

    And also, it is generally understood by psychologists that even adult women are the victim in a situation where their pastor/priest has sex with them. There is this thing called power differential that comes into play – the pastor/youth minister/etc. is the representative of God (whether he should be or not) and has a greater ability to manipulate emotions and perceptions. Just as there is no such thing as consensual sex between an adult and a child, there is no such thing (at least in the eyes of the law) as consensual sex between a member of the clergy and a congregant.

  213. @ Patrice:
    @ Anna:
    When I was abused by my grandfather my parents consulted the church elders on what to do. They said, “Do nothing” and nothing was done. 30 years later and I am still weeping. I was not worth justice. My family was destroyed. Who gave them the right to make that decision? All I ever heard about was forgiveness and how, “someday I would meet a nice Christian man and everything would be ok” that was the extent of what was done for me, and for my family. Everything is not ok. I have prayed and read the bible until my rage has boiled over and my tears have choked me. Every time I try and talk to any pastor about this they give the same answer – pray and read the bible. When our souls are wounded the church does not want to deal with us – this kind of wound is messy and you have to get your hands dirty to deal with it. Pastors don’t want to get their hands dirty. They want to pray, read a bible verse, maybe put a little olive oil on the forehead and walk away. I’ve talked to close to a dozen evangelical pastors from multiple denominations and they all say the same things. The theology of the evangelical church is bankrupt and tissue thin. It has no depth to truly deal with the sorrows of this world. Pray and read the bible – I’d rather be vomitted on. Some of this conversation is disgustings – different ethnicities having different ideas about growing up and womanhood – all these bible verses – all these statistics. None of it means anything. I sit and weep and you quote verses and numbers, you may as well curse. My generation is leaving the church because all you can say is “read the bible and pray” to any problem. We are living broken lives and do not know a way to go forward and we do not find it in your tract theology and pat prayers and your admonish to pray more and read the bible more. We want to be loved. We want to be physically touched. We want to be listened to. We want you to admit you made a mistake. We want you to actually know what you are talking about, because quoting a bible verse is rote memory not actual knowledge. Do not think to know about our faith and tell us to pray, do not think to know our pain believe that simply reading the bible will solve our problems, do no think that we can by some trick of the mind invite in the holy spirit and that magically change us into someone else who is easier for you to deal with. I have exhausted myself trying to get the holy spirit to come in, to baptize me. I have tried to “let it go and let God” I have tried to “have faith”. I cannot come to any conclusion after 30 years but that I do not have enough faith or that God forsakes me, or their is a trick that I cannot master so do not tell me to let the holy spirit fix this. This is not in your control or mine, but what is in your control is your compassion, your love, your honesty, your strength. I’ve said to much but that’s what happens when your soul is sick, you vomit all over the place.

  214. @ Nancy:
    While I agree with all of the precautionary measures that you describe and I agree that they should be taught, I do not believe that it is EVER necessary to bring those things up while dealing with the victim of a crime or accident that the victim might have been able to skirt. They are separate issues. I can’t even stand to here mothers yellow at their kids “I told you not to run down hill on the pavement!” after they skin up their knees, so unnecessarily cold hearted.

  215. @ Patti: This, this exactly. By all means teach safety measures but NOT after an assault. What good would it do then? Nothing, it would just have a severe further impact on the victim. Chances are they’re already analysing what they did “wrong” anyway, they don’t need anyone confirming their thoughts.

  216. @ clisa: I’m so sorry you had such a terrible experience with terrible pastors. I’m sorry for your suffering. I agree that there is a problem of laziness in a number of churches, that leadership only wants to deal with the cool kids and not the downtrodden, not the type that Jesus would have hung out with. They claim to follow Christ but do the opposite. I’m sorry for your experiences. And I’ll be honest, I would offer helpful healing words if I could but I don’t know what to say. I hope that’s ok. Peace to you on your inner journey though, whatever you choose to do on it. If you wish, I’ll pray for you, but other than that I’m not sure how I can help. Fortunately TWW is a community for those who’ve been hurt by the church and the people here always take stories seriously.

  217. @ clisa:

    And you have me crying in the library because what you have said is so true & your pain is so obvious. I am so sorry this happened to you – first the physical abuse & then the ‘spiritual’ responses that have only deepened your pain. There are many here who know what you mean, first hand, & I know they understand, I’m not one of them, but have so much admiration for their very ability to survive. You are in absolutely the right place for your voice to be heard.

  218. @ Eric Rasmusen:
    So all women are in submission to all men according to your highly imaginative interpretation of a few sentences ripped from context. But these same men are reduced to an irrational puddle of hormones when confronted with a twelve year old girl who, according to you, is definitionally a femme fatale. Did you ever reflect that your god is kind of a moron for putting such weakling in charge?

  219. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    Both of the csses of false accusation cited above, McMartin, etc., involved interviewers who planted the false accusations into the children, derived from one child’s fantasy story. As a 4/5 year old, I had a fantasy horse, fantasy friend with a horse, and we rounded up fantasy cattle together. When an adult takes a child’s fantasy and manipulates that into testimony by multiple children, all of whom like fantasy stories, that is when these ridiculous cases arise. There are now standards, and any interview with a child regrding possible sex abuse must be conducted by a trained and certified specialist and videotaped to be able to prove that planting did not occur. And an important question is “what did Mommy (or Daddy) tell you about this? what were you told to say?” Children’s fantasy stories, if not enhanced by planting of ideas, can usually be detected as such fairly easily and with great reliability.

  220. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Tired wrote:
    as if magically at the age of 12 you suddenly turn into a femme fatale, tempting both male youth and adults alike
    You do become a femme fatale, though— that’s exactly the point that my daughter’s resisting now. And it’s not a bad thing— it’s one of the joys of womanhood. It’s just dangerous, and the 12-year-old girl, plain or pretty, has to recognize that she has a new influence on the non-fair sex. She has to recognize that, just as every male youth leader has to realize that even without him trying, his group’s girls might fall in love with him.

    Oh Eric, I have so many problems with this I don’t know where to start. In a culture where appearance is so highly valued just how many ordinary normal 12 yr old girls are going to feel like femmes fatale? Pretty much none, that’s how many. At 12 I would have cried with laughter at the idea I had some kind of power over boys, let alone men. I think you perpetuate a dangerous myth that all women are ‘aware’ of wielding high levels of sexual power ( a ‘joy of womanhood’? Seriously?), only they pretend they don’t know, just to torment the male half of the species, like it’s some conspiracy designed to frustrate & control them. That what you see in the seriously scary men’s rights stuff, where the outright misunderstanding of women in this way builds a very dangerous hatred for them. Some females obviously do realise they can manipulate men, via their sexuality, but I think you’ll find that most of us, whatever age, do not see ourselves as having colossal power, or even often any power at all,let alone rejoicing in it. I find this bleating, normally of Christian men ‘oh protect me from the power of the 12 year old/15 yr old, 18 yr old woman’ repulsive, because it seems designed to excuse you from self-control by portraying very young women as sirens & yourselves as helpless little victims. Please grow up a bit. I have non-christian male friends & have had in the past non-christian boyfriends who have shown more genuine self-control & concern for true consent & appropriate aged relationships than I’ve seen in the contemporary evangelical church put together. It’s embarrassing to see such weak-willed males then attempt to step up to some kind of dominant ‘headship’. Honestly. Please don’t fill your daughter’s head with this kind of over-exaggeration & stereotype.

  221. Caitlin wrote:

    I just completely minimized the experience and tried to define it as something other than assault. At the same time, I was furious with myself about my failure to heal and move on. And now, with only 2 months before I get married, I’m struggling to sort through the frankly devastating psychological and physiological effects.

    I wish you the best in your marriage!

    It’s shocking how long it takes to face abuse. Therapist once said that people face their past when they are psychologically/spiritually capable of it and sometimes it takes decades (took me til 39). Keep grabbing patience for yourself.

    I am so sorry that you also are enduring physical breakdown. Trauma is super hard on the body…a gift that keeps on giving….arg!
    Caitlin wrote:

    And listening to my very good Christian friend and part-time accountability partner talk about how awful it was to be a victim just about killed me….Basically, the only thing that being a victim means is that someone else sinned on you. We need to remember that.

    It’s tres sweet that your friend eventually came around; I hope she has expressed regret because having to bear that when at the bottom of one’s self is beyond the pall. I bet she wouldn’t have been that way if you had cancer, would have understood her actions as caddish in that context.

    As you say, someone sinned on you, that’s it. Exactly. But that’s where some get stuck. Physical disease deserves sympathy/support but the results of sin should just go away, tout de suite, top to bottom, as if it never happened. It seems to me that, in order to maintain their powerful God, they have to minimize the power of evil. It makes no sense!

  222. elastigirl wrote:

    in my observation, “Christian” means a mass of cultural accumulation adding unhealthy poundage that can be a disease-prone drag on one’s life.

    Ooo, that’s good.

    Certainly was so for me. I’m grateful I could find the shape of the real thing again underneath all those tumors.

  223. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    The law says consent is not a defense to statutory rape, but it does not deny that some people truly consent. Many do.

    Children cannot fully consent because they do not have enough experience/knowledge to make the decision. That is the point, really. They are not equipped for it. Also, that teens have more experience/knowledge than prepubescents doesn’t mean they have enough.

    Because of that, the power differential means their relationship will be based on the parent-model rather than on a peer-model. And that’s not at all good for them.

  224. sam h wrote:

    I pity the man that tries to bear that burden and yoke. If you are saved by the blood of Jesus but your wife is saved by you then you are her messiah.

    I pity them too. If one stays honest with self, deep insecurity will develop because the burden is too heavy for success. If one thinks “oh yeah, I can do that,” he will be parading in front of a long series of mistakes and not even know it.

    It’s a ridiculous thing to force onto a human.

