Christianity Today: The Wartburg Watch Community Is Speaking Truth to Power

You have an engaged, honest blog community. Grateful for the site! -Michelle Van Loon

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=2941&picture=blog-letters
link

TWW readers-you are making a difference and it is starting to be noticed. On July 1, 2015, Michelle Van Loon and Marlena Graves wrote an article of Christianity Today's Her.meneutics titled Blogging Truth to Power: Why we listen to watchdogs and whistleblowers (from two of us who have been there). This article meant a lot to me since it catches the reasons why we all do what we do. The article mentioned TWW, Warren ThrockmortonJulie Anne Smith (Spiritual Sounding Board) Recovering Grace (Bill Gothard) and G.R.A.C.E.-Boz Tchividjian. I would add Amy Smith (Watchkeep)Janet MefferdTom Rich (FBC Jax Watchdog)Bob Jones (Do Right BJU)Calvary Temple and SGM Survivors, Musings from Under the Bus (Mars Hill), and many others. Update 7/4/15 Calvary Chapel AbusePhoenix Preacher and Thou Art the Man.

(If I have forgotten any, please let me know and I will add it to the list and try to get a page devoted to these groups.) 

Both Michelle Van Loon and Marlena Graves had bad experiences with a church. It is clear that they get what we are doing. Here was my tweet after I read the post.

Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 11.30.38 AM

It is hard to have to buck the entrenched evangelical *authority* based systems to challenge the status quo. That status quo leads to efforts to contain and deep six instances of abuse which include child abuse, child sex abuse, domestic violence and spiritual abuse. Some poo poo the last in that list-spiritual abuse- but one only has to look at the pain that has come out of ministries such as Mars Hill, Acts 29, and a myriad of mega churches and tiny churches throughout the world to know that it is alive and thriving.

Before you think that I am tooting my own horn, please look to the quote at the top of the page. Michelle Van Loon is one savvy writer. She is totally and absolutely correct. The success of this blog has little to do with us, The Deebs, and everything to do with all of you. A week ago, I was speaking with a reader who had an idea for a TWW post. He told me about a serious incident involving child sex abuse at a church. I had not yet heard about this situation.

We discussed the start of this blog back in 2009. No one was reading us in the early days except for a few stalwart readers who are still with us. The Deebs had hoped for 30-40 people who might read the blog ( I am not kidding) and that we could develop a community to discuss ideas and concerns. We had look hard find stories to discuss and happened on both Sovereign Grace Ministries and the concerns about abuse as expressed on SGM Survivors. We heard about Mark Driscoll through our friends and our kids. In fact, one of my earliest and most favorite of TWW titles was Brother Mark's Traveling Sex Show. (We reposted it in 2012 but it was originally posted in April 2009.) It has a great Neil Diamond song at the end which is so relevant, even today.

We were roundly criticized by some local theologians who told us that the leading Christian leaders supported Mark Driscoll as well as the ministry of SGM and that something must be wrong with us. One local leader even accused us of *character assassination.* If I had had the guts back then I would have replied, "Character? What character?" Yet we plowed on ahead.

Slowly, all of you began to join in. In the beginning, we had to find all the stories to write about on our own. But, as I told the reader last week, "Now I sit back, file my nails, sip coffee and look at the emails coming in."  wink  Every day we are confronted by dozens of potential stories dealing with abuse in the church. Some of us have also developed true friendships with one another and have met each other for what I call TWW soirees. 

It is all of you who point us to the information, tell us your stories, and provide insight and support to those who show up to comment here. We could not survive without you. So many of you have deep hearts and love for others. TWW is you-no doubt about it. We just organize it and help you all to tell your stories but, in the end, they are your stories and thoughts and this is your community.

Keeping that in mind, here are a few thoughts that I gleaned from Michelle and Marlena's article.

1. They get it because they, too, have been hurt by the church.

Personal experience is vital in understanding the issues of abuse. I would not have been nearly as empathetic if I had not had to confront a church regarding a pedophile situation and experience the incredible blow back. I needed to feel it so I can now feel what all of you have experienced. Here is what Michelle had to say about her experience.

 I was a naive sheep in this flock until I stumbled upon the elaborate efforts to keep hidden the pastor’s porn addiction and infidelity with a congregant. Anyone who got too close to this secret was branded a problem. I found myself drafted into the uncomfortable role of whistleblower. After my husband and I brought our concerns to church leadership, the elders made it clear that we were untrustworthy and troublemakers. After a number of failed attempts to resolve the situation, we left the church.

Here is what Marlena had to say about her experience.

When working for a Christian organization that many saw going in a troubling direction, we said something. We submitted our criticism, attended meetings, and talked to leaders at each level. Initially, we trusted the proper protocols and official channels set up to give and receive feedback. But not only did those in charge fail to address our concerns, they began enacting policies to punish those who spoke up.

2. They understand that those who raise an alarm often become subjected to criticism and abuse. Some leave the church for good.

Marlena said the following and many of you will be able to say "Been there, experienced that."

When church members criticize their leaders, they can find themselves subjected to gossip, shame, shunning, and even ex-communication. These consequences prove spiritually and emotionally damaging, sometimes enough to make people leave the church for good.

3. If a leader suggests ignoring whistleblowers, he is asking for unquestioning allegiance.

Michelle remarked:

When I see someone suggest those harboring hurt or suspicion toward the church are in sin, or that fellow believers would do best to ignore whistleblowers, my internal alarm sounds. Unquestioning allegiance to any earthly leader, even in the church, has proven in many cases hurtful rather than helpful.

4. When abuse is ignored, sometimes the only thing to do is to out the leaders.

Our readers had a front row seat to The Village Church abuse of Karen Hinkley and the subsequent admission of wrongdoing and apology by Matt Chandler. Do you think this would have happened without exposure by the blogs?

Marlena said:

When people go to their leaders in an effort to be faithful to the tenets of Matthew 18, and their leaders don’t listen, and even worse, when their leaders actively take part in abuse and mistreatment, they often have no recourse but to bring such abuses to light. Only under threat of public outing do many abusers and wrongdoers stop, apologize, or step down.

5. Are people blogging to simply complain or to care for the abused?

This, perhaps, is the most important point of this article. Why do we blog? We blog because we are compelled to speak for those who have been abused by the church. I personally blog because I have an unshakeable urge to write about the pain that I see. We write to provide a place for those who have been marginalized by an uncaring church bureaucracy.

We feel so strongly about this mission that we refuse to take any sort of income from advertising, book recommendation kickbacks, etc. Thankfully, our families support this mission and providesthe income we need to pay for technical support along with the occasional fun trip to meet readers. We are here for those who have been hurt. By removing the issue of money, we hope we send a message that we are in this because we love those who have been hurt or sidelined.

When we get critics, we determine their true agenda by this method. Do they offer up any words of concern for the victims prior to going for our jugular? If not, I know that they don't truly give a rip and merely want to defend their sacred cows which often means some celebrity pastor or church.

Michelle said:

But I do believe that some whistleblowers among us are exercising their gifts of prophecy and discernment when they raise their voices for the abused, marginalized, silenced, and disenfranchised for the good of the body. Whining can be the fruit of pride or immaturity, and tends to be focused on our individual, consumerist preferences. Whistleblowing is meant to awaken and protect others.

6. The critics of watchbloggers need to evaluate why these bloggers are striking a nerve.

Recently, I wrote two posts asking for stories by Dones (those who have left the church but still believe.) Those posts garnered 1400 comments with many sad stories of abuse and neglect link and link

Here is one comment from the comment section at the CT article. This is someone that does not get it.

Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 12.56.31 PM

Marlena said:

Some believers may be sick of so-called watchdog blogs and the endless updates about wrongdoing in Christendom. But I certainly am not. Especially for victims of abuse—spiritual, emotional, and sexual—these platforms are powerful and necessary. Before we instinctually respond with a quote from Romans 13 about church authority, let’s listen. Those speaking out may come from a place of firsthand knowledge, personal sacrifice, and holy anointing.

7. A critic of watchbloggers goes into hiding after the CT post.

 This is a rather amusing digression. In the above quotes by Marlena, she linked to a believer who is sick of watchdog blogs. However, that post was suddenly removed by Samuel James. Does the name ring a bell? It should.

Screen Shot 2015-07-03 at 1.06.31 PM

It is the Patheos page for Samuel James' blog, InklingationsWe wrote a post called Dear Samuel James: We Are Proud to Be Called Watchbloggers in response to his now deleted post: What Not to Do When a Fellow Christian Embarrasses The Rest of Us. He is a new hire by Russell Moore's, ERLC ( The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission) which is the group that is supposed to communicate values to our culture.

James is seriously opposed to wacthblogging. Here is how he communicates to people who are actually Christians. Can you imagine how he deals with those who don't believe as he must in his new position? These are some of his claims. Please go to the TWW post for explanations. Also, note he never, ever mentions victims in any substantial way except to say they leave the church because they don't love Jesus.

  • People leave the church because they don't love Jesus, not because they are abused or anything else. 
  • Watchblogs are out of bounds.
  • Make sure you never read comments on blogs and never comment yourself.
  • He claimed to be surprised by the response to his views on watchblogging.
  • He blocked a number of readers and called them *sock-puppets* including a judge,Tim Fall.
  • He claims he accept criticism.
  • He closed comments and when one person asked him why he said,

"If you are really confident in your views, open your comments"probably the most naked confession of outrage culture I've ever read.

  • He accused us of blogging for profit (money). 
  • He claimed folks became violent when he used the word bitter.
  • He claims there is real venom against the primacy of the local church.

Here's the bottom line. I am proud to be a watchblogger. I am not violent nor part of a culture of outrage for every little thing. However, I do get really upset when churches cover up child sex abuse. If one does not feel outrage for these children then that someone has a heart problem.

I do not make any money in blogging and, in fact, lose money with every day I have a blog. I am not bitter. I have great hope that our blog and others will promote positive changes in the church and prevent people from getting hurt unnecessarily. Here is a post I wrote which deals why I am not bitter in the least.

TWW allows for all sorts of comments, including serious disagreement. If we are going to dish out critique, we need to be able to take it. It is too bad that there are many pastors and leaders who will not allow comments, especially critical ones on their blogs. However, I have noticed that both Tim Challies and Kevin DeYoung have finally started doing so. Good for them.

It has been difficult keeping up with all the traffic since The Village Church story. However, the frustration of not being able to keep up with all of the emails, etc. clarified something for me. I want to be here for all of you. At times, it will be hard. However, the joy of being part of your stories and sharing those stories with the world means everything to me. You are making a difference and I am proud to be a small part of it.

(PS: If I am remiss in returning some emails, please send me another with the word "Urgent and forgotten" in the subject line.)

Also I am thankful for this country which gives private citizens the right of freedom of expression. I wish you all a Happy 4th and really hope you know more than the folks in the following video.

Comments

Christianity Today: The Wartburg Watch Community Is Speaking Truth to Power — 240 Comments

  1. Michelle and Marlena nailed it here: “Pastors and leaders unwilling to engage criticism or concern reveal a high stake in maintaining their ministry’s status quo.” As we saw with The Village Church, they only seem to change when they are publicly called out — going to them privately doesn’t do a bit of good and the concerned person is almost always labeled as a troublemaker.

  2. Hmmm….Samuel James…the same Samuel James who is a communications specialist with ERLC whose blog on Patheos doesn’t allow for comments? The same Samuel James I sent a long e-mail to last Sunday with answers to his blog post “Same Sex Marriage: 7 Questions for the Victors”? The same Samuel James who has not responded to my email over the last five days? I mean, even a “Hey, I don’t agree” would be sufficient. *That* Samuel James?

  3. Some of you may know that I’ve been working with a couple of people doing a documentary on Kent Hovind’s legal troubles. There’s been some interesting stuff come out of it. The director was able to round up two key jurors in the March case, which saw Hovind acquitted on three charges (and then the judge overturned the verdict on the fourth charge). Anyway, one of the jurors interviewed was ex-military, works in aerospace and lives in rural northwestern Florida. We’d probably disagree on politics. But when I listened to the rough audio of the interview and heard him talk about serving on that jury, it made me proud to be an American. It gave me hope about the future of the country.

  4. In a way, it’s kind of sad you had to write this, but I’m glad you did.

    I’m tired of people minimizing and bashing y’all for the stories y’all and others are bringing to light because it’s “messy” and you’re “just digging up dirt” and “Have you checked your heart?” and “have you tried privately talking to the pastor??”, etc.

    Whether folks like it or not or whether they agree with every assessment y’all come up with, someone has to do this, and if they don’t want to do it, they should have no problem letting someone else get their hands dirty. If you don’t like seeing it, don’t read – don’t bash the ones doing the digging for finding the dirt. That’s the callous me speaking bottom line, but really, if you’re not interested in seeing abuse in Christ’s name stopped, then you are really just fine with it continuing. It’s pretty simple.

  5. @ Leila:
    I agree. I have emailed leaders at TVC a few times about an issue that I had to deal with and no one seemed to be interested in what I had to say, namely because the person in question is a celebrity blogger for TGC and is BFF with the Chandlers. I even emailed them after I heard that TVC wanted people who have been hurt by them to come forward. My email was sent over two weeks ago. Not a peep from anyone.

  6. “1. They get it because they, too, have been hurt by the church.

    Personal experience is vital in understanding the issues of abuse. I would not have been nearly as empathetic if I had not had to confront a church regarding a pedophile situation and experience the incredible blow back. I needed to feel it so I can now feel what all of you have experienced. Here is what Michelle had to say about her experience.”

    This x1000. It does seem like those who’ve never experienced it tend to not get it. I just get blank or incredulous “no, really? Are you sure?” stares when relating aspects of my past church experiences with people. Fortunately, my wife – who did not attend an abusive church growing up – visited one of mine several times while we were dating and understands where I’m coming from.

    I don’t really know what to say to such people that have never experienced it, yet refuse to give it weight. Many are willing to bash churches for “bad doctrine”, such as pentacostalism or odd eschatology and such like, but refuse to or simply can’t see potential for systemic abuse.

    Thank God if you’ve never experienced it – truly – but don’t minimize what I went through.

  7. GovPappy wrote:

    “1. They get it because they, too, have been hurt by the church.
    Personal experience is vital in understanding the issues of abuse. I would not have been nearly as empathetic if I had not had to confront a church regarding a pedophile situation and experience the incredible blow back. I needed to feel it so I can now feel what all of you have experienced. Here is what Michelle had to say about her experience.”
    This x1000. It does seem like those who’ve never experienced it tend to not get it. I just get blank or incredulous “no, really? Are you sure?” stares when relating aspects of my past church experiences with people. Fortunately, my wife – who did not attend an abusive church growing up – visited one of mine several times while we were dating and understands where I’m coming from.
    I don’t really know what to say to such people that have never experienced it, yet refuse to give it weight. Many are willing to bash churches for “bad doctrine”, such as pentacostalism or odd eschatology and such like, but refuse to or simply can’t see potential for systemic abuse.
    Thank God if you’ve never experienced it – truly – but don’t minimize what I went through.

    You make a good point. The leaders who put down members for speaking up about issues in the church are the same leaders putting down other churches for how they do things. So, it is OK for them to have a “critical heart” but their members need to shut up.

  8. Christina wrote:

    @ Leila:
    I agree. I have emailed leaders at TVC a few times about an issue that I had to deal with and no one seemed to be interested in what I had to say, namely because the person in question is a celebrity blogger for TGC and is BFF with the Chandlers. I even emailed them after I heard that TVC wanted people who have been hurt by them to come forward. My email was sent over two weeks ago. Not a peep from anyone.

    Not surprising. It’s nice to see a public apology from the neocalvinist crowd, but it’s hard to give it too much credibility when it comes only at the end of a long and public process. Makes you wonder if it’s an apology or a more clever than average PR ploy.

  9. Law Prof wrote:

    Christina wrote:

    @ Leila:
    I agree. I have emailed leaders at TVC a few times about an issue that I had to deal with and no one seemed to be interested in what I had to say, namely because the person in question is a celebrity blogger for TGC and is BFF with the Chandlers. I even emailed them after I heard that TVC wanted people who have been hurt by them to come forward. My email was sent over two weeks ago. Not a peep from anyone.

    Not surprising. It’s nice to see a public apology from the neocalvinist crowd, but it’s hard to give it too much credibility when it comes only at the end of a long and public process. Makes you wonder if it’s an apology or a more clever than average PR ploy.

    I’m willing to not be too cynical on this one, given that in the admittedly short time I’ve been following these stories, I’ve never seen what Matt did before – a personal, in-home meeting with the offended party, who left satisfied. Yeah, maybe it wouldn’t have happened if bloggers didn’t raise cane, but I’m willing to give them some time to see if they actually realized their error and repented or if, like you said, it’s at least partly a publicity stunt/we-were-exposed “repentance”/”save the work!!” ploy. I find the latter easy to believe, but I think we saw some evidence for the former, which is encouraging to me, the incurable optimist.

    But I’d rather not help derail this discussion any further. Just my (current) final 2c on the TVC thing.

  10. Samuel James. Of course he is opposed to watchbloggers. He is part of the anointed class with the privilege to pontificate while never being questioned. His attitude no doubt arises from spending way too little time in TheRealWorld instead of churchville. And I say that as someone who has been in the church for a very long time. It has only been recently, however, that the culture of immature youth has taken over where young and passionate men like Samuel are used to promote the interests of certain older men who benefit from their unquestioning and fierce loyalty at the expense of the little ones in Jesus’ flock. Every one of them should be ashamed for dishonoring Christ that way.

    Jesus was the example for confronting entrenched religious leaders who used and abused the little people. The “watchbloggers” are turning over some tables because the men who should be doing so are too busy stuffing themselves at the buffet.

  11. “I was a naive sheep in this flock until I stumbled upon the elaborate efforts to keep hidden the pastor’s porn addiction and infidelity with a congregant. Anyone who got too close to this secret was branded a problem. I found myself drafted into the uncomfortable role of whistleblower. After my husband and I brought our concerns to church leadership, the elders made it clear that we were untrustworthy and troublemakers. After a number of failed attempts to resolve the situation, we left the church.”

    Trying to correct situations like these is why I blog about adultery and divorce on my blog, Divorce Minister: Taking Adultery Seriously. These situations break my heart as they are send the wrong message about my dear Lord and Savior. He does not find adultery acceptable at all; let alone the coverup of this evil (see Deut 22:22).

    I am SO thankful for places like TWW, Throckmorton, etc. who are courageous enough to say something to protect the vulnerable. And I would submit that many who leave the church in light of unaddressed adultery leave because of an innate understanding that their Jesus would not tolerate the abuse of faithful spouses and their supporters in the face of such evil. In other words, they are being more faithful to the true God than those leaders “protecting” the adulterous spouse.

  12. Michelle Van Loon and I came from the same church in Wisconsin. I want to write about this article as well. Really proud of her!

  13. Congrats to TWW for the shout out from CT!

    As for Chrisrina’s situation…how hard would it be for TVC to send an email. Even if they been overwhelmed or are on vacation-they could at least say so.

    It is so hard for someone who has been deeply hurt to reach back and initiate contact with those that hurt them deeply.

    The lack of response leads me to wonder whether they were really serious, or just saying the right thing for public consumption.

  14. I got up another post about how the SGM lawsuit helped me resolve the problem of evil. Its also my plea for Susan Burke and the plaintiffs to finish the job and hold CJ Mahaney accountable for allegedly covering up child sex abuse.

    https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2015/07/03/how-the-sovereign-grace-lawsuit-helped-me-resolve-the-problem-of-evil/

    I had one Tweet to CJ Mahaney and this is what I tweeted to CJ, Carolyn Mahaney and SG Louisville. The minion running CJ’s twitter blocked me but not Carolyn. Can we interpret this to mean Caolyn can take criticim better than her husband who was all about being a jock, being a man, and what manhood is. Lol!!

  15. doubtful wrote:

    Congrats to TWW for the shout out from CT!
    As for Chrisrina’s situation…how hard would it be for TVC to send an email. Even if they been overwhelmed or are on vacation-they could at least say so.
    It is so hard for someone who has been deeply hurt to reach back and initiate contact with those that hurt them deeply.
    The lack of response leads me to wonder whether they were really serious, or just saying the right thing for public consumption.

    My cynical side says they haven’t responded because I am not a big news story, and my beef was with someone who is popular in the blogosphere. It is unfortunate that a lowly minion like myself is discredited simply because I am not “popular” or run with the cool kids. Spiritual abuse and overstepping your authority happens from members as well. I lost friends and a lot more because of the situation, and I think it is sad that people sweep it under the rug or dismiss it. I am definitely done with A29 and do believe their system is abusive. And that is not me being cynical or bitter, I am just stating what I have seen.

  16. I’m going to see Terminator in a couple of hours. Are the Deebs the theological equivalent of the Terminator to spiritually abusive churches?

    Mom!! Can I hear you say to CJ Mahaney or Mark Driscoll, “Hasta la vista baby” :-p

  17. @ GovPappy:

    I am not picking on you but picking up on what you said as I hear it quite a bit from people in these sort of churches who have gone through something similar. Since the churches are large and operate as closed systems and a distant pastor what would repentance (change of direction) look like for them? TVC made it clear the membership covenant was biblically fine.

    I mean they might appear nicer and ask people to approach them with their concerns, etc. But really, what would repentance look like? I just cannot seem to get a grip on what people are thinking. What I think might be happening is everyone seems to be defining repentance as “I am sorry”…an apology and admitting they did not handle something correctly. That is not repentance. Repentance would require a total change in how they operate.

  18. GovPappy wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Christina wrote:
    @ Leila:
    I agree. I have emailed leaders at TVC a few times about an issue that I had to deal with and no one seemed to be interested in what I had to say, namely because the person in question is a celebrity blogger for TGC and is BFF with the Chandlers. I even emailed them after I heard that TVC wanted people who have been hurt by them to come forward. My email was sent over two weeks ago. Not a peep from anyone.
    Not surprising. It’s nice to see a public apology from the neocalvinist crowd, but it’s hard to give it too much credibility when it comes only at the end of a long and public process. Makes you wonder if it’s an apology or a more clever than average PR ploy.
    I’m willing to not be too cynical on this one, given that in the admittedly short time I’ve been following these stories, I’ve never seen what Matt did before – a personal, in-home meeting with the offended party, who left satisfied. Yeah, maybe it wouldn’t have happened if bloggers didn’t raise cane, but I’m willing to give them some time to see if they actually realized their error and repented or if, like you said, it’s at least partly a publicity stunt/we-were-exposed “repentance”/”save the work!!” ploy. I find the latter easy to believe, but I think we saw some evidence for the former, which is encouraging to me, the incurable optimist.
    But I’d rather not help derail this discussion any further. Just my (current) final 2c on the TVC thing.

    I agree with you. It may have been real repentance. God knows, so perhaps I shouldn’t be too quick to judge, but if they are now ignoring emailed concerns, they appear not to have taken the repentance to heart. Of course, I have a few emails I’ve forgotten over the years.

  19. @ Law Prof:

    Chandler is no dummy. He sat on Acts 29 Board with Driscoll and took over from him. He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.