  225. @ Patrice:
    It’s important to remember that consent is a legal term of art here. A 16 year old shouting yes is rendering legally effective consent to activities with a fellow 16 year old, but the same behavior with a 23 year old would be non consensual no matter what. An 18 year old high school senior can legally consent to sex with any adult, unless that adult happens to be her 22 year old English teacher. That’s because legislatures have determined that the power and maturity differences between 16 year olds and 23 year olds and students and teachers is such that a bright line rule barring such relations is vastly more beneficial and simpler than having to prove coercion in each and every case. There may be 16 year olds emotionally mature enough to enter a truly non coercive relationship with certain 23 year olds, but they are few and far between and the inconvenience of making them wait two years is dwarfed by the benefit of preventing and punishing relationships between more typical 16 year olds and adults.

    Note that this doesn’t just effect teenagers and children. A 40 year old can’t render effective legal consent to sex with her doctor in many jurisdictions. The key is the power differential and nature of the relationship.

  226. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Suppose a 17-year-old girl seduces a 22-year youth group leader. What I see people saying in the comments is that she is purely a victim, because the youth leader should have resisted, and nobody should tell her she has sinned.

    I don’t understand why on God’s green earth we can’t let teens grow up in peace? What’s so fr*ckin’ difficult about leaving that 17 yr-old alone for another year or two?

    Sure, some late-teenagers are competent to make an open choice, but the rule is in place for maximum protection of all, so why push it like that?

    If an adult truly loves that teen, it is no big-awful to wait a year, watching her further develop into a person with whom one can have a full peer-relationship. An adult who wants to push those boundaries shows he is more about sex than love. And IMO, that proves the need for an age limit, even if mildly arbitrary.

  227. Eric,

    That is a great example of prooftexting Paul in 1 Cor 11. Unfortunately, you missed the entire point of his argument, just as you miss the point of his argument in 1 Tim 2. I’ll not recreate the discussion regarding the latter, but if you read Aristotle on the household (available online but I assume you are familiar with it) and if you consider the meaning and purpose of headcoverings in worship for Jewish males and the *very different* meaning that headcoverings for females carried for all respetable women in Middle Eastern culture, whether Jew or Gentile, then it might shed a whole new light on that passage for you.

    Also, if you start with Paul’s conclusion to his argument and reverse engineer it from there, you will reach precisely the opposite conclusion from your own.

    Kelly Sensening’s argument starts out with a straw man and poisioning the well. The straw man is that no one I’m aware of is saying that interpretation of the Bible should be governed by culture. The poisoning of the well happens from that erroneous presupposition.

    But here is the really ironic thing: Complementarians use their own subculture and its presuppositions to derive meaning from a text written by a man who was well-educated in both the Jewish and Greek worldview while they totally discount those cultural underpinnings of the text. So, what they really mean is that no one should use 1st century cultural lenses to read Scripture because that would not get us to the required answer, which must always be male priority or “headship.”

    And that, my friend, is what every complementarian/patriarchal prooftexting is aimed at.

  228. Caitlin wrote:

    He works in our hearts to impel us to seek it in the first place. Freely and widely available, sure, but from God 100%. Even though we choose to act on it, the nudge comes from God.

    I think this is an interesting thought. If the Spirit dwells in us, impelling us to repent and to live obedient lives, why don’t we? Is the Spirit ineffective in His call to us? I am driving at something a bit more than this and that is the issue of free will. I am curious to see what role you think it plays in both salvation and sanctification.

  229. @ An Attorney:

    Don’t know about the other case much, but in the Little Rascals Day Care it was professionals, not just parents, who were influencing the children. That is scary.

  230. Eric,

    On the SGM thing: the problem at SGM was not its church governance (polity) but instead the problem was/is its fundamentally wrong belief system or culture. Polity flows from the underlying doctrine and SGM’s doctrine is very, very mistaken at the least.

    Theology proper/Christology/Pheumatology: The eternal Son is eternally subordinate to the eternal Father. The Holy Spirit is subordinate to both Father and Son. Hierarchy in the Trinity. The Holy Spirit’s ministry of teaching and sanctification in the life of the individual believer is reduced, practically speaking, to zero in favor of the authority of the anointed leaders in the church and home. Gothardism dressed up for a new generation.

    Anthropology/Hamartiology: the first sin in the Garden was Eve stepping out from under Adam’s authority and eating the fruit. Complementarians will deny this, just as they deny other unavoidable implications of their doctrine. Their concept of sin is designed to be a control mechanism. Yes, it is, and birds of a feather may not look exactly alike, but they do flock together when the chips are down.

    I could go on, but you get the point.

    To put it in engineering or management terms, it is not the implementation (polity) that has caused the failure; it is the concept (underlying theology) that has caused the failure in the system.

    Gram3

    Hamartiology:

  231. Patrice wrote:

    Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Suppose a 17-year-old girl seduces a 22-year youth group leader. What I see people saying in the comments is that she is purely a victim, because the youth leader should have resisted, and nobody should tell her she has sinned.

    I don’t understand why on God’s green earth we can’t let teens grow up in peace? What’s so fr*ckin’ difficult about leaving that 17 yr-old alone for another year or two?

    Sure, some late-teenagers are competent to make an open choice, but the rule is in place for maximum protection of all, so why push it like that?

    If an adult truly loves that teen, it is no big-awful to wait a year, watching her further develop into a person with whom one can have a full peer-relationship. An adult who wants to push those boundaries shows he is more about sex than love. And IMO, that proves the need for an age limit, even if mildly arbitrary.

    I have friends who WERE that young youth pastor and 17 year old in the high school group who found themselves attracted to each other. Here’s how it played out. He said nothing to her about his feelings. She said nothing to him. After she turned 18 and graduated from high school, he asked her for a date. Her parents approved of him. Eventually they got married and then they had sex for the first time. They are still happy forty years later and he is still in the ministry.

    Nobody seduced or tried to seduce anybody. Both parties behaved maturely because their love was real and they were hoping for lasting happiness.

  232. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.

    It is also the view of egalitarians, and whatevers, that the person in power or leadership or authority must restrain him or herself. I do not know what complementarianism has to do with this. For example, you do know about the fair number of female teachers seducing male students?

  233. @ burnrnorton:
    I get that. I mean, I’m not a lawyer but I see that Eric is debating law in this sentence. But he followed it up with “Many do”, a personal assertion that shows he’s using the law framework to argue the ethics they’re based upon.

    I’m sure every lawyer understands that there is no perfect law and that law will vary from culture to culture. But our law on age of maturity currently carries more benefit than harm, particularly since the harm is only a demand to gather up fortitude and patience. I am suspicious of those who make hard work of such a small harm. To further emphasize it with a sin ratio? Nah…

    Yes, at bottom it’s about the power-differential. Sooo important to understand this. It is not obvious but still clear when broken between adults, and it is roaring-obvious when adding the ungrown nature of children/teens.

  234. sam h wrote:

    lets say a child who was sexually abused when young gets a spirit of lust and starts acting promiscuous. lets say she tries to seduce a 30 year old youth group leader at her church. if he “consents” it is still his sin.

    That child may not be in sin. In fact, she may be mentally damaged and not responsible due to her abuse. The church must understand that abuse can lead to mental illness and what these folks need is counseling and support.

  235. Anna wrote:

    et’s not cross the line into suggesting to girls that their very presence causes boys to have “impure thoughts”. THAT is way more dangerous than her developing body could ever be.

    You are 100% correct. And, as I always say, in certain Muslim countries in which women wear burkas, the sight of an ankle causes swoons in men. The religious authorities run around throwing stones at women who inadvertently show their ankles instead of lecturing their men to grow up.

  236. Marsha wrote:

    Let’s say that a middle schooler has an illness for which there is no cure but his doctor knows of a clinical trial. The boy makes an appointment with the lead researcher at the hospital where the clinical trial is being conducted. Is it okay for the doctor to just ask the boy to participate? No, the boy is not mature enough to make the decision. The parents must give consent.

    Great comment.

  237. Caitlin wrote:

    Please do not treat your daughters like they are asking for it.

    That is so important. I also do not think that Eric should treat men like some sort of hormonally controlled robot that just can’t help himself if a pretty woman walks down the street.

  238. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Quite right. The first thing is to go after the adult, or, in general, after the man. It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.

    The man’s perceived ‘headship’ or his ‘complementarian’ views don’t mean a darn thing and don’t make men any better off. We know plenty of men with these exact views that abused, raped, even spiritually abused others. The comp and headship mantra doesn’t change anyone’s heart to treat others the way they want to be treated. It doesn’t cause men to treat others like they are the image bearers of God. The sooner people stop living in nanaland about comp and headship view saving the day, the better off we’ll all be. (end rant)

    Just love and respect the people around you whether you are male or female. That’s what a good leader (make or female) does. It doesn’t have anything to do with your body parts.

  239. @ Nancy:
    There is a problem. And I, also, taught my daughters to be modest in their dress, thinking it might prevent problems. I have come to the conclusion that it doesn’t.

    The modest thing devolves into rules. Over at SGM Survivors they discuss women running around telling other women to button their top button on the blouse. Some pastors allegedly told women not to drape their purses over their chests. The Duggars must wear modesty swimsuits that are hideous.

    Then, of course, there is modesty in which women who wear burkas are attacked if their ankle shows. It is not the women, it is the men.

    Staying out of an area which is dangerous after dark makes sense. But, how does one really avoid all danger when going to school, etc.? In a civilized society, men do not attack women, no matter their dress.

    In fact, if there are men out there getting ready to rape women who are dressed in a provocative manner, they need help.

  240. Hester wrote:

    : it’s not as if we only have to worry about kids after puberty, because pedophiles are interested in them before puberty. And I know no one here would claim that young children have some kind “power” over pedophiles that they can abuse and thus be partially culpable for their own molestation.

    Well said!

  241. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    attend to the spiritual state of the child or former child. If she (or he) reported the situation, then she is almost surely either a pure victim or repentant.

    I am now truly confused by this. I was a public health nurse and was involved in a number of child abuse situation. A child often does not report being molested due to the power of the person who is doing the molesting. There are many, many child sex abuse cases that go unreported for years.

    That is precisely why the laws in states are changing-Missouri being the newest one- in which child sex abuse can reported decades after it happened. And the perp can go to jail. Sex abuse is so damaging to a developing child that many are unable to process it and discuss it for decades.