  20. Lydia wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    Chandler is no dummy. He sat on Acts 29 Board with Driscoll and took over from him. He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.

    I agree, but The Village was doing the same thing Mars Hill was doing in terms of spiritual abuse. I was there for about 4 years and saw many church discipline cases that led to people fleeing church altogether. One of my closest friends had her name publicly called out at a membership meeting and people were told not to contact her unless they asked her to repent. I tried contacting her numerous times to get together just to hang out, I wasn’t interested in forcing her to do something her heart wasn’t ready for. She never returned my calls or texts, and I believe it was because she didn’t trust anyone’s motives. Very sad. I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.

  21. “Some poo poo the last in that list-spiritual abuse- but one only has to look at the pain”
    See, I started reading your blog back when I didn’t know your character and I’ve been encouraged along the way by new friends with character. The interest I had for this blog and others grew out of google searching about spiritual abuse after painful experiences and reading some good books including by Johnson/Van Vonderen and Arterburn/Felton. You both and commenters were saying things few others were brave enough to say. Then Julie Anne happened. I was shocked that any pastor would sue to protect his image. I also heard about child sex abuse cover ups in ABWE. SGM was one thing, not really connected to me, but ABWE was personal. I got mad. I hurt. I grieved. And you guys and many others were speaking out. The Gospel Coalition was blocking godly Christians whose crime was caring that people like Nate Mirales were allowed to leave the Rast Coast and abuse further people as far away as Vegas, where I lived at the time. Despicable. And I found when I talked publicly in comments on another blog that I was accused of cowardice and trash talk because I didn’t sign my name to the facts I related. I called the bluff and put my name to it. You guys have given ordinary Christians and others hurt by church a safe place to heal and motivation to work towards transparency among God’s people. I love that. I heartily endorse that. I am so thankful for what God has done because you guys were willing to take risks even when you were slandered and publicly shamed by so many. You have never been about nastiness as some of those “ministries” are but about truth and transparency. Your integrity has been a blessing to me personally. I want you guys at TWW to know how much you mean to all of us anonymous individuals for whom Christ died. We may not be famous or “wise” but we are all the Body. Thanks for taking the risks and not letting it go to your heads. Please don’t stop until God says to stop. Please keep pointing people to truth and love. We love you!! Thank you TWW.

  22. Lydia wrote:

    @ GovPappy:
    I am not picking on you but picking up on what you said as I hear it quite a bit from people in these sort of churches who have gone through something similar. Since the churches are large and operate as closed systems and a distant pastor what would repentance (change of direction) look like for them? TVC made it clear the membership covenant was biblically fine.
    I mean they might appear nicer and ask people to approach them with their concerns, etc. But really, what would repentance look like? I just cannot seem to get a grip on what people are thinking. What I think might be happening is everyone seems to be defining repentance as “I am sorry”…an apology and admitting they did not handle something correctly. That is not repentance. Repentance would require a total change in how they operate.

    Exactly. And I don’t see a total change in operation happening any time soon. It seems as if this commentor is saying his story with abusive churches is validated, but people who still have concerns and hurt from TVC don’t have any validation since Chandler apologized. Maybe I am reading his comment wrong, but I thought this thread was about church abuse, so how are we derailing the conversation if we talk about churches that spiritually abuse people?

  23. @ Christina:

    Christina, I am so sorry and I have no doubt what you say is true about it being abusive and authoritarian all along. What rot they put peoples names out like that telling others how to deal with them. But we saw that same type of micromanagement in their emails about Karen and her Ex and how to “talk” to them when they came back. Adults have to be told this?

    What I was referring to in that comment was Chandler’s response to what happened with Karen. He knew he was like Driscoll in terms of polity and operations and now many people outside TVC are getting an inside look. That always makes them very nervous because members tend to start asking questions when that happens and money starts to not flow as freely.

    I think he was saving his position/empire. I don’t think that he thought he had a choice in how he responded given the recent history of SGM, Mars Hill, Acts 29 etc. As I said, Chandler is no dummy. I don’t think his beliefs have changed at all. And I say that as someone who used to be very involved in the mega world. Image and perception are everything in that business. There is no way around that. They live and breath image and perception as they operate as closed systems.

  24. Christina wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    @ Law Prof:
    Chandler is no dummy. He sat on Acts 29 Board with Driscoll and took over from him. He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.
    I agree, but The Village was doing the same thing Mars Hill was doing in terms of spiritual abuse. I was there for about 4 years and saw many church discipline cases that led to people fleeing church altogether. One of my closest friends had her name publicly called out at a membership meeting and people were told not to contact her unless they asked her to repent. I tried contacting her numerous times to get together just to hang out, I wasn’t interested in forcing her to do something her heart wasn’t ready for. She never returned my calls or texts, and I believe it was because she didn’t trust anyone’s motives. Very sad. I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.

    But of course, while they get to call people out in such a manner and even devote PPT presentations(!) to the calling out thereof, trust me, if these people are anything like what I’ve seen, then just try and whisper a concern about them or fellow luminaries to a friend and see how long before you are destroyed as a “divisive gossip”.

  25. Dee’s… You forgot to mention Calvary Chapel Abuse in your list of watchdog groups… Also Phenoix preacher

  26. Law Prof wrote:

    Christina wrote:
    Lydia wrote:
    @ Law Prof:
    Chandler is no dummy. He sat on Acts 29 Board with Driscoll and took over from him. He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.
    I agree, but The Village was doing the same thing Mars Hill was doing in terms of spiritual abuse. I was there for about 4 years and saw many church discipline cases that led to people fleeing church altogether. One of my closest friends had her name publicly called out at a membership meeting and people were told not to contact her unless they asked her to repent. I tried contacting her numerous times to get together just to hang out, I wasn’t interested in forcing her to do something her heart wasn’t ready for. She never returned my calls or texts, and I believe it was because she didn’t trust anyone’s motives. Very sad. I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.
    But of course, while they get to call people out in such a manner and even devote PPT presentations(!) to the calling out thereof, trust me, if these people are anything like what I’ve seen, then just try and whisper a concern about them or fellow luminaries to a friend and see how long before you are destroyed as a “divisive gossip”.

    I have already been called a gossip. And most recently, I was called bitter. Whether that is true or not, it still doesn’t excuse spiritual abuse. And if I do have bitterness that needs to be dealt with, would it be all that surprising?

  27. @ Gram3:

    This Samuel James?

    https://erlc.com/staff-directory/

    The one who is a “communications specialists” for the SBC’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission? The hand picked spokesgroup FOR the SBC?

    Wonder how he defines LIBERTY considering his blog post about watchbloggers? My guess is his boss, Russ Moore, defines it for him. Or perhaps Joe Carter mentors him?

    The ERLC is one reason ALONE not to support the SBC.

  28. I will believe that CT takes this blog and others like it seriously if/when Mark Galli and other head honchos at CT take it seriously. No offense intended, but the people who run the place are stuck in a very particular sovial and political rut, and i don’t see that changing in the forseeable future (unfortunately).

  29. Christina wrote:

    I have already been called a gossip. And most recently, I was called bitter. Whether that is true or not, it still doesn’t excuse spiritual abuse. And if I do have bitterness that needs to be dealt with, would it be all that surprising?

    Ah, calling someone bitter is the typical response. That means they don’t want to deal with it.

    I would worry about you if you did not have some anger at any sort of abuse or injustice. And worse, they use Jesus Christ TO abuse others. Just look them in the eye next time… and do an Elie Wiesel and say, aren’t you angry when people use Jesus Christ to abuse or do injustice toward people?

    They are the ones with the problem!

  30. Christina wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Christina wrote:
    Lydia wrote:
    @ Law Prof:
    Chandler is no dummy. He sat on Acts 29 Board with Driscoll and took over from him. He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.
    I agree, but The Village was doing the same thing Mars Hill was doing in terms of spiritual abuse. I was there for about 4 years and saw many church discipline cases that led to people fleeing church altogether. One of my closest friends had her name publicly called out at a membership meeting and people were told not to contact her unless they asked her to repent. I tried contacting her numerous times to get together just to hang out, I wasn’t interested in forcing her to do something her heart wasn’t ready for. She never returned my calls or texts, and I believe it was because she didn’t trust anyone’s motives. Very sad. I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.
    But of course, while they get to call people out in such a manner and even devote PPT presentations(!) to the calling out thereof, trust me, if these people are anything like what I’ve seen, then just try and whisper a concern about them or fellow luminaries to a friend and see how long before you are destroyed as a “divisive gossip”.
    I have already been called a gossip. And most recently, I was called bitter. Whether that is true or not, it still doesn’t excuse spiritual abuse. And if I do have bitterness that needs to be dealt with, would it be all that surprising?

    I was called a “destroyer of the church” on one occasion and a “DSM IV sociopath” on another. That was just to my face, can’t imagine the talk behind my back.

  31. @ doubtful:

    having been a member of TVC a while back their staff is HORRIBLE about responding to email. I was a highly placed volunteer, regularly rubbing shoulders with the exec staff and leaders and still wouldn’t hear back with actually asking about my email in person.

  32. @ Christina:

    During my tenure at TVC this happened too many times and I always wondered why they had to shame people in front of the church. That doesn’t help anyone “repent” but drives them to be done with church altogether.

  33. gabriel wrote:

    @ Christina:
    During my tenure at TVC this happened too many times and I always wondered why they had to shame people in front of the church. That doesn’t help anyone “repent” but drives them to be done with church altogether.

    Sure, that’s how they get rid of the unwanted.

  34. @ Christina:
    I agree that ACTS 29 is abusive.

    I’m sorry that they have, yet again, chosen to ignore one of the “little people” 🙁

    I’ve been there…it hurts, but I hope the best for you a you move forward.

  35. I am surprised that CT posted anything about watchdog bloggers. Was it in the main mag or shuffled off to a spin off pub. I was a subscriber for many years and quit. Why? Because it had become the house organ for certain in groups and had lost any journalistic integrity. Published puff pieces on the popular mega pastors who were, in fact, abusing their church budgets and membership. Rarely on the side of the abused, often on the side of the abusers. Which is why I refuse to support it with my $.

    Sorry, but I took an oath to tell the truth, and I do.

  36. Christina wrote:

    My cynical side says they haven’t responded because I am not a big news story, and my beef was with someone who is popular in the blogosphere. It is unfortunate that a lowly minion like myself is discredited simply because I am not “popular” or run with the cool kids.

    Just like High School.
    “OOOOOOO! POP-U-LAR!!!!!”

  37. Lydia wrote:

    Wonder how he defines LIBERTY considering his blog post about watchbloggers? My guess is his boss, Russ Moore, defines it for him. Or perhaps Joe Carter mentors him?

    Simple:
    LIBERTY = I GET TO DO ANYTHING *I* WANT! I GET TO GET AWAY WITH ANYTHING *I* WANT TO DO! AND YOU CAN’T!

  38. Lydia wrote:

    Wonder how he defines LIBERTY considering his blog post about watchbloggers? My guess is his boss, Russ Moore, defines it for him. Or perhaps Joe Carter mentors him?

    Well, he certainly sounds exactly like Joe Carter, but isn’t that how the young guys advance in that system? What would be shocking is if one of the lower-tier guys woke up and said “enough” and walked away. That would be news. Russell Moore went from politics to…politics via SBTS/Mohler.

    I am all for church people speaking up about religious liberty and ethics. We don’t need a huge staff in D.C. to do that when there are so many other needs. And how can Russell Moore speak exactly what every Southern Baptist is thinking.