  242. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Did they know about the lawsuit? Not everybody is clued in

    Oh, they most certainly did, so this deflection will not work.
    Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Mahaney has some things to say worth hearing— just not on church governance.

    Oh really??? CJ Mahaney has good things to say???? Now I understand the trajectory of your comments. That is really comforting to the many people who have been hurt out there….

    So, if he “says” it right,then it must be good. There is a song from My Fair Lady “Word, word, words,
    I’m so sick of words.” Instead you should “show me.”

    In my opinion, following the history and problems inherent in SGM, words have little meaning.

  243. @ clisa:
    You wrote an amazing comment. It is not vomit. I agree with every single bit of it. This particularly is sooo very grievous: “I’ve talked to close to a dozen evangelical pastors from multiple denominations and they all say the same things.”

    There is a strange need in many church leaders to know everything, which is an impossibility. Because of that need, they wack everything they meet with the same hammer and when a “nail” doesn’t respond properly, they judge that “nail” for not acting like one. How stupid is that? All of it, start to finish, is ridiculous.

    You are courageous to have sorted it through with such integrity and honesty. There are believers and nonbelievers who are not like those who refused you. With all my heart, I hope you find one or two of them to give you exactly what you know you need.

  244. Marsha wrote:

    After she turned 18 and graduated from high school, he asked her for a date. Her parents approved of him. Eventually they got married and then they had sex for the first time. They are still happy forty years later and he is still in the ministry.

    That’s lovely!

  245. @ dee:

    I don’t think that I sounded like I was talking about clothing. I was talking about attitude, and alertness, and presuming danger in whatever situation, and pre-thinking situations in order be better prepared. I was talking about people not giving away all their power to circumstances. I was talking about individual responsibility whenever choices were available. I was trying to say that people are not totally helpless always and in all ways, and that probabilities can be shifted towards better outcomes with some caution and forethought.

    I need to go take a writing course!

  246. dee wrote:

    I think this is an interesting thought. If the Spirit dwells in us, impelling us to repent and to live obedient lives, why don’t we? Is the Spirit ineffective in His call to us? I am driving at something a bit more than this and that is the issue of free will. I am curious to see what role you think it plays in both salvation and sanctification

    Okay, so my thoughts on how free will works with respect to human action/sin/salvation/sanctification go something like this (I’m a Wesleyan by raising, but definitely do not claim to be any sort of theologian or even vaguely knowledgeable)

    Basically, I don’t think of it as impulsion. I wouldn’t phrase it as “The Spirit makes us do these things” Instead, I’d phrase it as “Without the Spirit, we *cannot* do these things.”

    Imagine a person with severe spinal cord injuries. Paralyzed from the neck down. This person’s mind remains intact. They have the will to do everything they did before their injury. But they don’t have the nervous system to relay their will to their muscles. They don’t have the ability to effectuate their will. So you can say to this person “Move your finger or don’t move your finger” but it is a false choice, because they are incapable of moving their finger and the fact that their finger stays still in no way represents what their actual will was. Now imagine someone who has been paralyzed their whole lives. This person might have no comprehension of what “move your finger” would even look like.

    To me, God’s role in all of this is to give us the ability to effectuate our will. Humans were essentially paralyzed at the Fall (unable to act in a Godly manner) and God can restore Godly function (partially here on Earth, completely once His Kingdom arrives). We are the second person, the person paralyzed since birth, who has no concept of what “Godly” is until God shows us. As He works in our lives, we start to understand what it means and we start to gain the ability to actually make it happen. We can choose to use that function or not, the “choice” is still ours. But we are only able to act in a Godly manner (and to me, repentance is a Godly activity) with God’s help.

    Side note: Being a Wesleyan, I think that God is perfectly capable of acting through non-believers and He does, and I don’t think that any good occurs in the world that is not perpetuated by God, simply because I think He is the source of all that is good. I can see God in the face of a non-believing mother smiling down at her baby just as easily as I can see Him in the face of the soloist on Sunday morning.

    In my original post, I was essentially saying that repentance is inherently a Godly thing and God has to provide the tools of repentance. He has to work on the hearts of the people in need of repentance for them to be able to repent.

    But. I’m not really all that knowledgeable. This is just based on my observations of Christians and non-Christians and what I’ve experienced of God in my life.

  247. Nancy

    It may be I was reading too fast as well!  I was trying to take in a number of comments and sometimes I mix them up. I agree woth you on forethought and caution. I recently read a study in which it seems to indicate that teens are almost hardwired to be risk takers which means they will “know” what to do but will ignore it in a parciular situation because …well, just because. I think this stidy has some merit because it jives with my own experiences and that of my friends. You know, the blank stare when you say “Why in the world did you do that? You know better.”

  248. Patrice wrote:

    I wish you the best in your marriage!

    It’s shocking how long it takes to face abuse. Therapist once said that people face their past when they are psychologically/spiritually capable of it and sometimes it takes decades (took me til 39). Keep grabbing patience for yourself.

    I am so sorry that you also are enduring physical breakdown. Trauma is super hard on the body…a gift that keeps on giving….arg!

    Thank you. I’m working with therapists, of the mental and physical variety, and getting hopeful. I had an encouraging experience talking with one of the pastors (a young woman fresh out of seminary who did her thesis on women’s religious practice in Kenya- very fascinating) about my experience and she recommended a Christian therapist with a dual MDiv and LCP-MHSP who has been wonderful.

    So, though I guess some of my pain can be derived from “Christian” teaching, I have to give credit to the Christian women who were able to hold my hand through the worst of the healing process.

    I had a moment last week where I started crying (a thing that has been happening frequently) but I was astonished to realize that I was crying because I was so happy that I was going to spend my life with the man I loved. That was the first time that had happened.

  249. @ dee:

    That is exactly what my daughter says they run into with the teens at school. And when the ask the teen, why did you do such a *** thing, the teen has no idea why.

  250. @ dee:

    Thanks, Dee. Once it occurred to me that God clearly in the Bible works through people who had no idea they were participating in His story, the problem of “good non-believers” and “free will” sorta.. fell into place. Helped that I went to an academically rigorous Christian school as a kid. (My senior AP English class read Job and J.B. by Archibald MacLiesh and wrote a paper on the quote “If God is God He is not good and if God is good He is not God.” That’s the sort of thing that really forces you to think.)

  251. @ Caitlin:

    Prevenient grace? I am of that opinion also. There is also the idea of “common grace.” Lots of good grace stuff out there. Loved your comment.

  252. @ Nancy:
    YES!

    Prevenient Grace. I am UMC born and bred, but not exactly “hip to the lingo”- it’s been a long time since Confirmation class.

  253. @ dee:
    There are men who want the post-puberty virgin (or apparent virgin). Cf the Muslim suicide bombers promised virgins in heaven. So a 13-17 y.o. can also be a target of crazy thinking.

  254. dee wrote:

    The (Muslim) religious authorities run around throwing stones at women who inadvertently show their ankles instead of lecturing their men to grow up.

    Well, since they sometimes cut off the hand of a thief, something more than lecturing might get the point across!

  255. @ dee: the swwoning at the sight of an ankle deal was also true in our culture until the 1920s, when women ditched full length dresses for knee length.

    19th c. novels tend to have many references to catching a glimpse of someone’s shapely ankles, etc.

  256. Nancy wrote:

    So, though I guess some of my pain can be derived from “Christian” teaching, I have to give credit to the Christian women who were able to hold my hand through the worst of the healing process.

    Yeah, well, there are obviously two completely different Christian teachings occurring here, and one of them must be false. In your case, I think we can safely lay the false stuff at the men’s feet lol.

    I am glad that you found a man you love with your eyes wide open! When I married, I wasn’t capable of making a good choice, so got someone with the same vague shape as my abusing father. Oy!

    All blessings, including recovery of your physical health!

  257. clisa wrote:

    We want you to admit you made a mistake. We want you to actually know what you are talking about, because quoting a bible verse is rote memory not actual knowledge. Do not think to know about our faith and tell us to pray, do not think to know our pain believe that simply reading the bible will solve our problems, do no think that we can by some trick of the mind invite in the holy spirit and that magically change us into someone else who is easier for you to deal with.

    Exactly! Sending you {{{hugs}}}.

  258. @ Marsha:

    The minor is not totally helpless in this circumstance. His lawyer can, on his behalf, petition the court to get involved. The court can directly address the issue of treatment and/or appoint a guardian for the minor who will decide instead of the minor’s parents. Perhaps the court has other options, I am not a lawyer.

    There was a case of this, a 17 year old with Hodgkin’s disease, in which the court decided for the minor, and Mohler wrote about it maybe a couple of years ago or so.

  259. Bridget wrote:

    The man’s perceived ‘headship’ or his ‘complementarian’ views don’t mean a darn thing and don’t make men any better off.

    I’ve watched how complementarianism works out in people’s lives. I couldn’t find a useful function for it in relationships between equally valued partners, and in unhealthy relationships, it most often deepened the dysfunction. The only place I’ve seen it get anything right was in relationships where the woman insisted on pre-eminence, but then it tended to either destroy the woman or cause her to run, and what is the good in that?

    I don’t understand why people take up interpretations of scripture that don’t work for humans. Jesus made clear that law is made for humans, not humans for the law. And since complementarianism is a law/principle believed to govern male/female relationships, Jesus’ words do apply to it. So if one’s interpretation twists humans in knots rather then help them and their relationships to greater wholeness and worship, it seems obvious to me that they need to go back to scripture and find out what it really says.

  260. And since we are talking about consent issues, Boz and Tullian’s mother married an “older man” not really terribly older but with an age gap within what we have been discussing, at age 17 with the approval of Ruth and Billy G. These things are complicated.

  261. Nancy wrote:

    These things are complicated.

    Is it complicated or is it that there are always exceptions whenever a line is drawn? ISTM that exceptions, just by being there, don’t mean a line should be erased (I know you don’t think that).