    What they believe about Liberty is that every male in SBC leadership has liberty to say whatever affirms their respective Mentors. Everyone else, including every last female has no liberty or right to say anything except “Yessir.”

  39. Law Prof wrote:

    I was called a “destroyer of the church” on one occasion and a “DSM IV sociopath” on another. That was just to my face, can’t imagine the talk behind my back.

    Wow, there’s no way I can top that. I just got the bitter, divisive and emotional baggage cards played on me. And a revisionist story told to other people about our private meetings. Note to all who observe the niceties of approaching leadership privately. Take a witness along. It’s good to have witnesses, especially those who tell you what the leaders are saying even though they are not supposed to.

  40. @ numo:
    I’m amazed that CT published anything favorable about watchbloggers. At all. My opinion is that if journalists at CT and other places were doing their jobs, the watchbloggers would have lots more spare time. Journalists no longer do journalism.

  41. Michael at Phoenix Preacher and Alex come to mind, they have been a great help to me as has all here and at JA board.

  42. Gram3 wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    I was called a “destroyer of the church” on one occasion and a “DSM IV sociopath” on another. That was just to my face, can’t imagine the talk behind my back.
    Wow, there’s no way I can top that. I just got the bitter, divisive and emotional baggage cards played on me. And a revisionist story told to other people about our private meetings. Note to all who observe the niceties of approaching leadership privately. Take a witness along. It’s good to have witnesses, especially those who tell you what the leaders are saying even though they are not supposed to.

    At least I got the full force as they took off the masks and got down and dirty. That’s not so bad, you can categorize it for what it is–evil–and move on. You probably got the worst of it because it sounds like they tried to maintain a sheen of “godly concern” for you. That’s far harder to deal with, because you’ll drive yourself insane wondering if they’re right and it’s really not you after all. It’s gaslighting.

    The worst sort of bullies, in my opinion the most diabolical I’ve seen, are the ones who “bro”-nice you while quietly slipping in the knife, then destroy your relationships with others behind your back. They don’t give you any traction, if they were to at least be honest monsters you could scream at them, tell them off good and be done with it.

    No, I got off easy compared with you.

  43. @ Arce:
    I very much agree with you about the way CT is run these days. I quit reading it in 2008, when a certain spin became very obvious.

  44. Law Prof wrote:

    You probably got the worst of it because it sounds like they tried to maintain a sheen of “godly concern” for you. That’s far harder to deal with, because you’ll drive yourself insane wondering if they’re right and it’s really not you after all. It’s gaslighting.
    The worst sort of bullies, in my opinion the most diabolical I’ve seen, are the ones who “bro”-nice you while quietly slipping in the knife, then destroy your relationships with others behind your back. They don’t give you any traction, if they were to at least be honest monsters you could scream at them, tell them off good and be done with it.

    Bingo. As I always say now, I will take a direct consistent jerk any day over the gas lighting, covert aggression, deceit and fake niceness. It is the MOST evil of all, IMO, using a Jesus plastic fish. Masquerading as “light”. And my favorite then playing the victim card when it comes to light.

  45. numo wrote:

    @ Arce:
    I very much agree with you about the way CT is run these days. I quit reading it in 2008, when a certain spin became very obvious.

    It’s a business. It’s about the money. Advertising dollars. What’s a poor blogger with a computer compared with a megachurch or denomination that might advertise their megaconferences and extravaganzas in your magazine? Perhaps the CT higher ups care every bit as much about propping up their organization and keeping their income rolling in as the average megachurch pastor.

    Too many people want a prop to exalt themselves, either as a journalist, leader, pastor, conference speaker, sycophant, hanger-on, or wannabe–and Jesus sells if you’re reprobate enough to use Him for your own. Unless a Christian is willing to die for the truth or throw themselves between an abuser and the abused, unless we’re willing to be fired, ruined, humiliated, degraded, estranged and destroyed for Jesus, what is Jesus to us?

  46. Law Prof wrote:

    Sure, that’s how they get rid of the unwanted.

    That is only a side benefit, the main reason despots put someone against the wall is for the benefit of onlookers.

  47. Law Prof wrote:

    You probably got the worst of it because it sounds like they tried to maintain a sheen of “godly concern” for you.

    Sounds like you got a hold of their playbook. The condescension from the 30 year old appalled me.

  48. Samuel James …… Ooh, I can see it now ….. “The Baptist Faith and Message 2016 Article XIV: Thou shalt neither read nor comment on TWW, or any other watchblogs!” I wonder if he will become president of the ELRC when Russie moves on up the patriarchal ladder?

    For the past few years, my marriage has been very rocky because of my husband’s and our church’s stance on “Biblical Patriarchy”. I had no idea how bad some so-called churches could be until I started googling to learn more about the SBC, as well as other faiths.

    I found TWW a couple of months ago, when I was reading about 9Marks and SGM.
    I love TWW ….. I’ve been exploring old posts.
    Keep on “speaking truth to power”, and truth to all! Let’s exercise our First Ammendment rights!

  49. A quick search brought up a few other comments from a Bob Brunswick. One was concerning a CT article “Mark Driscoll Resigns from Mars Hill” posted October 15th 2014 on a facebook page:

    “Now we’ll see which members are followers of Jesus or Mark. Keep going, Mars Hill! I think Mark is a great man of God who is a victim of this PC loving and oversensitive society. Score one for Satan!”

    When you swim in a sewer you loose your sense of smell. Need we say anything more about Bob?

  50. Bill M wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    You probably got the worst of it because it sounds like they tried to maintain a sheen of “godly concern” for you.
    Sounds like you got a hold of their playbook. The condescension from the 30 year old appalled me.

    I know the playbook pretty well. Never been a leader in a mega nor have I ever been in the same room with any of the luminaries other than John Piper (and he was a massive disappointment, I “knew him” before he was the demigod of the new reformed young guns, and I always have been nonplussed at the gushing over that person), but I’ve been a leader in two cultic churches that either as a whole followed the playbook precisely or had a head honcho who followed it. It’s been an education.

  51. Bill M wrote:

    A quick search brought up a few other comments from a Bob Brunswick. One was concerning a CT article “Mark Driscoll Resigns from Mars Hill” posted October 15th 2014 on a facebook page:
    “Now we’ll see which members are followers of Jesus or Mark. Keep going, Mars Hill! I think Mark is a great man of God who is a victim of this PC loving and oversensitive society. Score one for Satan!”
    When you swim in a sewer you loose your sense of smell. Need we say anything more about Bob?

    Saw some of those myself, Bob doesn’t present himself as too thoughtful in all matter Driscoll, does he?

  52. Great article Dee and congratulations to all those who are prepared to speak out. It can be a lonely path that comes with many arrows fired at you. But we have put on the full armour of God so we are protected from these fiery arrows.

    Because we are seen to be the wrong-doer but speaking out and clearing out is what Jesus did. He didn’t go around upholding the reputation of the temple or remaining silent when the Pharisees hurt the very people they were to shepherd.

    What Bob Brunswick wrote is ridiculous. Attributing Mark Driscoll’s style and aggressiveness to the Apostle Paul. So I gather Mark Driscoll can trace his genealogy back to the Apostle Paul. I think Bob Brunswick’s statement is questionable for a Christian.

  53. doubtful wrote:

    There’s a woman in the comments section who seems desperate to tell her story.
    I wonder if Dee or Deb have talked to her yet?

    If you are referring to me, I am not so much desperate as I am perplexed at how someone could say talking about TVC and the abuse there is getting the conversation off track. I was under the assumption that this was a site for people who have dealt with abuse, so it is weird that someone would sort of defend Matt Chandler just because he made it known to the public that he apologized. I was especially confused because the person who said it has been a victim of church abuse. And yes, I have spoken to Dee and Deb via email before I made these comments.

  54. Christina wrote:

    doubtful wrote:
    There’s a woman in the comments section who seems desperate to tell her story.
    I wonder if Dee or Deb have talked to her yet?
    If you are referring to me, I am not so much desperate as I am perplexed at how someone could say talking about TVC and the abuse there is getting the conversation off track. I was under the assumption that this was a site for people who have dealt with abuse, so it is weird that someone would sort of defend Matt Chandler just because he made it known to the public that he apologized. I was especially confused because the person who said it has been a victim of church abuse. And yes, I have spoken to Dee and Deb via email before I made these comments.

    I don’t think he meant anything particularly acerbic. You ought to just go ahead and tell your story–that is, if you feel like it. I think GP was speaking primarily to my cynicism about MC, not yours. Whether MC really apologized from his heart or not, you’d still have a valid point in telling your story or giving your opinion about whether MC was being opportunistic or not. That’s on point for this blog and you’d have every right to state your opinion.

  55. gabriel wrote:

    @ Christina:

    During my tenure at TVC this happened too many times and I always wondered why they had to shame people in front of the church.

    Make an Example of one and a hundred will fall right into line.

  56. Law Prof wrote:

    Saw some of those myself, Bob doesn’t present himself as too thoughtful in all matter Driscoll, does he?

    More like Harley Quinn gushing over her Joker.
    “I WANT TO HAVE HIS CHILD!!!!!!”

  57. Lydia wrote:

    Christina wrote:

    I have already been called a gossip. And most recently, I was called bitter. Whether that is true or not, it still doesn’t excuse spiritual abuse. And if I do have bitterness that needs to be dealt with, would it be all that surprising?

    “Brethren, even if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; each one looking to yourself, so that you too will not be tempted.” Galatians 6:1

    It seems from the bible that if you are a gossip and bitter, that the spiritual ones at your church have a duty to restore you. Did that happen?

  58. Lydia wrote:

    Christina wrote:

    I have already been called a gossip. And most recently, I was called bitter. Whether that is true or not, it still doesn’t excuse spiritual abuse. And if I do have bitterness that needs to be dealt with, would it be all that surprising?

    Ah, calling someone bitter is the typical response. That means they don’t want to deal with it.

    Uhhh, but they HAVE to deal with it. Galatians 6:1

  59. Law Prof wrote:

    It’s a business. It’s about the money. Advertising dollars. What’s a poor blogger with a computer compared with a megachurch or denomination that might advertise their megaconferences and extravaganzas in your magazine?

    Bingo — this is exactly why CT and lots of Christian organizations are struggling to know which way to jump. They know who pays their bills (advertisers and institutional and church leader subscribers) and they believe they must toe the evangelical line: Evangelicals are all good. Outsiders and critics are all bad or very suspect.

    Take a look at what internet search keywords drive traffic to ChristianityToday.com, according to Alexa.com:
    1. christianity today 4.01%
    2. ed stetzer 0.95%
    3. world vision 0.88%
    4. mark driscoll 0.78%
    5. dave ramsey 0.75%

    Another shocking thing is that CT gets only about double or triple the number of visitors that TWW does… and TWW is run by three people. If I were CT, I would be thinking about that.

    I truly understand CT’s fear. They know that the word police and thought police are vicious. They saw what happened to Focus and to World Vision, and they are too afraid to take the risk. They need a bold new magazine or website. I think Strang did a good job in launching Relevant magazine — designed for Millennials. It’s not perfect, but it’s going in the right direction.

    Maybe they need a new Watchdog magazine. After all, TWW gets more comments (but not more views) than Christianity Today does. The TWW audience is far more engaged than the CT audience.

    Thanks to the internet, now the world changes faster than the older generation dies out. Scroll down this infographic for proof — http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-pace-of-social-change/

    I would suggest ChristianityToday.com launch a new watchdog site such as TWW and find a completely new way of monetizing it.

  60. mirele wrote:

    We’d probably disagree on politics. But when I listened to the rough audio of the interview and heard him talk about serving on that jury, it made me proud to be an American. It gave me hope about the future of the country.

    Thank you for this comment. Happy 4th to you.

  61. GovPappy wrote:

    at’s the callous me speaking bottom line, but really, if you’re not interested in seeing abuse in Christ’s name stopped, then you are really just fine with it continuing. It’s pretty simple.

    Callous is not a word I would use to describe you. You are one nice guy. I am glad I met you on Twitter, I think? Happy 4th.

  62. Gram3 wrote:

    Samuel James. Of course he is opposed to watchbloggers.

    Not only does he not have the courage to face comments, he pulls the post down when there is some pushback. Can you imagine if he was a pastor or an elder and you had a disagreement with him?

  63. @ doubtful:
    First, thank you for your kind comment in the last thread.

    Secondly, i know about this situation and it involves a well known(in certain circles) blogger who is not currently on staff at TVC which makes it a bit tricky.

    I have an idea and I plan to deal with this. If I do not get a response, I will blog on it.

  64. @ Eagle:
    I love the Terminator series. Arnie has many faults but this is not one of them. I heard that the stunt people actually flipped the bus (for real) in a bus scene.

  65. Lydia wrote:

    . He knew he had a disaster on his hands. A big one.

    And the Acts 29 culture appears to be one heckuva mess. Did you see some of those stories by Dones?

  66. Christina wrote:

    I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.

    Let me ask you a question. When their names were put up on the screen, did they tell people what they did? Also, was this a general meeting in which all however many thousand could attend?

    I have some interest in learning the procedure that was used.

  67. Melody wrote:

    . I want you guys at TWW to know how much you mean to all of us anonymous individuals for whom Christ died. We may not be famous or “wise” but we are all the Body. Thanks for taking the risks and not letting it go to your heads. Please don’t stop until God says to stop. Please keep pointing people to truth and love. We love you!!

    What a wonderful thing to say.

    For the first year of blogging, we, too, were anonymous because our families were worried about our safety. After the first year, we realized that we could help our anonymous readers by putting our names on the blog. So, when critics complained about those who were anonymous, we said that our names were on the blog and that we believed in anonymity for our readers so their stories could be told.

    That criticism went away immediately and I believe we have given credence to the many good people who for good reason must be anonymous. Our names, in some respect, cosign that comment.

    We love you as well.

  68. @ Lydia:
    I agree – but it starts somewhere, theoretically. My beliefs didn’t change overnight, and I wouldn’t expect theirs to either. It could be a starting point, is all I’m saying. I highly doubt they’re going to change any of the core beliefs that got them into this mess though. Too much at stake.

  69. @ Gram3:

    take a recording device in your pocket or purse, or put it on the table and refuse to meet without a recording

  70. So, here it is, the Fourth of July and a great opportunity to reflect on the significance of true freedom in Christ. For what it’s worth, I’ve been thinking lately about the intersection between (1) “functionaries” (those who run the organizational system side of things, which insulates authoritarian leaders from direct involvement and gives them plausible deniability about the system) and (2) “anti-watchbloggers” who criticize writers and websites that expose so-called “dirty laundry” of the Church. Not all those who critique are functionaries, but I suspect that many are, as there seems to be a noticeable pattern that they fight against watchbloggers on specific situations rather than on all situations.

    Anyway, it seems to me that many such critics have a pretty unsophisticated perception of what’s going on. Understandably, if they’ve been groomed theologically and personally to be convinced that anything spoken against ANY leader — or just against THEIR leader — is sin, then their simplistic view makes sense within their doctrinal system. But it’s insidiously sophomoric to conflate all kinds of critique blogs into the same cauldron, as if they are all about muckraking for reasons of bitterness, revenge, filthy lucre, etc. They fail to see the many kinds of situations labeled as “watchblogs”:

    * Some deal with one person or organization primarily (such as Recovering Grace and Bill Gothard/IBLP/ATI; or Joyful Exiles, Mars Hill Refuge, Musings from Under the Bus, and others on Mark Driscoll/Mars Hill). Some deal with one key topic (G.R.A.C.E. and child sexual abuse). Some deal with multiple topics and systems (such as The Wartburg Watch, Spiritual Sounding Board, and Warren Throckmorton).

    * Some are individuals, some are groups.

    * Some are methodically building a case about a specific individual or entity or issue, and these are often collect primary sources that others use in writing interpretive pieces about that or other situations.

    * There is a range of commenting policies for such sites, and differences in the communities of readers/commenters they attract into the dialogue in terms of Christians, nones, dones, gones, people of other religious backgrounds, etc.

    * Some are informal, some are non-profits (like G.R.A.C.E), but none — NONE — that I am aware of are for-profit enterprises.

    If these anti-watchbloggers critics object on theological bases to the exposure to the light of acts done in the darkness by allegedly malignant ministers, I’m not sure they have a very strong understanding of *evil* and how it plays out in the structures of society.

    If they are commenting based on their on due-diligence research and discernment, fine. Perhaps there is hope for them to eventually arrive at some other conclusion based on critical reasoning skills plus practical ethics of how God expects us to treat people.

    But if they are mere functionaries of their authoritarian leaders, it seems hope for coming to their senses is slim — unless they themselves eventually experience the kind of spiritual abuse and scapegoating that they themselves currently disbelieve. I wouldn’t wish spiritual abuse on anyone, but it may prove the only providential way to awaken their conscience and compassion to the reality of damage such sins and evil inflict.

  71. @dee … certainly Wenatchee the Hatchet should be added to the list of investigative reporters for his focus on collating and interpreting primary source materials on the alleged malignancies of Mark Driscoll and his Mars Hill Church system.

  72. dee wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    I am interested in this process. If I can get some info, I might want to shoot something past you.

    Shoot away, I’ll bet we’re thinking in the same direction about that powerpoint exposure thing.

  73. Eagle wrote:

    I’m going to see Terminator in a couple of hours. Are the Deebs the theological equivalent of the Terminator to spiritually abusive churches?
    Mom!! Can I hear you say to CJ Mahaney or Mark Driscoll, “Hasta la vista baby” :-p

    How about “I’ll Be Back”?

  74. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    I wouldn’t wish spiritual abuse on anyone, but it may prove the only providential way to awaken their conscience and compassion to the reality of damage such sins and evil inflict.

    Just like during the late Cold War. I noticed that all the gushing praises of Communism came from those who never lived under that system; usually they were Baby Boomers from rich families. None of those who actually had to live under the USSR’s reach — the ones the Enlightened put down with a condescending pat-pat-pat on the head — ever had anything good to say about it.

  75. An Attorney wrote:

    @ Gram3:
    take a recording device in your pocket or purse, or put it on the table and refuse to meet without a recording

    As long as you’re in a one party consent state.

  76. Christina wrote:

    I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.

    You mean the doubleplusunpersons and doublepluscrimethinkers?

  77. Law Prof wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:
    @ Gram3:
    take a recording device in your pocket or purse, or put it on the table and refuse to meet without a recording
    As long as you’re in a one party consent state.

    Of course, you throw it up on the table and make it clear you’re recording, as An Attorney mentioned, and they keep on talking, that’s consent.

  78. Eagle wrote:

    Can we interpret this to mean Carolyn can take criticism better than her husband who was all about being a jock, being a man, and what manhood is. Lol!!

    Can we interpret this to mean Carolyn is Only a Woman (not The MoG) so they don’t care?
    (chuckle chuckle)

  79. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    brad/futuristguy wrote:
    I wouldn’t wish spiritual abuse on anyone, but it may prove the only providential way to awaken their conscience and compassion to the reality of damage such sins and evil inflict.
    Just like during the late Cold War. I noticed that all the gushing praises of Communism came from those who never lived under that system; usually they were Baby Boomers from rich families. None of those who actually had to live under the USSR’s reach — the ones the Enlightened put down with a condescending pat-pat-pat on the head — ever had anything good to say about it.

    And there was an actual term for such people: “Useful Idiots”

  80. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Just like during the late Cold War. I noticed that all the gushing praises of Communism came from those who never lived under that system; usually they were Baby Boomers from rich families. None of those who actually had to live under the USSR’s reach — the ones the Enlightened put down with a condescending pat-pat-pat on the head — ever had anything good to say about it.

    Yup. The “apparatchik” functionaries and their families held a position of privilege, so, it makes sense that much of what they experienced was “positive conditioning” and “grooming” to laud the system that allowed them prestige, power, and wealth.

    Meanwhile, the rest of the people experienced primarily “negative conditioning” to keep them in line, and keep them “contributing” to maintaining the machine.

    One of the ethical questions here, then, is whether anti-watchblogger functionaries are actually contributing to the continued subjugation of God’s people, in the name of so-called “truth” and “discipline” and even “the gospel.”

  81. @ Law Prof:

    I should have been more clear about when you put in on the table or keep it hidden — the law on whether consent is required is critical to that choice, but sometimes, even without consent, a recording is useful — you just may not be able to use it or broadcast it. But later, telling the other party that it exists may be potent! In fact, I have suggested that two such devices be taken, one secretly recording and the other put on the table. Then if they refuse to allow the open one, the hidden one becomes useful to a party reconstructing the conversation, even if it is never publicly disclosed. A typed up transcript can be presented to the other party for them to recognize it as accurate or deny it! And even in some two-party consent states, a hidden recording can be used in cross X to challenge the truthfulness of a witness who testifies falsely.

  82. @ dee & Deb,

    A hearty thanks goes out to you both for all that you do. If it weren’t for the great American tradition of muckraking (a la Upton Sinclair), we probably wouldn’t have gotten a pure food and drug act through Congress until the reign of FDR.
    I’ve lived long enough to know that perfection is a fool’s errand and it follows that there’s no such thing as a ‘perfect church’. What is possible however is calling out the worst abuses of church and alerting people of faith to be careful. And that you guys do really well!

  83. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    I noticed that all the gushing praises of Communism came from those who never lived under that system;

    There is that aspect to it but there is also the continued subservience to those living directly under it. A fellow I knew spent a good deal of time in Russia, I think near the end of the 70s. He told the story that while waiting in line an hour to buy bread, the Russians that knew he was from the USA would argue with him how their Soviet system was superior.

  84. doubtful wrote:

    There’s a woman in the comments section who seems desperate to tell her story.
    I wonder if Dee or Deb have talked to her yet?

    On a previous thread Deebs offered to write up her story, if she wanted to share it. Maybe she contated them via email.

    I’m not giving TVC the benfit of he doubt at all if they are not responding to contact that THEY publicly requested from people who had issues with them. They are basically asking people to resubmit to further abuse!!! This came up on the previous thread as well. It is sickening to me.

  85. Bill M wrote:

    There is that aspect to it but there is also the continued subservience to those living directly under it. A fellow I knew spent a good deal of time in Russia, I think near the end of the 70s. He told the story that while waiting in line an hour to buy bread, the Russians that knew he was from the USA would argue with him how their Soviet system was superior.

    I ran across a fascinating quote from Gary Ross, director of the first movie in *The Hunger Games* series. A section with a long comment from him on the genius of author Suzanne Collins includes this clip: “The way you get to control people is to make them participate, not just subjugate them. If there’s one survivor, one victor, we get them participating in our system.” [From *The Hunger Games: The Official Illustrated Movie Companion*, page 154.]

    It seems to me that competition for “the right/best system” does that as well, even in Christendom and christianized celebritydom. Blind loyalty to the received ideal blocks out the real in terms of destructive impact of their system. It turns plebes into participants with culpability for perpetuating the system — even if they aren’t at the more exalted level of “functionaries” who directly keep the system chugging forward.

  86. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    The way you get to control people is to make them participate, not just subjugate them

    This site is actually Dee and Deb running a PhD program in organization psychology and related abuses. We even get visiting professors, they even let us participate, how great is that?