    Sometimes a line does needs to be erased because of the number and kind of exceptions that occur. But I don’t find the men’s-rights people at all persuasive on this one.

  262. @ dee:

    Dee – You also wrote,

    The question to ask is “What is a 30 something year old guy doing with a 14 year old girl?” That’s not normal!

    I think it’s important to be aware that the “statutory rape” laws are different for each state. For example, the South Carolina law states,

    First-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor to have sexual intercourse with a person under age 11.

    Second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor to have sexual intercourse with a person between ages 11 and 14.

    If I’m reading the South Carolina statute correctly, a 30 something year old guy with a 15 year old girl is not illegal. It may not be normal, but its not illegal.

  263. @ Patrice:

    I have no idea what the men’s rights people think. I never even thought there was such a what? movement? cause? Hey, I don’t know.

    But yes, I think that if a line has been drawn and it may not be working as well as it might, then it needs to be re-examined–maybe changed, maybe not. But in my state a person can marry at 16 with parental consent only, so it is not just me. The laws in my state are such that 16 and 17 year olds are caught betwixt and between in some matters. You can decide to marry at 16 but you cannot decide to have sex or be held responsible for it. You can go to school with girls who already are mothers at 17, and girls who have had abortions, and you better not do that, but no we are not going to hold you responsible for your sexual decisions because we know you cannot decide. So you are capable of deciding “no” but you are not capable of deciding “yes”? The other girls may be, but you are not.

    Now, understand, I am in no way in favor of fornication at 16, 30 or 62. That is a religious position which I believe and have consistently practiced. My whole issue is with the inconsistency of the way the system works at this time. And, yes, our “system” is not being put into practice. Just because some 16 year old is dating some 23 year old does not mean that anybody is necessarily going to do anything about it, and her parents may be thrilled to death.

    And no, I personally do not think that just because some guys in Raleigh set it up that way it is necessarily on a par with holy writ.

  264. Joe2 wrote:

    @ dee:
    Dee – You also wrote,
    The question to ask is “What is a 30 something year old guy doing with a 14 year old girl?” That’s not normal!
    I think it’s important to be aware that the “statutory rape” laws are different for each state. For example, the South Carolina law states,
    First-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor to have sexual intercourse with a person under age 11.
    Second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor to have sexual intercourse with a person between ages 11 and 14.
    If I’m reading the South Carolina statute correctly, a 30 something year old guy with a 15 year old girl is not illegal. It may not be normal, but its not illegal.

    Everyone wouldn’t agree with the laws of NC. I hope there is still a law in NC that takes into consideratiin the “power” play issues if the 15 year old girl is being groomed by her boss, pastor, or teacher, etc. If not, I’d have to say that NC is living in the dark ages. No offense to all you NCites.

  265. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Yeah. When I suggested once that that getting falling-down drunk at Spring Break in a party town (where sexual predators WILL congregate looking for easy prey) was not the most brilliant move, I got damned to Eternal Feminist Hell and accused of Patriarchy Rape Culture. (With appropriate slogans.)

    I just want to explain why I get mad about victim-blaming when it comes to sexual assault victims and try to draw a line between “keeping you safe” advice and “sexual assault”

    Nancy upthread talked about prevention techniques, things to keep women safe. These are all super important. They are good for not just sexual assault, they’re good for theft and mugging too! A prudent person would follow this advice. And frankly if, say, you left your car unlocked in a dangerous part of town and it was stolen, people would probably shake their head at your stupidity.

    So is that victim-blaming? Is it victim-blaming to say “Gee, you got robbed because you were flashing $100 bills around like an dummy”? Well, I guess it is. However, no one is getting up in arms about *that* kind of victim-blaming, so why do I get angry when people say “You shouldn’t get falling down drunk!” with respect to sexual assault?

    First, what the woman is flaunting is herself. Her own body. Her personage. She is not a car that can be left unlocked or bills to be flashed around. She’s a human being, not an object. So, it is dehumanizing to see it though it’s something she ought to keep locked up or else.

    Second, and this is huge, leaving your car door unlocked does not eliminate the crime of theft. The police might shake their heads a bit at your foolishness, but they are still going to charge the guy if they catch him of grand theft auto. The jury is still going to convict him. However, when it comes to sexual assault, what victim-blaming boils down to is “That didn’t really happen.”

    Suuuuure you had sexual contact, and maybe you weren’t all that thrilled after the fact, but really, it wasn’t rape at all because you didn’t do XYZ thing or you did ABC thing. It was “consensual until you woke up” or “Beer goggles” not sexual assault.

    And that’s why victim-blaming when it comes to sexual assault is so pernicious. I can get told off for being stupid for leaving my car unlocked when my phone gets stolen, but my phone still got stolen. A girl gets too drunk to consent and someone has sex with her? Well, you got drunk, so it wasn’t rape.

    (And yes, legally it’s still rape, but practically it won’t get very far in a criminal case and it definitely won’t get far in the Court of Public Opinion”)

    I’m not trying to jump on you, but I just wanted to point out a difference.

  266. Nancy wrote:

    @ Marsha:

    The minor is not totally helpless in this circumstance. His lawyer can, on his behalf, petition the court to get involved. The court can directly address the issue of treatment and/or appoint a guardian for the minor who will decide instead of the minor’s parents. Perhaps the court has other options, I am not a lawyer.

    There was a case of this, a 17 year old with Hodgkin’s disease, in which the court decided for the minor, and Mohler wrote about it maybe a couple of years ago or so.

    I am all for minors having this option! It breaks my heart every time I read of child dying of a treatable condition because their parents believe in faith healing alone. But even here, the minor’s judgment is being reviewed by adults in a courtroom.

  267. Dave A A wrote:

    dee wrote:
    The (Muslim) religious authorities run around throwing stones at women who inadvertently show their ankles instead of lecturing their men to grow up.
    Well, since they sometimes cut off the hand of a thief, something more than lecturing might get the point across!

    🙂 🙂 🙂

    (I remember an old Les Dawson joke about cultures in which thieves had their hands cut off. If you were done for indecent exposure, life wasn’t worth living!)

  268. Caitlin wrote:

    Once it occurred to me that God clearly in the Bible works through people who had no idea they were participating in His story, the problem of “good non-believers” and “free will” sorta.. fell into place.

    Lesley and I have found that most of the “Kingdom people” we’ve come across are non-Christians. That’s because so few Christians can imagine God functioning outside of a tymuvworship.

  269. Bridget wrote:

    Everyone wouldn’t agree with the laws of NC. I hope there is still a law in NC that takes into consideratiin the “power” play issues if the 15 year old girl is being groomed by her boss, pastor, or teacher, etc. If not, I’d have to say that NC is living in the dark ages. No offense to all you NCites.

    I don’t know if there is or not. The website I was using was only talking about ages, and it got very complicated. It also went down to and below 14 with various age formulas as such. Like what if the girl is, let’s say 5 and the boy is 9, stuff like that. I was not trying to remember anything below 16 at the time. Frankly, if one is saying that she is 16 and he is 25 and so it is statutory rape regardless of other considerations, what difference in the law would it make if he was a preacher or a postman?

    I can see that a counselor or a priest might differentiate based on moral culpability and/or feelings of guilt or possible guilt, or lack of it, but if he is going to prison either way, why would it matter for the law to get involved with that?

  270. @ Nancy:

    By the way, he was talking about South Carolina. I am talking about North Carolina. You referenced him and then talked about NC. In just lots of ways the two states are different.

  271. Bridget wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    tymuvworship
    Definition please.

    “tymovworship” – alternative spelling “time_of_worship”. As in, now we’re going to move into a time of worship. A period during a christian gathering in which the inmates sing songs until they feel a pleasurable sense of emotional arousal known as “the presence of God”.

  272. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    A period during a christian gathering in which the inmates sing songs until they feel a pleasurable sense of emotional arousal known as “the presence of God”.

    You know, we don’t do that at my church, but I know some who do, charismatics and pentecostals I think, maybe others. You have self identified as a “none” and also as a “charismatic” and this statement you have just made seems-out of sync. If you wan to explain that I would like to hear it, but if you want to preserve your privacy, no need to say anything.

  273. @ Nancy:

    I was referring to a 15 year old who was in a relationship with a person who was in a position of authority/power over her as in her teacher, her pastor, her boss, etc. This is different than a 15 year old who is in a relationship with some man who is a teacher, a pastor, a boss. Although for me, 15 is too young for a 20 and above man of any sort. There is too much immaturity in a 15 year old to make a decent decision.

    Heck, in my city we have had a rash of policemen abusing their “authority” with grown women. They’re all in deep doodoo for abusing their position. They could be facing jail time and the police department could be sued for systemic problems, as it should.

  274. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    tymuvworship
    Definition please.
    “tymovworship” – alternative spelling “time_of_worship”. As in, now we’re going to move into a time of worship. A period during a christian gathering in which the inmates sing songs until they feel a pleasurable sense of emotional arousal known as “the presence of God”.

    Got it. I was looking at it like OTOH, and couldn’t figure it out.

    Thankful that the presence of God isn’t dependent on a feeling. But having a feeling or emotion when worshipping isn’t necessarily wrong or bad either.

  275. @ Nancy:

    Good question, Nancy, and no – if I wanted to preserve my privacy that much I’d have used a pseudonym and an avatar fotie of someone who has been handicapped with hair!

    Firstly, if you’ll excuse the crass buy-my-book nature of this, there’s an article on my award-winning blog * at http://godsjobcentrestirling.wordpress.com/2012/11/11/worshipping_vs_worshipper/, in which I describe this in a bit more detail. In particular, it describes something of my own personal journey on UK-style charismatic worship.

    In brief, I do actually love full-on gatherings when singing about who Jesus is and what he has accomplished gets completely out of hand. IMHO it is impossible to go “over the top” in worship because there is no top. But there is a big difference between a gathering in which God’s presence descends, and a gathering in which everyone simply sings songs until they get emotional. The “charismatic liturgy” – i.e. lots of songs one after another, with a great deal of emotional expression – has been around a long time in the UK, and people have developed a taste for it as well as the ability to cultivate it. But in itself, it ain’t the Holy Spirit.

    Does that make sense?

    * Winner, “Best blog called ‘God’s Jobcentre’ that also has its own gallery”, 2014

  276. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    By the way, what with the stereotypes of Brits on TV it is really really hard to think there are charismatics in the UK. I just about cannot imagine it, in fact. This goes along with my saying all the time that the american south is not what non-southerners think it is.

    Like you say, I hope that helps.

  277. Nancy wrote:

    what with the stereotypes of Brits on TV it is really really hard to think there are charismatics in the UK.

    As long as you bear a couple of things in mind:
     Nobody in the UK has ever spoken or behaved like any character in the Simpsons
     Not all evil people have a suave English accent
     Patrick Steward, who plays Jean-Luc Picard, really is English
     The Scottish chappie fae Alien versus Predator really is Scottish
     So is Ewan McGregor

    Also worth bearing in mind is that “charismatic” probably means something very different here in Blighty. Charismatics, as a rough rule of thumb:
     Don’t realise the “charismata” are actually in Romans 12;
     Think the “charismata” are the manifestations of the spirit from 1 Corinthians;
     Incorporate same into most church gatherings, including small and informal ones;
     Do not believe prophecies are infallible or otherwise in any sense on a par with the biblescriptures;
     Accept the authority of the biblescriptures, with the caveat that they don’t believe the biblescriptures are a person of the Godhead;
     In summary, build their church gatherings and organisations around the assumption that everything the Holy Spirit is described as doing in and through believers in Acts and the NT, he still does today

    I hope this is helpful.

  278. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    The Scottish chappie fae Alien versus Predator really is Scottish
     So is Ewan McGregor

    Wasn’t the tenth Doctor also Scottish and wanted to do a Scottish Doctor but that was shot down? Am I remembering correctly?

  279. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I hope this is helpful.

    Quite so. Yes. Really. I do say, old chap. Jolly ho and all that.

    And the top o’ the mornin’ to you. No, wait, that would be some of my ancestors, not yours.

  280. Joe2

    I have a feeling that if a 30 year old guy in charge of a youth group had sex with a 15 year old girl in his group in SC, there would be other laws which could be applied. In other words, the police would not tip their hat and say “enjoy yourself.” 

  281. Bridget

    There are laws that make one a felon and there are law which make people criminals. One goes to prison, another goes to jail. I bet that there are laws that would cover this situation.

  282. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Check out any rock star’s memoirs about “groupies” sometime.

    Makes me think of Mark Knopfler’s catchy guitar licks and:

    Money for nuthin’ an’ your chicks for free

  283. Mara wrote:

    Wasn’t the tenth Doctor also Scottish and wanted to do a Scottish Doctor but that was shot down? Am I remembering correctly?

    David Tennant, the Tenth Doctor, is indeed Scottish. Whether he decided, or was instructed, to change his accent I’m not sure; but the Thirteenth Doctor, Peter Capaldi, is also Scottish and is using his own accent; so we have a Scottish Doctor after all.

    The Ninth Doctor, Christopher Ecclestone, is from the north of England. He too used his own accent; this was covered in the following piece of dialogue from his first episode:
    Rose Tyler: If you’re an alien, how come you’ve got a northern accent?
    The Doctor: Loads of planets have a north.

  284. @ Nancy:
    What a mess! Over the long haul, it makes citizens feel contempt for the law because it’s double-minded and contradictory.

    I don’t suppose that’ll improve, either, as we send more legal authority to the states.

  285. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    I read your article. It is good. I/we don’t do that in the same way, but I know what you are talking about. This thing you said, though, I want to write here—just because I do.

    Nick said: ” an insatiable hunger to see Jesus’ Kingdom demonstrated on earth”.

    I am thinking that this, in itself is a form of worship, and that anything growing out of that also is.

  286. clisa wrote:

    @ Patrice:
    @ Anna:
    When I was abused by my grandfather my parents consulted the church elders on what to do. They said, “Do nothing” and nothing was done. 30 years later and I am still weeping. I was not worth justice. My family was destroyed. Who gave them the right to make that decision? All I ever heard about was forgiveness and how, “someday I would meet a nice Christian man and everything would be ok” that was the extent of what was done for me, and for my family. Everything is not ok. I have prayed and read the bible until my rage has boiled over and my tears have choked me. Every time I try and talk to any pastor about this they give the same answer – pray and read the bible. When our souls are wounded the church does not want to deal with us – this kind of wound is messy and you have to get your hands dirty to deal with it. Pastors don’t want to get their hands dirty. They want to pray, read a bible verse, maybe put a little olive oil on the forehead and walk away. I’ve talked to close to a dozen evangelical pastors from multiple denominations and they all say the same things. The theology of the evangelical church is bankrupt and tissue thin. It has no depth to truly deal with the sorrows of this world. Pray and read the bible – I’d rather be vomitted on. Some of this conversation is disgustings – different ethnicities having different ideas about growing up and womanhood – all these bible verses – all these statistics. None of it means anything. I sit and weep and you quote verses and numbers, you may as well curse. My generation is leaving the church because all you can say is “read the bible and pray” to any problem. We are living broken lives and do not know a way to go forward and we do not find it in your tract theology and pat prayers and your admonish to pray more and read the bible more. We want to be loved. We want to be physically touched. We want to be listened to. We want you to admit you made a mistake. We want you to actually know what you are talking about, because quoting a bible verse is rote memory not actual knowledge. Do not think to know about our faith and tell us to pray, do not think to know our pain believe that simply reading the bible will solve our problems, do no think that we can by some trick of the mind invite in the holy spirit and that magically change us into someone else who is easier for you to deal with. I have exhausted myself trying to get the holy spirit to come in, to baptize me. I have tried to “let it go and let God” I have tried to “have faith”. I cannot come to any conclusion after 30 years but that I do not have enough faith or that God forsakes me, or their is a trick that I cannot master so do not tell me to let the holy spirit fix this. This is not in your control or mine, but what is in your control is your compassion, your love, your honesty, your strength. I’ve said to much but that’s what happens when your soul is sick, you vomit all over the place.

    I am so sorry that you had to go through all of this. I wish this comment of yours was required in every church and seminary in the whole country. I wish the people reading it would know that this is the heart of Jesus to His church. He said in the judgment we wont be judged on prophesying or wonderful works but when He was hungry we fed Him, when He was naked we clothed Him, when He was a stranger we took Him in, in prison we visited Him, and when we did it to the least of His disciples we did it to Him, or not.
    when you were hungry for compassion there was none, nothing to cover your nakedness, seen as a stranger and cast out, in a prison of pain with no visitors. I am so very sorry. Is it ok if I share your post with others? I wont put a name or this site addy if you want it anonymous.

  287. sam h wrote:

    people that don’t see minors as victims in sexual contact with an adult have no business counseling victims of sexual abuse. they have no business trying to apply the grace and forgiveness of the blood of Jesus to forgive them their sins. People who have been victimized themselves are the ones that can do that because they see it for what it really is, they don’t hammer to the victim their part in the sin, they already know it and have been condemned and judged by everyone already. I rejoice that abused men and women are coming forward, they are almost the only ones besides Jesus that are truly able to minister to abused people in Christs Love.

    Thank you! You said what I was thinking–only beter than I could have.

  288. @ Nancy:
    My Dad had Hodgkins, was aggressively treated with surgery and chemo therapy, and lived 27 years and some months from the time it was discovered. It is an entirely curable disease that is fatal unless the treatment is very aggressive. My Dad was left with a bit of palsy in one hand, but lived well for 20+ years before other events resulted in disability.

  289. clisa wrote:

    @ Patrice:
    @ Anna:
    When I was abused by my grandfather my parents consulted the church elders on what to do. They said, “Do nothing” and nothing was done. 30 years later and I am still weeping. I was not worth justice. My family was destroyed. Who gave them the right to make that decision? All I ever heard about was forgiveness and how, “someday I would meet a nice Christian man and everything would be ok” that was the extent of what was done for me, and for my family. Everything is not ok. I have prayed and read the bible until my rage has boiled over and my tears have choked me. Every time I try and talk to any pastor about this they give the same answer – pray and read the bible. When our souls are wounded the church does not want to deal with us – this kind of wound is messy and you have to get your hands dirty to deal with it. Pastors don’t want to get their hands dirty. They want to pray, read a bible verse, maybe put a little olive oil on the forehead and walk away. I’ve talked to close to a dozen evangelical pastors from multiple denominations and they all say the same things. The theology of the evangelical church is bankrupt and tissue thin. It has no depth to truly deal with the sorrows of this world. Pray and read the bible – I’d rather be vomitted on. Some of this conversation is disgustings – different ethnicities having different ideas about growing up and womanhood – all these bible verses – all these statistics. None of it means anything. I sit and weep and you quote verses and numbers, you may as well curse. My generation is leaving the church because all you can say is “read the bible and pray” to any problem. We are living broken lives and do not know a way to go forward and we do not find it in your tract theology and pat prayers and your admonish to pray more and read the bible more. We want to be loved. We want to be physically touched. We want to be listened to. We want you to admit you made a mistake. We want you to actually know what you are talking about, because quoting a bible verse is rote memory not actual knowledge. Do not think to know about our faith and tell us to pray, do not think to know our pain believe that simply reading the bible will solve our problems, do no think that we can by some trick of the mind invite in the holy spirit and that magically change us into someone else who is easier for you to deal with. I have exhausted myself trying to get the holy spirit to come in, to baptize me. I have tried to “let it go and let God” I have tried to “have faith”. I cannot come to any conclusion after 30 years but that I do not have enough faith or that God forsakes me, or their is a trick that I cannot master so do not tell me to let the holy spirit fix this. This is not in your control or mine, but what is in your control is your compassion, your love, your honesty, your strength. I’ve said to much but that’s what happens when your soul is sick, you vomit all over the place.