  87. Muff Potter wrote:

    there’s no such thing as a ‘perfect church’

    Funny, I’ve had that quoted to me several times as a silencing technique. Next time I may respond with “WOW that is so PROFOUND, I’m in my sixties and I NEVER thought of that”.

  88. Bill M wrote:

    there’s no such thing as a ‘perfect church’

    … but there is such a thing as churches with “toxic systems” led by “malignant ministers.” Which kind do the “no perfect church” memers support?

  89. Bill M wrote:

    This site is actually Dee and Deb running a PhD program in organization psychology and related abuses. We even get visiting professors, they even let us participate, how great is that?

    There have been behind-the-scenes conversations over the past five years about some kinds of assessment tools to identify anti-abusive ministries. Perhaps TWW could institute a training program on the subject for so-called “certification” councils? That’d be an awesome application of the crowd-sourced materials that get posted here …

  90. GovPappy wrote:

    agree – but it starts somewhere, theoretically. My beliefs didn’t change overnight, and I wouldn’t expect theirs to either. It could be a starting point, is all I’m saying.

    I have a much more radial view which is just my view and I don’t expect others to share it. My view is that IF they did not know their authoritarian system (that benefited them) was toxic to people and are just now in the process of repenting (because they got caught) and it was pointed out to them by outsiders….then they are too ignorant to be given any credibility. If they KNEW it was toxic and wanted that much control over people then the system they built is just plain evil in the Name of Jesus.
    My hope is that by discussing this people won’t really bother with which one it is, they will simply withhold their money, leave and seek the true Jesus Christ. I am not at all concerned about the souls of such leaders anymore because if they sincerely repent, they will simply get out of ministry and go find real jobs, ie…spend time in Tarsus making tents and rethink what they believed and why.

    You see, I don’t think they are presenting the truth to people about who Jesus is or how He operates. I think it is another religion altogether. But that is just my opinion as I am hoping people realize that supporting these systems just perpetuates the abuse. See, I am really mean. :o)

  91. I kind of feel bad for Samuel James. You see, I went to SBTS, and while that experience cured me permanently of ever associating with the SBC in any fashion whatsoever for all of history, I can easily see someone like James being a product – and somewhat victim – of that kind of environment. People there are promoted and advanced through one thing only – promoting the agenda of those in charge, and “protecting” them from any kind of criticism (folks there do not even pretend that it is otherwise…it is almost celebrated). And all the while students are lied to told that they are so blessed to be getting such an awesome education from people who believe the Real True Word of God, etc., etc. Here are some examples of how toxic and anti-intellectual the culture there is:
    1) I had three different professors say at one point, “Now don’t go running to Mohler and telling him that I said such and such, what I really mean is…”, implying that the doctrinal gestapo would lower the boom if they didn’t toe the line.
    2) One person asked a professor if he had read a book (by someone who took an opposing position); his response was something like “No, and based on the reviews I’ve read, I don’t need to”, implying that it was a waste of time to examine ideas that don’t fit into what is acceptable there.
    3) Many in that orbit have openly embraced and developed professional relationships with vile men who do not at all exhibit the fruit of the Spirit (quite the opposite in fact): men like Joe Carter, Dan Phillips, and others.

    So bottom line, I can easily someone becoming totally screwed in the head in an environment like that, and coming out a complete and self-deluded fool. I don’t know if Samuel James is a good guy or a douche-bag, but I can believe that he has been manipulated to the point where he can’t see that his post quoted above is sort of the crown jewel of douche-baggery. The other option – that he is a sociopathic jerk who enables and supports abuse in order to make a pay check – is such a serious charge that I don’t want to go there yet.

  92. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    There have been behind-the-scenes conversations over the past five years about some kinds of assessment tools to identify anti-abusive ministries

    A post on specific things to look for, small indicators, would be very interesting.

    I have found that identifying a good church is similar to the problems I found buying application software. With software I found the reviews to be shallow, the manufacturer oversold what it could do, and did not say what it could not do. You had to buy it and use it to make judgement. The statistic about ten years ago was roughly half the medical practices that adopted medical records software changed from their initial vendor after a few years. If you were the IT support you would be the scape goat.

    I’ve come across a number of clients who continue to use poor software because it was what they initially adopted. Often when they finally found the limitations they were in too deep to change. After going through the selection process many times as a consultant I became more aware of the right questions to ask.

  93. Beyond the very important mission of watchblogs to flag church abuse and abusers, they also serve to draw attention to aberrant theology of popular church movements (e.g., New Calvinism) and their influencers which draw young believers astray. You know when you are striking home when the leaders of these groups openly criticize watchblogs and watchbloggers that are exposing their sin and rebellion.

    I add my thanks to TWW; I’m a new follower of your site but see great value in what you are doing. You provide a service similar to the nation’s counter-terrorist agencies, who advise us “If you see something, say something.” Thanks for watching and speaking.

  94. @ Bill M:

    For what it’s worth there Bill I was born in 1950. You do the arithmetic. If you look a bit closer at the context of my comment you’ll see that it was a full affirmation TWW’s mission statement and prime directive.

  95. @ dee:

    Yes, they put what they did on the PP. And the presentation was given at membership meetings, so members were the only people who saw it. As you know, TVC is a big church, so each campus meeting has roughly 1,000 or so members. Many people seeing these PPs who aren’t directly involved in the situation.

  96. An Attorney wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    I should have been more clear about when you put in on the table or keep it hidden — the law on whether consent is required is critical to that choice, but sometimes, even without consent, a recording is useful — you just may not be able to use it or broadcast it. But later, telling the other party that it exists may be potent! In fact, I have suggested that two such devices be taken, one secretly recording and the other put on the table. Then if they refuse to allow the open one, the hidden one becomes useful to a party reconstructing the conversation, even if it is never publicly disclosed. A typed up transcript can be presented to the other party for them to recognize it as accurate or deny it! And even in some two-party consent states, a hidden recording can be used in cross X to challenge the truthfulness of a witness who testifies falsely.

    Potent- I agree with you. Very good method of making certain that people can’t play vicious games with you. Wish I’d had a recording of Pastor Ed when he said X to me in private, then non-X otherwise and accused me of being a liar.

  97. __

    Making a difference one victim at a time. Thank you Wartburg Watch..

    TOOT YOUR HORN !

    ATB

    Sopy

  98. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Just like during the late Cold War. I noticed that all the gushing praises of Communism came from those who never lived under that system; usually they were Baby Boomers from rich families.

    I highly recommend watching, “Mrs Ratcliffe’s Revolution” [Catherine Tate]. I think numo will e

  99. There was a time when highly educated women who were comfortable economically would join the Junior League. Thank goodness there are so many more options now!

    Dee and Deb, you’re doing a valuable service with your watch blogging. I especially like the fact you are not beholden to any special interests and do not accept money. That is downright scary to a lot of folks.

    Keep up the good work.

  100. What an honor to be named with some great people who have been defending victims for much longer than me. I know most of the bloggers listed, some I’ve spent hours on the phone or shared back and forth e-mails. I have never been more impressed with a group of selfless individuals who truly care for the marginalized and abused.

    Together, we can be a collective voice for those who either have no voice or are too weak to speak out. Through our efforts, we may not be able to get corrupt leaders out of the pulpit, but we are able to use our blogs so that search engines will pick up survivor’s stories and those who are still stuck in harmful churches may find that they aren’t so alone after all. That’s what happened to me when I was in my cult. I truly believe that survivor/watchdog blogs can help save torn families, and help in the restoration process emotionally and maybe spiritually. People have told me so and I’m sure Dee and Deb can say the same.

    Please keep praying for us. We are not well liked and some have gone to some malicious ways to try to stop us (which, in turn, makes us want to shout out even louder).

  101. All silliness aside, if churches practiced Matt 18 the way it was intended, members would not be afraid to approach church leadership when something seemed amiss, nor would leadership be afraid to approach members. However, when leaders decide that they are “perfect” and “untouchable”, then the natural back and forth of Christian exhortation and edification cannot take place. 30 years ago I was a member of a church where the board tried to hide the evidence of the senior pastor’s philandering. However, word tends to get out in a small town. It had also gotten out in the other small towns where he had pastored and done the same thing. The damage that this guy left behind him in at least three churches was incredible. But, he set himself up as untouchable, terrified the board (until someone finally said something), and would go on to the next church. The people who tried to stand up to him in my church were run off, either to never attend another church, or to attend a different congregation without being very committed. My old church has never recovered from this guy.

  102. @ dee:
    hmmm…seems I was unclear.

    I meant to communicate that there was a woman in the comments section of the Christianity Today post that seemed desperate to tell her story about a high powered leader that was living a duplicitous life.

    Sorry for the confusion.

  103. Muff Potter wrote:

    If you look a bit closer at the context of my comment you’ll see that it was a full affirmation TWW’s mission

    I should have added that I agreed with you, I was doing a take off on a few words that triggered bad memories. I can see how my statement could be taken as disagreement.
    Muff Potter wrote:

    What is possible however is calling out the worst abuses of church and alerting people of faith to be careful.

    Agreed, and yes they do it very well here.

  104. Lydia wrote:

    I am not at all concerned about the souls of such leaders anymore because if they sincerely repent, they will simply get out of ministry and go find real jobs

    Mark Driscoll may have made a decent brick mason or some other trade. He would likely still have told degrading stories about his wife, but at least he would not have abused so many and he could have looked back at his life and seen some accomplishment.

    So, yeah, I get what you are saying.

  105. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    People there are promoted and advanced through one thing only – promoting the agenda of those in charge, and “protecting” them from any kind of criticism (folks there do not even pretend that it is otherwise…it is almost celebrated).

    “Only when you are completely broken to The System will you be permitted to advance within The System.”
    — verbal comment on the 1984 movie version of 1984, re minor change in the ending

  106. Max wrote:

    Beyond the very important mission of watchblogs to flag church abuse and abusers, they also serve to draw attention to aberrant theology of popular church movements (e.g., New Calvinism) and their influencers which draw young believers astray.

    I consider blowing the whistle on the abusive behavior to be the primary mission.

    I’m leery of the “Aberrant theology” angle for two reasons:
    1) There are a LOT of abusive churches/cults/TACOs with Perfectly-Parsed Correct Theology (at least from the view of the cult-watcher types). But they are just as controlling and abusive.
    2) Too easy to get sidetracked into Theology Wonks, arguing theological trivia and minutiae while pastors’ widows keep eating out of dumpsters.

  107. Lydia wrote:

    My view is that IF they did not know their authoritarian system (that benefited them) was toxic to people and are just now in the process of repenting (because they got caught) and it was pointed out to them by outsiders….then they are too ignorant to be given any credibility. If they KNEW it was toxic and wanted that much control over people then the system they built is just plain evil in the Name of Jesus.

    AKA are they truly Evil or just Too Stupid to Live.

  108. Bill M wrote:

    He told the story that while waiting in line an hour to buy bread, the Russians that knew he was from the USA would argue with him how their Soviet system was superior.

    Kind of like Apple Mackinistas.

    This might have to do with “the key to a successful con job” — get the marks to invest their time, energy, and so much of their lives in the con that they can’t back out and will even defend the con man.

  109. Law Prof wrote:

    And there was an actual term for such people: “Useful Idiots”

    The KGB slang term for them was “sh*t-swallowers”.
    Because they truly believed and swallowed all that sh*t.

  110. Journalists often get this kind of complaint. Politicians, for instance, regularly accuse the media of making them look like fools, when more often than not, the politician made a fool of himself, and the media just reported it.