    I am NOT going to tell you any of the things you were told; those people were not just wrong, they were horrifically, cruelly wrong, & need to be ashamed of themselves.
    I am going to say, that i believe & I know that there is a just Judge, & that those who refused to care for you will be (or have all ready been) judged for their sins against you.
    I alkso know that this doesn’t really help. If I could, I would reach into the past & bang a few heads together. Hugs & prayers from here.

  290. zooey111 wrote:

    I alkso know that this doesn’t really help.

    There is no “k” in also. Can someone please remove it?
    And yes, a lot of people’s lives would indeed be simpler if I would just go ahead & re-install Spellcheck, but Spellcheck is of the devil.

  291. zooey111 wrote:

    zooey111 wrote:

    I alkso know that this doesn’t really help.

    There is no “k” in also. Can someone please remove it?
    And yes, a lot of people’s lives would indeed be simpler if I would just go ahead & re-install Spellcheck, but Spellcheck is of the devil.

    rofl, yep

  292. a thing that bothers me about “marginalizing” “discounting” “doubting” the person who was sexually abused is that in truth it is not all those things, it is that the person is told that they are lying and are a liar. That is so harmful and abusive in itself, especially when it comes from the good Christians on staff at the good church. Instead of pouring in God’s love; condemnation, shame and guilt are poured into the victim.

  293. An Attorney wrote:

    Jolly ho???? I thought it is Tally Ho!

    I don’t know. I was just messing with Nick the best I could, hoping that he would respond with some of his humor. He did not. There you go. Should that prevent me from trying in the future? Nah.

  294. Nancy wrote:

    f there has been a conviction. What is listed is what they were convicted of, which is sometimes pled down to a lesser crime. Locally there seems to be an epidemic of indecent liberties, which my informant says is pretty worthless as an indicator of what actually happened. Not that it matters for church purposes; whatever it was that happened was too much.

    And some offenders are removed from the list after a certain amount of time. I know a former teacher convicted for a “relationship” with a 14 yr old (he was 28) who was only required to be listed for ten years. In about two years, he won’t be on that database and only an actual criminal background check will turn up that information.

  295. Two things: 1–Catholic schools and parishes in the U.S. (except one lone diocese that refuses to participate–Lincoln, Nebraska: shame them, they deserve it!) conduct criminal background checks on all staff and volunteers that have contact with children. This includes everyone. Even the school janitors. And I know of people who have been denied the opportunity to volunteer due to not passing these background checks. The rest of the church world needs to follow suit.

    2–I know of two cases where a teenage girl was married to her youth pastor, one at 17 and one at 18. I know for a fact that an inappropriate relationship was discovered between the 17 year old and the 30+ pastor shortly before the wedding took place and that the 18 year old had been in an open and public relationship with the pastor since age 15–he was 35 at their wedding. One of the horrible problems in evangelical culture is that too many people do not understand that these are not appropriate relationships. The first girl was married to her abuser in order to cover up a scandal. The second is in a relationship that started in an abusive manner.

    I also know a woman whose first “serious boyfriend” was a youth pastor who at age 24 sought her parents’ permission to date her. It was the type of church where a pastor wanting to date their daughter was an “honor” and the fact that she was 16 did not matter. Looking back, she feels that her parents threw her into a bad relationship with a power differential that was harmful to her and that he was an abuser looking for permission to abuse.

    Until everyone understands that teenage girls should not be involved with grown men in any romantic way, this will continue and the attitude in that article will continue to be pervasive.

  296. ar wrote:

    Until everyone understands that teenage girls should not be involved with grown men in any romantic way…

    And vice versa (with the emphasis on “vice”…). If a youth pastor or similar is attracted to a girl who is clearly inappropriately young, it’s really simple: he needs to keep his thoughts to himself at the very least until she is old enough.

    The story Marsha told above (comment at 9:11 am on 19th June 2014) demonstrates that it is eminently doable.

  297. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    And vice versa (with the emphasis on “vice”…).

    Agreed, but it seems that there is less social acceptance of older women and young men/boys. There is a lot of “wink wink lucky kid” stuff when a female teacher is caught having sex with a teenage boy, but there is not a lot of acceptance of that as an appropriate potentially long term relationship. I personally endured (and sometimes still do hear it after five years of a happy marriage) a lot of crap thrown at me for dating a man seven years younger than me and we were 27/34 when we met. One friend who voiced her negative opinion loudly is nine years younger than her husband and her response when I pointed that out was “but that’s different”. So I think the idea of a 24 year old female youth worker wanting permission to date a 16 year old boy would get a much different response.

  298. @ ar:

    I have finally figured out what is going on. I have been getting my knickers in a knot needlessly. I found an hhs dot gov website regarding age of consent state by state. I thought that age of consent and age of majority were the same thing. They are not. As it turns out the 16 and 17 year olds in NC are not in legal limbo at all, given the difference in the two legal concepts.

    I have also been unaware as to the extent to which it all differs from state to state, which explains probably why some of us have been talking at cross purposes with each other. I was correct about how people do in NC. I was not correct in failing to realize that how we do is actually consistent with the law, since the age of consent (not majority) is 16 in NC.

    My apologies to all for my ignorance of this.

  299. @ ar:

    it seems that there is less social acceptance of older women and young men/boys

    Absolutely. I think people are used to younger women being with older men due to centuries/millennia of it being an economic decision (older men were typically better established, better able to provide, etc.). Younger men being with older women, however, just made no sense because part of the goal of marriage was to get children to keep property in the family, and an older woman was less likely to conceive. Much of that is different today, of course, but old habits die hard, I guess. So yeah, the 24yo female youth worker wanting to date the 16yo boy, would probably get labeled a cougar or something in about a second.

    My parents have a friend who is 6y older than her husband. They joke occasionally about her husband being the “baby” but that’s about it. Personally I don’t really care that much in either direction, as the long as the (1/2x +7) “creepy boundary” I mentioned upthread is kept in mind. It’s not absolute, of course, but it seems to be a decent guideline to me. And plus it was actually mentioned on Bones so that must make it true, right? 😉

  300. Hester wrote:

    My parents have a friend who is 6y older than her husband. They joke occasionally about her husband being the “baby” but that’s about it. Personally I don’t really care that much in either direction, as the long as the (1/2x +7) “creepy boundary” I mentioned upthread is kept in mind. It’s not absolute, of course, but it seems to be a decent guideline to me. And plus it was actually mentioned on Bones so that must make it true, right?

    The wife is older thing seems to “run in my family”, LOL. Of seven grandchildren on one side, only one couple is the more traditional husband-is-older.

    I agree about the 1/2x + 7 rule–it is an easy way to keep a couple in the same generation which is important. My sister-in-law is dating a 23 year old boy who has never had a job, lives with his mom and dad and gets an allowance. He is, maturity wise, a child. And she is early 40s. They have nothing in common and the whole thing just feels awkward all the time. When she reminisces about 80s television shows, for example, and then giggles that she just can’t believe he never watched them and we’re listening to this thinking, “yes, because he was not born yet”…And we’d feel the same if their genders were reversed.

  301. dee wrote:


    Eric Rasmusen wrote:
    Mahaney has some things to say worth hearing— just not on church governance.
    Oh really??? CJ Mahaney has good things to say???? Now I understand the trajectory of your comments. That is really comforting to the many people who have been hurt out there….
    So, if he “says” it right,then it must be good. There is a song from My Fair Lady “Word, word, words,
    I’m so sick of words.” Instead you should “show me.”
    In my opinion, following the history and problems inherent in SGM, words have little meaning.

    Gram3 wrote:

    Eric,
    On the SGM thing: the problem at SGM was not its church governance (polity) but instead the problem was/is its fundamentally wrong belief system or culture. Polity flows from the underlying doctrine and SGM’s doctrine is very, very mistaken at the least.

    I am also sure Mahaney has some things to say *not* worth hearing. But you have to be careful about tying together doctrine and behavior— in which last I include covering up scandal and not caring about people. A good preacher can be a bad pastor and a bad preacher can be a good pastor. So inviting someone to preach at your church is a different matter from asking him to pastor it.

    That might be the source of the biggest systemic problem, in fact. “My church is so doctrinally pure, and my pastor delivers such good and wise sermons that he couldn;t *possibly* beheave that way.” It’s a more general form of “Mr X is such a good man, he could never do such a thing!” But in fact someone can say all the right things, whatever you think they are, and still sin grossly and continuously. It works going the other way too. Just because you discover your pastor has betrayed you doesn’t mean that his sermons have to have even a single false sentence.
    “It is a good divine that follows his own instructions. I can easier teach twenty what were good to be done than be one of the twenty to follow mine own teaching. The brain may devise laws for the blood, but a hot temper leaps o’er a cold decree. ” Or, in our thread;s context, “a lily liver runs away from a cold decree.”

  302. Nancy wrote:

    …since the age of consent (not majority) is 16 in NC.

    I just looked up the age of consent in my state. It’s 18– a 17 y o can’t consent with a 23 y o. If we had lived here, the line between me and Mrs A A being Man and Wife and being Perp and Victim would have been very thin. Had we met just a few months eatlier and failed to “wait” just once… I might have become a “leadership” writer.

  303. @ Dave A A:
    Just to be clear, I’m in no way saying the Perp who wrote the article is anywhere close to any gray area. Except for the color of the bars on his cell.

  304. Beakerj wrote:

    I have non-christian male friends & have had in the past non-christian boyfriends who have shown more genuine self-control & concern for true consent & appropriate aged relationships than I’ve seen in the contemporary evangelical church put together.

    Think about what kind of things a man would say if he was positioning himself to seduce women. Would he say that he, or men generally, fact temptation? No. Would he show tremendous concern? Yes. Would he tell your daughter he believes she should be safe with older men? Yes— just as he’s putting his arm around her. The epitome of that “I really care about women” style is Bill Clinton.

  305. dee wrote:

    Eric Rasmusen wrote:
    It is the man’s duty to restrain himself, or so a genuine complementarian believes, precisely because of the man’s headship.
    It is also the view of egalitarians, and whatevers, that the person in power or leadership or authority must restrain him or herself. I do not know what complementarianism has to do with this. For example, you do know about the fair number of female teachers seducing male students?

    The complementarian would add that every man—grown man, not boy— is in a position of authority, and hence should bear blame. But not necessarily the complete blame. I don’t know how many professors and bosses seduce college students and employees, but it’s certainly common for students and employees to seduce professors and bosses too. You don’t hear so much about that publicly, since the seduced professor and boss is usually content with the result, but the students and employees who lose out due to the favoritism notice it.

  306. Bridget wrote:

    The man’s perceived ‘headship’ or his ‘complementarian’ views don’t mean a darn thing and don’t make men any better off. We know plenty of men with these exact views that abused, raped, even spiritually abused others. The comp and headship mantra doesn’t change anyone’s heart to treat others the way they want to be treated.

    Would you say, then, that a man bears no special responsibility to avoid triggering an improper relationship? The view of many men is the egalitarian one: “If she consents, then if she doesn’t like it later and says her heart is broken, that’s her problem. She’s an adult too.” The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

  307. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    Hmm… there is one thing it’s hard to escape from here, regardless of who’s responsible for what and of who feels what about it. That is, in a sexual encounter, the woman always, potentially, has more to lose. He can’t get pregnant, and if she does, she can’t simply walk away even if she wants to.

    Incidentally, it’s not inconceivable that this was what Peter had in mind when he spake of a husband esteeming his wife as a weaker vessel. There were no vasectomies in those days.

  308. Eric

    So then what does it matter if he says some good things? If he is a jerk, then he is a jerk who occasionally says he loves his kids.

  309. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    Everybody know what you call a woman who trusts a man to “do the right thing?”

    A mother.

  310. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Would you say, then, that a man bears no special responsibility to avoid triggering an improper relationship? The view of many men is the egalitarian one: “If she consents, then if she doesn’t like it later and says her heart is broken, that’s her problem. She’s an adult too.” The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    I think that if some woman wants to encourage some man to think like that it may be to her advantage to do so. But if that same woman actually believes it for one minute, she increases her chances of living to regret it.

    It is pretentious and patronizing and sounds like a line that men feed women, “Trust me, baby” in all it’s variations. Hooey. She is responsible for her own actions. To let her think otherwise is to set her up for heartbreak. Did God give anybody in that Eden crowd a pass when they tried to blame it on somebody else?

  311. @ Eric Rasmusen:
    You don’t understand women, consent, or egalitarian sexual ethics. On the latter, honesty and consent are paramount. People still get their hearts broken – sometimes a good, honest person decides she wants to end things when another good, honest person wants to go on – but as long as everyone is behaving honestly, there’s no special responsibility on one gender.

  312. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    But you have to be careful about tying together doctrine and behavior— in which last I include covering up scandal and not caring about people. A good preacher can be a bad pastor and a bad preacher can be a good pastor. So inviting someone to preach at your church is a different matter from asking him to pastor it.

    absolutely the opposite of what Jesus said eric! Jesus said not to go by what the Pharisees said,they were learned scholars of the word of God and expert at twisting it to their purposes and not God’s. Jesus absolutely said “you can tell them by their fruit” Inviting someone to preach at your church who does not have the fruit of the Holy Spirit and the doctrine of the bible is so incredibly unscriptural that I cannot believe you said it. Its called a wolf in sheeps clothing and you invite them in to the church to spread a little lie here and a little lie there, a bit of an “interpretation” here and there. Isnt what Jesus said enough for you? Isnt what Jesus taught enough for you? do you need an interpreter who has a sinful life to come to your church to interpret things so you don’t have to pick up your cross and die to your own selfishness? interpretations like, yep its ok to treat your wife like she is your servant, don’t forget she causes the sin in your life so don’t listen to her if you disagree, yep those bible thumpers are just trying to ruin your fun in life, it starts a little here a little there until you invite someone to your church who says “yep I am mark driscoll and what I say is the correct interpretation, I know what Jesus really meant when he said those things and I will punch out anyone that disagrees.”

  313. sam h wrote:

    absolutely the opposite of what Jesus said eric! Jesus said not to go by what the Pharisees said,they were learned scholars of the word of God and expert at twisting it to their purposes and not God’s.

    I thought he said do what they tell you (the sitting in Moses’ seat thing) but do not do what they do. That would be just the opposite of what you said.

  314. @ Nancy:

    Sorry, I left out chapter and verse. I have been away from the Baptists so long I have forgotten my manners.

    Matthew 23:2-3

  315. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    That is, in a sexual encounter, the woman always, potentially, has more to lose. He can’t get pregnant, and if she does, she can’t simply walk away even if she wants to.

    The man involved is liable for child support, isn’t he? So in reality, both have a lot at stake.

  316. The@ Victorious:
    Trust me. Except in extraordinary situations involving top NFL players, the one with primary custody has the most to lose in time and money. And until the baby’s born, that’s the woman 100% of the time.

  317. According to the U. S. Census Bureau, only half of custodial parents are awarded child support and of those, only 41 percent receive the full payment while 30 percent receive partial payments and 29 percent receive no payments.

  318. ar wrote:

    Agreed, but it seems that there is less social acceptance of older women and young men/boys.

    Nobody bats an eyelash when a guy is older than the hottie on his arm. But when the age-wise gender pair-up is reversed, all of a sudden it’s ‘sick’, not what the Lord ‘intended’ (eye-roll), and a whole panoply of other nixes on why it shouldn’t be. If there ever was a double standard for gender roles whether secular or religious, this is definitely one of the more salient ones.

  319. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Incidentally, it’s not inconceivable that this was what Peter had in mind when he spake of a husband esteeming his wife as a weaker vessel. There were no vasectomies in those days.

    Good catch Nick.
    When Ivan (the Red Army) pushed the Wehrmacht far enough West and the death camps in the East got liberated, the vast majority of survivors were women. I’ll grant it that men in general have an initial physical strength greater than women, but in harsh and corrosive environments, women will outlast men much in the same way that titanium will outlast the strongest steel alloys.
    Real world empirical observation will not support 1 Peter 3:7 unless the much broader meaning is the brutal cultural constraints placed on women in the ancient Greco-Roman world.

  320. Eric,

    The SGM problem along with the other “complementarians” is that they have made up a doctrine of authority that is prescribed nowhere, nowhere, absolutely nowhere in scripture. You must import hierarchy into the eternal Trinity, and you must import it into male and female relationships in Genesis 1-2 by misreading 1 Timothy 2:11-15 by using a faulty hermeneutic that is used only for gender passages.

    The SGM and complementarian problem is due to silencing women and anyone who raises any issue at all about their doctrine. The CBMW website is full of ad homs, well poisoning, straw men, and slander toward those who merely disagree. It is shameful.

    Being careful of another person’s feelings is not the “complementarian” way of treating people. It is the *Christian* way of treating people. If you did not believe you were in authority over women, would you act like a jerk? I hope not if you claim the name of Christ.

    Do you think it is acceptable to use a term like “complementarian” when you really mean hierarchy? Is that what male headship looks like?

    Gram3

  321. @ Eric Rasmusen:

    “The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++

    that’s silly

  322. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Beakerj wrote:

    I have non-christian male friends & have had in the past non-christian boyfriends who have shown more genuine self-control & concern for true consent & appropriate aged relationships than I’ve seen in the contemporary evangelical church put together.

    Think about what kind of things a man would say if he was positioning himself to seduce women. Would he say that he, or men generally, fact temptation? No. Would he show tremendous concern? Yes. Would he tell your daughter he believes she should be safe with older men? Yes— just as he’s putting his arm around her. The epitome of that “I really care about women” style is Bill Clinton.

    Oh Eric, these were guys that I as a non-Christian &then as a young Christian was actually in a relationship with. I have been treated with care & courtesy inside sexual relationships when I drew lines saying this far & no further… no attempts to persuade me into more, no nastiness, no accusations of ‘using my power’ to drive them crazy, just respect & love. That’s how men can be, even young men, full of testosterone, even in situations which are sexual, but aren’t going to result in full sex, or anywhere near it. And no, not older men, age appropriate boyfriends. I feel sorry for you not knowing this is possible.

  323. And just to add, which you may not know, out there in the non-Christian world there are a lot of decent men who behave decently towards the women they become involved with. Whilst you may have a picture of it being a dangerous hotbed of seething lust (which some of it is) some people actually know how to relate to others well- without the ‘guidance’ of complementarians. They even get married to them! Yes, they don’t just want sex & then to run, some have sex in their relationship & then, gasp, marry that woman, not considering them faulty goods or to have nothing left to offer. Revolutionary stuff.

  324. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    I am also sure Mahaney has some things to say *not* worth hearing.

    Actually, there may be a lot of things in Mahaney’s message worth not hearing.
    😉

  325. Gram3 wrote:

    You must import hierarchy into the eternal Trinity,

    I do see some comments in scripture which can be used by either side in the argument as to whether there is hierarchy in the trinity. Since some of the earliest church “issues” for debate included this concept, it must be that some of them had good ideas either way, or else I am thinking there would have been no debate, just proclamation and enforcement. And some ideas have been put forth to explain one position or the other over the centuries.

    I like talking about theological issues, but this is probably not the place, and today (Saturday) is not the time since my daughter in law is going to pick me up in just a bit and I am going to hang our with their family today. She has to pick me up because I am not yet back to driving after damaging my right shoulder rotator cuff in an accident while tent camping last weekend. But when all that gets squared away and I feel halfway humanoid again I would like to get your take on certain comments in scripture and see why you have said what you have said in such a definitive way. Maybe we can do that one day, if you are interested.

    At this time I am in the position of: the preponderance of the evidence seems to indicate, but I can see where the arguments on the other side are coming from, so I defer to the decisions of early church councils on this one.

  326. @ ar:

    my 28 yo son married a 36 yo woman. It is a very healthy relationship of equals professionally and personally And he has always been mature for his age, as in establishing an IRA at age 19, and by 28 having savings enough, as she also had, that they were able to make a $60,000 down payment on their first house, and almost simultaneously pay cash for a new car. A lot depends on the individuals and how the couple actually relate to each other.