  111. @ Steve Scott:

    No, that never happened. Didn’t happen at The Village and now that this woman is coming to my current church to be in a leadership position, this church doesn’t really care either. I can’t seem to escape it. Looks like she is living in my neighborhood in Denver as well. I have emailed A29, The Village and this current church in Denver that I will no longer be involved in A29 anymore. It is one thing to let a situation go and never deal with it, it is quite another for me to play dumb and blindly follow her leadership at this new church considering she never apologized for what happened last year.

  112. @ doubtful:
    Thank you. I appreciate that. It is frustrating when all you want to do is find community and friends, but you end up having to deal with hurtful situations.

  113.   __

    “Bubblegum Blogging In Da Shadow Of His Wings: What Is The Focus At The Wartburg Watch (AKA TWW)?

    hmmm…

    “We look at all of the trends within evangelical Christianity, along with other stories and trends that impact the faith,

    We have become quite interested in church conflict, spiritual abuse, and hyper-authoritarian polity,

    We are equal opportunity offenders and do not emphasize one denomination over another.” 

    -Dee & Deb, Wartburg Watch

    🙂

    —> “Da Gates Of Hell Shall Not Prevail…”

    Yep.

    ‘Every day is kinda like Christmas @ da  Wartburh Watch’ (r) ?

    huh?

    The ‘abused’ think so…

    (tears)

    Sopy
    __
    TWW’s Theme Song:
    “Snoopy Vs. The Red Baron”; By The Royal Guardsmen
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxzg_iM-T4E

    Bonus: “Snoopy Vs. The Red Baron” (Snoopy’s Christmas)
    https://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=Jlf—13Q0g

    Reference:
    http://thewartburgwatch.com/about-us-the-basics/about-us-our-faq/

  114. @ Lydia:
    I can see where you’re coming from. Not being too far removed from such shenanigans myself though, there’s a lot of decent people in these places who are there because they don’t know different, and I believe even some pastors fall into that. They are a product of someone or some movement’s grooming many times – it’s all they know. I still sometimes fight the depression that comes from being conditioned to thinking I’m a failure because I never went to seminary or surrendered to preach or be a missionary – you know – the only callings that really matter in many church circles. The pressure is real. A lot of the folks are products of that pressure to do something for God and don’t know any different than the system they were brought up in. So yeah, personally I’m hoping these things will be a major wake-up call for them and other churches who watched it all to shake things up and really examine their whole calling and system.

    But again, I doubt – even if we assume the apology was totally genuine – that real meaningful change will come from this.

  115. @ Lydia:
    And I realize my previous comment might have sounded like me just talking past you, so my apologies.

    I am certainly with you in hoping that the Deebs and us talking about it will set “church capitalism” in motion and people will just start walking away from these places to better and safer environs. The peripherals have so clouded out our mission that it may indeed be another gospel, and maybe folks will realize that. I think that’s the best hope we have, even though I’m not real confident that’ll happen either, yet.

  116. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    There are a LOT of abusive churches/cults/TACOs with Perfectly-Parsed Correct Theology (at least from the view of the cult-watcher types). But they are just as controlling and abusive.

    Agreed, HUG. I bring up New Calvinism specifically since many of the member abuse stories are currently coming from that corner of Christendom as reported on this site and other watchblogs: Mars Hill, Village Church, SGM, etc. The “elder rule” church governance in reformed works is a set-up for abuse by authoritative leaders and “elders” in their 20s-30s. Thus, we need to watch and discern the message and methodology of aberrant theology which nurtures potential abusers.

  117. GovPappy wrote:

    I still sometimes fight the depression that comes from being conditioned to thinking I’m a failure because I never went to seminary or surrendered to preach or be a missionary – you know – the only callings that really matter in many church circles.

    Just like Priests, Monks, and Nuns in the Medieval Church.

  118. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Kind of like Apple Mackinistas.

    This might have to do with “the key to a successful con job” — get the marks to invest their time, energy, and so much of their lives in the con that they can’t back out and will even defend the con man.

    I recall training given to a prospective insurance salesman I know, “Don’t talk about religion or politics”. I would add a third, MAC vs PC. You made a perfect trifecta, Mackinistas, I love it, especially the successful con job.

  119. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    GovPappy wrote:

    I still sometimes fight the depression that comes from being conditioned to thinking I’m a failure because I never went to seminary or surrendered to preach or be a missionary – you know – the only callings that really matter in many church circles.

    Just like Priests, Monks, and Nuns in the Medieval Church.

    Ah yes. Father Pappy was just never meant to be.

  120. Christina wrote:

    The leaders who put down members for speaking up about issues in the church are the same leaders putting down other churches for how they do things. So, it is OK for them to have a “critical heart” but their members need to shut up.

    Incisive comment. Gets right to the point. You have articulated something that has been hovering in the back of my mind for years, but never quite came clear until now.

    I am in pain today, from the weight of regret. How would things be different if we had left our church 20 years ago? Even ten years ago? I know I can’t change our decisions, and some of our problems were our own immaturity (so we would have taken our problems with us, had we gone), but I can’t help grieving the scars, and yes, open wounds that are still there.

    Some scabs got ripped off yesterday, with a teen’s comment about past 4th of July celebrations with families from our former church, and how glad the teen was not to have to be exposed to that anymore. I was always hungry for fellowship and community and looked forward to those occasions, when *everyone* in the church (even the fringe elements, like ourselves) was invited. I had no idea what our kids were suffering.

    The pain just never seems to stop.

    So yes, spiritual abuse is real. I know I don’t have to tell that to most of the people reading here.

  121. @ refugee:
    Yep. My family inadvertently brings up things that trigger me from years ago that my mind has blocked out. I’m sometimes thankful my memory is poor.

  122. Christina wrote:

    I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.

    Wow. This is worse than the way Jesus said to treat our enemies.

  123. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Christina wrote:
    My cynical side says they haven’t responded because I am not a big news story, and my beef was with someone who is popular in the blogosphere. It is unfortunate that a lowly minion like myself is discredited simply because I am not “popular” or run with the cool kids.
    Just like High School.
    “OOOOOOO! POP-U-LAR!!!!!”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4EtbRJw14E

  124. Law Prof wrote:

    At least I got the full force as they took off the masks and got down and dirty. That’s not so bad, you can categorize it for what it is–evil–and move on. You probably got the worst of it because it sounds like they tried to maintain a sheen of “godly concern” for you. That’s far harder to deal with, because you’ll drive yourself insane wondering if they’re right and it’s really not you after all. It’s gaslighting.

    The worst sort of bullies, in my opinion the most diabolical I’ve seen, are the ones who “bro”-nice you while quietly slipping in the knife, then destroy your relationships with others behind your back.

    Yes! Yes! This is what we experienced… for years! And we didn’t hear even a smidgeon of what was said behind our backs until we left. And then I guess it was okay for us to hear it? Why couldn’t people tell us while we were sticking it out at that church, trying to be good little christians, trying to support our burdened, sincere, persevering leaders through tensions that included more than one church split?

    We were going to be part of the change. We weren’t going to throw the baby out with the bath water. We were going to influence people for good. Instead we destroyed our own family.

  125.  __

    “Mercurial Emergence?”

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Bill M : “He told the story that while waiting in line an hour to buy bread, the Russians that knew he was from the USA would argue with him how their Soviet system was superior.”

    HUG: “Kind of like Apple Mackinistas. This might have to do with “the key to a successful con job” — get the marks to invest their time, energy, and so much of their lives in the con that they can’t back out and will even defend the con man.”

    ***

    Hug,

    hey,

    hmmm…

    I have to strongly disagree with your reference to Steve Jobs and Apple. 

    But words like ‘con job’, con man, and ‘marks’? Isn’t that a bit of a stretch, fella?  You apparently did not know the man. 

    Yes, Steve Jobs utilized his intelligence for more than just criticizing others. 

    What critic questions Jobs’ seismic impact on computing and our communication culture; that his legacy is now a trillion dollar company positively affecting the lives of many millions. 

    Perhaps you are you referring to Jobs’ clearely documented sometimes callous, controlling personality? 

    What?

    A complicated figure who could inspiring people one minute, and then demean and demonstrate an arrogant and cruel behavior the next?

    Gump!

    Sure, Steve Jobs was curt and an  insensitive perfectionist at times, and notoriously difficult to please, simply viewing people and products in the context of black and white terms. They were either brilliant or “sh-t” , which invarably leads to the following question,

    Which one are you?

    ATB

    Sopy

    🙂

  126. Lydia wrote:

    @ Steve Scott:
    What is your definition of “spiritual ones at church”? :o)

    My question would be, what does “restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness” mean? At TVC, it might be construed as “forcing” someone “under care” (I forget if “forcing” was the actual word used, but have no time to go and look it up right now.)

  127. dee wrote:

    Christina wrote:
    I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.
    Let me ask you a question. When their names were put up on the screen, did they tell people what they did? Also, was this a general meeting in which all however many thousand could attend?
    I have some interest in learning the procedure that was used.

    This sounds like the kind of thing an Acts29 church I’m currently acquainted with might do in a “members only” meeting.

  128. dee wrote:

    That criticism went away immediately and I believe we have given credence to the many good people who for good reason must be anonymous. Our names, in some respect, cosign that comment.

    And thank you so much for that.

    Part of the reason I am anonymous is because our teens have enough wounds to lick at present.

  129. Muff Potter wrote:

    I’ve lived long enough to know that perfection is a fool’s errand and it follows that there’s no such thing as a ‘perfect church’.

    Ah, but to paraphrase Animal Farm, some churches are more perfect than others…

  130. Arce wrote:

    The problem is “elders” (and pastors) who are not old enough to be elder to anyone but a child.

    Yep. It gets pretty scary when the youth group is running the church!

  131. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    Blind loyalty to the received ideal blocks out the real in terms of destructive impact of their system. It turns plebes into participants with culpability for perpetuating the system — even if they aren’t at the more exalted level of “functionaries” who directly keep the system chugging forward.

    Blind loyalty. Yes. We supported the system (with tithes, time, defense in the face of criticism, with trying our best to live up to the demands of “godly lifestyle”, with continually trying to fit in, to find acceptance — what FOOLS we were!) that, in the end, damaged us, perhaps permanently, and destroyed our family.

  132. Lydia wrote:

    My view is that IF they did not know their authoritarian system (that benefited them) was toxic to people and are just now in the process of repenting (because they got caught) and it was pointed out to them by outsiders….then they are too ignorant to be given any credibility.

    Thank you. You see, I really got the idea that the elders at our former church were among this crowd you mention. I didn’t see them controlling for control’s sake, but more in a spirit of fear, of having to give an account for our souls. (What is that verse?)

    I used to tell people that I didn’t blame the elders, that I thought their hearts were in the right place. They truly were concerned (at least, I thought so), not on a power trip.

    And yet, it was okay for their children to bully and gossip about “less popular” children in the church. It was okay for the wife of one of the elders to play cruel middle school popularity games, to decide who would be “accepted” and who would be tolerated, and who would be downright made fun of (oh, and don’t you dare befriend her, because then you’ll be on the outs, too).

    Whether incompetence or evil, the results were the same.

    And your clear statement that I quoted above relieves some of my guilt feelings, and the feeling that I have no right to criticize them. (If it wasn’t the right church for us, we should have walked away years ago. And their view, that if “the system” didn’t work for us, it was not because of any failings on their part, but because we were doing it wrong.)

    If they are incompetent, they have no credibility. You don’t know what a relief I find in that sentiment!

  133. Christina wrote:

    One of my closest friends had her name publicly called out at a membership meeting and people were told not to contact her … people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people

    Shunning is an ancient church practice that has been given new energy by the New Calvinist movement. Members who see the names of others plastered on the wall will soon learn not to question the message and method of church leadership, lest their John Henry also be put on public display. Control, manipulation, and intimidation are not fruit of the spirit. Your friend would do well to exit that church and shake the dust off her feet on the way out.