  327. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Did anyone else see the most recent incident of a gun nut shooting himself in the privates, the one, not the two. Appears to happen with some rate of repetition — gun nut shoots off own p’s. Now a political eunuch.

  328. Nancy,

    A couple of resources I can recommend are Millard Erickson’s book on this topic, “Who’s Tampering with the Trinity” and the Henry Center debate at Trinity Int’l University between Grudem and Ware for hierarchy and Tom McCall and Keith Yandell against hierarchy. Erickson gives a good overview of church history and the relevant texts while the Trinity U. debate is more the philosophical and logical problems with the hierarchical view.

    There is also a conversation between Kevin Giles and Fred Sanders which was supposed to be a debate but really wasn’t. Sanders, who was representing the complementarian view, says that speculation about the immanent Trinity does not belong in a gender debate.

    Hope that helps. It is difficult to have theological discussions if you are a woman. Thankfully, more women are being allowed to study.

    Gram3

  329. An Attorney wrote:

    my 28 yo son married a 36 yo woman. It is a very healthy relationship of equals professionally and personally And he has always been mature for his age, as in establishing an IRA at age 19, and by 28 having savings enough, as she also had, that they were able to make a $60,000 down payment on their first house, and almost simultaneously pay cash for a new car. A lot depends on the individuals and how the couple actually relate to each other.

    My husband is mature beyond his years as well. But given that we met as independent adults, it was never an issue in our minds anyway. I do tease him that he is really, secretly older than me. All the music he likes is from the mid 70s before he was born. He is a Luddite who will barely use the web and refuses to use the texting that is on his cell phone plan and he is currently searching for a working 8 track player for reasons I do not understand. 🙂

    My sister-in-law and the child she is dating on the other hand…we would be equally uncomfortable if the genders were reversed since the 23 year old in question is exceedingly immature–not independent. He has never had a job (of any kind…not even a pt job) and never lived away from his parents’ house. And she’s literally barely younger than his mother.

  330. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Think about what kind of things a man would say if he was positioning himself to seduce women. Would he say that he, or men generally, fact temptation? No. Would he show tremendous concern? Yes. Would he tell your daughter he believes she should be safe with older men? Yes— just as he’s putting his arm around her. The epitome of that “I really care about women” style is Bill Clinton.

    I was reading a book by a woman – a therapist – who does not appear to be a Christian. Her book is for all women, regardless of religious beliefs or lack thereof.

    She says this is a big problem for a lot of women, and not just ones raised in religious homes. She says a lot of women, especially young ones, are naive and cannot spot when a man is coming on to them sexually, or is trying to use them sexually.

    She has a chapter in her book about how older males prey and hoodwink younger women.

    She says such men will usually play the “mentor” or “I’m just a friend” or “I can help you with your employment problems” cards. What these men are really after is sex, but a lot of women fall for this. They think the guy is just “being nice” or offering friendship, when he really has an ulterior motive going on.

    I don’t know if I want to go down the road that all men are this way, however.

    Common Christian views (specifically evangelical, Southern Baptist, IFB, and Neo Calvinist) maintain that men are sex crazed beasts who are incapable of sexual self control. Holding that view creates other problems.

    But there are some men, including older ones, who do play the role of “concerned father figure” type to a troubled 20 something to lure them into the sack.

    There is also some criticism on secular entertainment sites the last few years of older men who date or marry women who are more than 10 or 15 years younger than they.

  331. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    The complementarian would add that every man—grown man, not boy— is in a position of authority, and hence should bear blame.

    The only time the Bible specifically mentions woman submitting to a man is the deal in Eph. about a wife submitting to her own husband.

    (But prior to that is a verse saying all Christians should submit to all other Christians – that means husbands are to submit to their own wives.)

    The point is, that Bible does not teach that the male gender has authority over the entire female gender.

    The Bible has only has that one verse about wives submitting to their own husbands. That is, that married woman is asked to submit to her husband only, not to other women’s husbands.

    I am over 40 years of age and have never been married. Outside the general “all submit to all” verse in Eph and the thing in Romans about believers submitting to secular authority.

    I, as a single woman who’s never married, don’t have to submit to anyone, or play the gender comp (not biblical) role of “Susie Homemaker” who bakes cookies all day and vacuums the carpeting (unless I so choose of my free will to do this, but it’s not demanded of all women or even married ones in the Bible).

    Authority has nothing to do with behavior in this case. The Bible simply expects and asks all believers to practice self control, and it does not matter the person’s gender, skin color, or marital status.

  332. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Would you say, then, that a man bears no special responsibility to avoid triggering an improper relationship? The view of many men is the egalitarian one: “If she consents, then if she doesn’t like it later and says her heart is broken, that’s her problem. She’s an adult too.” The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    No, I don’t agree with that, depending on the particulars of the case (and I have not read every post in this discussion, so I might be missing something).

    If we are talking about a male who happens to be in a position of authority or trust that can be exploited, such as if the man is a woman’s boss, preacher, or therapist, than in those cases, I’d say the man bears more responsibility.

    However, the same would be true if it was a female boss or teacher who is using her status, influence, or power to exploit a male.

    It’s not gender that is at play in those cases, but the job role itself.

  333. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    I am so gosh darned confused. This makes no sense.No wonder the complementarian viewpoint doesn’t play well. It makes no sense.

    I am equally concerned about my husbands feelings as he is about mine. I couldn’t imagine being shallow in this regard.

    I can see it now. Hubby has a bad day at work. He comes home, frustrated, depressed and anxious. I pat him on the back, say “Poor baby” and then launch into how I mad I got when I got cut off on the highway.

    Where in the world did the “feelings” thing come from? The Bible?

  334. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    The man’s perceived ‘headship’ or his ‘complementarian’ views don’t mean a darn thing and don’t make men any better off. We know plenty of men with these exact views that abused, raped, even spiritually abused others. The comp and headship mantra doesn’t change anyone’s heart to treat others the way they want to be treated.

    Would you say, then, that a man bears no special responsibility to avoid triggering an improper relationship? The view of many men is the egalitarian one: “If she consents, then if she doesn’t like it later and says her heart is broken, that’s her problem. She’s an adult too.” The complementarian view is that the man has more of a duty to look out for the woman’s feelings than the woman has duty to look out for the man’s. That’s male headship.

    No. The man doesn’t have more of a duty to be concerned for the woman’s feelings. Adult men and women have responsibility not to abuse others (.) I can’t control anyone else, just myself.

    As I and many here have already pointed out, men who are complementarian or who believe in headship are no better at treating women and children well than men who aren’t. You seem to have missed this point completely. Directives from Jesus are to love your neighbor as yourself. This applies to men and women.

  335. Bridget wrote:

    men who are complementarian or who believe in headship are no better at treating women and children well than men who aren’t.

    Darn straight! That is the problem for comps. They cannot define it adequately and cannot express why it really matters beyond some esoteric theological point and only letting men be pastors. That is why the comps are not gaining any foothold.

  336. @ Gram3:

    Sanders, who was representing the complementarian view, says that speculation about the immanent Trinity does not belong in a gender debate.

    He’s right. And I’m glad to hear a comp say that (unless of course he turned around and speculated about the Trinity himself a second later). The Trinity has no bearing whatsoever on gender roles. The whole argument’s way overused by both sides and should be retired immediately (though it would of course have been better if it was never introduced since it’s completely irrelevant).

    I suspect most people don’t really care about hierarchy in the Trinity. The only reason anyone does at the moment, is because they think they need it to prop up their beliefs about marriage and ordination. You can tell because the question is almost never discussed except on forums about gender stuff, which means the Trinity’s not the real issue here. So my prediction? Almost all the heat about ESS would disappear overnight if it were separated from the gender debate. Which, I think, would go a long way toward answering the actual questions at stake about Trinitarian hierarchy or non-hierarchy.

  337. dee wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    men who are complementarian or who believe in headship are no better at treating women and children well than men who aren’t.

    Dee replied
    Darn straight! That is the problem for comps. They cannot define it adequately and cannot express why it really matters beyond some esoteric theological point and only letting men be pastors. That is why the comps are not gaining any foothold.

    I would not be surprised if some gender complementarians said that men who abuse women and children are not actual complementarians, which brings me to this page, which is somewhat related, and I’ve posted a link to it before:

    John Piper and the No True Complementarian Fallacy
    http://www.heretichusband.com/2013/01/john-piper-and-no-true-complementarian.html

    [MOD:Edit link format changed.]

  338. Eric Rasmusen wrote:

    But you have to be careful about tying together doctrine and behavior— in which last I include covering up scandal and not caring about people. A good preacher can be a bad pastor and a bad preacher can be a good pastor.

    This is very widely believed in the western Church, but I respectfully submit that it is founded on an important misconception.

    We have widely confused “spiritual” with “religious”. That is, spirituality is a kind of subset of ethics and philosophy; spiritual things have to do with church and carnal things have to do with daily life. This is compounded by the great academic and oratorical bias of reformation and post-reformation culture. So if someone looks the part in a church meeting, we give them a pass. This would explain how someone conspicuously lacking in love for people – the absolute, dominant hallmark of Jesus’ kingdom – can be hailed as a great preacher: he speaks eloquently about religious matters in church.

    This from John 6:

    It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe.

    If I understand the gospels, and especially what Jesus taught about the Kingdom, “spiritual” doesn’t mean “religiously moral”, it means “made of spirit”. A wooden magnet will never be magnetic no matter how carefully it’s painted to make it look real. In the same way, a person may be incapable of producing words that are spirit and life no matter how he frames them doctrinally or how much emotional or intellectual stimulation he gives to his audience. A bad tree cannot produce good fruit, and if – specifically – Mr Mahaney lacks love, his preaching can provide at best shallow and temporary benefit to a congregation.

  339. dee wrote:

    This makes no sense.No wonder the complementarian viewpoint doesn’t play well. It makes no sense.

    Dee, you’re right, and you’ve simplified a nearly intractable controversy.
    When all is said and done, all the Hebrew & Greek word studies argued from now until the Apocalypse, complementarian dogma makes no sense from a real life practical point of view.