  134. Law Prof wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    I have a much more radial view…

    Sometimes the truth sounds radical.

    Sometimes the truth sounds radial, too. (Interesting word picture. Truth radiating from the center?)

  135. Olivia wrote:

    There was a time when highly educated women who were comfortable economically would join the Junior League. Thank goodness there are so many more options now!
    Dee and Deb, you’re doing a valuable service with your watch blogging. I especially like the fact you are not beholden to any special interests and do not accept money. That is downright scary to a lot of folks.
    Keep up the good work.

    I hear the social undercurrents in the Junior League were pretty fierce, too.

  136. @ refugee:
    We have a rule here that ignorance of the law does not mean you are innocent when breaking it. The same thinking applies to spiritual abuse. They cannot plead spiritual immaturity or ignorance (nor should we use it as an excuse for them) because they are the ones who sought “spiritual” power and position.

  137. @ Christina:
    If you were referring to me here, my apologies – I have no desire to minimize the TVC situation. Besides the abuse of Karen, the story puts a spotlight on church leadership abuse everywhere. But I can tip my cap to a single noteworthy act while simultaneously believing the system that led it to be necessary is off base, a twist of scripture, and inherently (if not always in practice) abusive.

    TVC is about 12k people – pastors and all – who need to wake up, just like I have been doing over the past year or so. My apologies for being both unclear and insensitive.

  138. refugee wrote:

    The pain just never seems to stop.
    So yes, spiritual abuse is real. I know I don’t have to tell that to most of the people reading here.

    Something in the Bible that never quite resonated prior to dealing with spiritual abuse at multiple churches and seeing my children suffer from the effects and realizing it was my own idiocy and naivety that led to their pain is when it tells us how the Lord will one day “wipe away all our tears”. I get that completely now.

  139. refugee wrote:

    Christina wrote:
    I also saw people’s names put up on power point presentations at meetings and again, everyone was asked not to talk to these people unless we asked them to repent.
    Wow. This is worse than the way Jesus said to treat our enemies.

    This is the sort of thing that just might get churches sued under certain circumstances. I am waiting for the day when people get fed up and file a class action lawsuit based on abuse like this. I will be cheering. Barring that, when Jesus returns, He won’t come humbly on a donkey, He’s going to come crashing in on a white horse and He will set things right. For the abusers who defame and slander and divide in the name of God, I have to think what He’ll do will make the tables turned over and whip cracking towards the money changers look like child’s play.

  140. I’d like to recommend http://www.bjugrace.com, a website originally for survivors of abuse and abusive counseling at Bob Jones University, but it’s applicable in any abusive context. The blog features first person stories of gut-wrenching honesty. They are famous for their “Frequently Quoted Bible Verses” (or “FQBV’s”), verses that are quoted to silence stories of abuse, and how to respond to people who quote them at you. It also has a section on how to respond to common objections, like “Why are you tarnishing the reputation of Christ before a watching world?” Or “You shouldn’t air dirty laundry.” I love this part:

    “Picture Jesus standing up in public and lambasting the highly-respected Pharisees in the harshest imaginable terms.

    Ordinary people, people like us, are listening to His descriptions of these high and holy men (“vipers” comes to mind) and information about what these high and holy men are doing in secret (“devouring widows’ houses” comes to mind), and someone says, “I can’t believe he’s airing our dirty laundry.”

    Surely there’s a better way to handle this. Surely Jesus should go to them in private. Surely we can quietly help the widows whose houses have been devoured without having to hang up all that filthy laundry for everybody to gawk at. It’s so . . . embarrassing.

    I’m not a fan of the expression, but since it’s popular, I’ll run with it. Let’s say some clothes belonging to some Pharisees and others have been horribly . . . dirtied. Body waste? Other body fluids? Blood? It’s bad.

    What needs to happen is that this dirty laundry needs to be hauled outside to that big tub of steaming water and lye soap, to be washed clean and then yes, to be hung out and “aired” dry by the strong wind and the purifying rays of the sun. But instead, these Pharisees stuff all this filthy laundry in a corner of a secret room. Year after year they pile it higher and higher.

    And they ignore the fact that there is occasionally a broken, wounded body stuffed in there with the dirty laundry. Pile something else on top. Look fancier, cleaner, handsomer, more beautiful. Look like a show window. Make more rules so people won’t notice, make a rule that they can’t even look in the direction of that room or whisper about it. Pray louder, longer, more publicly.

    And the pile grows higher.”

  141. Law Prof wrote:

    refugee wrote:

    The pain just never seems to stop.
    So yes, spiritual abuse is real. I know I don’t have to tell that to most of the people reading here.

    Something in the Bible that never quite resonated prior to dealing with spiritual abuse at multiple churches and seeing my children suffer from the effects and realizing it was my own idiocy and naivety that led to their pain is when it tells us how the Lord will one day “wipe away all our tears”. I get that completely now.

    Wow. That is hard. I’m wondering if my parents ever realize the same about us. And I hope I’ve learned enough to break the cycle.

  142. Arce wrote:

    @ Max:
    The problem is “elders” (and pastors) who are not old enough to be elder to anyone but a child.

    Had an elder at my neocalvinist church who was all of 23+/-. Had a bachelor’s degree in education, his only degree, was a newly-minted a junior high teacher. The pastor put him in charge of church finances–removed a guy who was a CFO of a large nonprofit that employed over 1,000 and had a CPA to do it.

  143. Law Prof wrote:

    Had an elder at my neocalvinist church who was all of 23+/-. Had a bachelor’s degree in education, his only degree, was a newly-minted a junior high teacher. The pastor put him in charge of church finances

    I first noticed this twenty years ago in the business world with some managers. During interviews they wanted to hire the unqualified candidate, I figured they were intimidated by someone with capability. Is it the same dynamic with pastors?

  144. GovPappy wrote:

    I still sometimes fight the depression that comes from being conditioned to thinking I’m a failure because I never went to seminary or surrendered to preach or be a missionary – you know – the only callings that really matter in many church circles. The pressure is real. A lot of the folks are products of that pressure to do something for God and don’t know any different than the system they were brought up in.

    i had a real awakening when i was re reading the account of stephen being stoned to death. As Stephen was dying the Lord opened up heaven i think to help him endure it, and it says that he saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God. Everywhere else in the bible it says sitting at the right hand of God. Jesus loved Stephen so much that He stood up and helped him through it. The real awakening i had, even more than that astounding fact, is how stephen, the dearly beloved of Jesus Himself, got his job. He got it because it was beneath the disciples lol, like Jesus said,
    11 For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. Luke 14:11

    1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.
    2 Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.
    3 Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.
    4 But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word.
    5 And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch” Acts 6:1-5
    i started reading the bible differently and thinking of people differently too, do you know how many unnamed people there are that God used in the bible, lots and lots!
    i think the desire for power and position is what corrupts leadership and so many churches preach ‘full gospel’ but dont have ‘full fruit’ longsuffering, love that is patient and kind and does not boast does not seek its own….
    also if it was important that they choose men full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom to distribute food to widows, why in the world does any church think its ok to just have anyone in sunday school? the church looks at things like the world does, and its not how God looks at things. Jesus said …”that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God. Luke 16:15
    i have to keep giving my heart to the Lord and ask Him to change my views to His views because i was raised totally thinking position is to be desired, lots of money, nice cars, all the whole american thing. When Paul said he became a fool to become wise i think thats what it means to me, i have to totally rethink everything and its hard and not popular! Glad your here sharing, i get alot from your posts

  145. Bill M wrote:

    I first noticed this twenty years ago in the business world with some managers. During interviews they wanted to hire the unqualified candidate, I figured they were intimidated by someone with capability. Is it the same dynamic with pastors?

    I think that’s exactly what it is. Elders and senior leaders with experience and competence are pushed out entirely (like the CPA/CFO of my example) or marginalized and used as figureheads to demonstrate to the members of the flock who retain a bit of discernment/common sense that there’s a legitimate system of checks and balances in place to keep the too-young, power-hungry pastor in check (of course, let one of those senior figureheads speak up and they’ll be quickly defamed and eliminated).

    The leaders want to do whatever they want whenever they want to do it, perhaps on some level they sense they’re in over their heads, and that’s a discomfiting feeling they want to get out of their heads, so they surround themselves with those who will both support whatever they do and are incapable of pointing out their incompetence.

  146. Law Prof wrote:

    Had an elder at my neocalvinist church who was all of 23+/- … The pastor put him in charge of church finances–removed a guy who was a CFO of a large nonprofit

    Ahhh … this is SOP in New Calvinist works. Young, restless and reformed pastors hand-pick “elder” teams that they can control. If it’s a new church plant, they bring their theological buddies with them; if it’s an established church, they turn it upside down by gutting congregational governance, moving the church to elder rule, and sending older non-Calvinist members packing. In the case you mention, the pastor essentially forsook the older man’s wisdom over the finances to put the books under his direct control through the younger fellow. And of course, the young elder idolized the pastor more, having been given position and power while still green behind the ears.

    The whole New Calvinist set-up in church leadership reminds me of the story of King Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12. Here’s the picture: young King Rehoboam rejected the wisdom of elders from Solomon’s reign and took the advice of the young guys he had grown up with. Israel rebelled and the kingdom split. In the end, it didn’t turn out well for Rehoboam or Israel. That’s the direction we are headed with New Calvinism; the American church will pay a terrible price for allowing this serpent to slither in.

  147. Law Prof wrote:

    The leaders want to do whatever they want whenever they want to do it, perhaps on some level they sense they’re in over their heads, and that’s a discomfiting feeling they want to get out of their heads, so they surround themselves with those who will both support whatever they do and are incapable of pointing out their incompetence.

    The Dictator surrounding himself entirely with Yes-Men who will Always Agree With Him.

    Worked out real well for Baba Saddam.

  148. Bill M wrote:

    I first noticed this twenty years ago in the business world with some managers. During interviews they wanted to hire the unqualified candidate, I figured they were intimidated by someone with capability. Is it the same dynamic with pastors?

    Or they didn’t want anyone who was better than they were.
    Might jeopardize their job security if they weren’t the Best and the Brightest in their department.

    Bill & Hillary Clinton were said to be that type of manager — always had to be the smartest of anyone around them.

  149. Bill M wrote:

    I first noticed this twenty years ago in the business world with some managers. During interviews they wanted to hire the unqualified candidate, I figured they were intimidated by someone with capability. Is it the same dynamic with pastors?

    “Bureaucracy destroys initiative. There is little that bureaucrats hate more than innovation, especially innovation that produces better results than the old routines. Improvements always make those at the top of the heap look inept. Who enjoys appearing inept?”

    From: Frank Herbert’s Heretics of Dune

  150. sam wrote:

    Everywhere else in the bible it says sitting at the right hand of God. Jesus loved Stephen so much that He stood up and helped him through it.

    What an awesome reading of the story.

  151. Law Prof wrote:

    The leaders want to do whatever they want whenever they want to do it, perhaps on some level they sense they’re in over their heads, and that’s a discomfiting feeling they want to get out of their heads, so they surround themselves with those who will both support whatever they do and are incapable of pointing out their incompetence.

    The denom I used to be a part of was very authoritarian. Just a year or two before I left, the flagship church in the conference imploded because the Pastor was embezzling. That would not happen to a church of that size if there were capable people doing the specific duties you used in your example.

  152. @ Muff Potter:

    Since *Dune* just turned 50 recently, here’s another Dune-saga quote to celebrate the occasion. This one comes from a prequel written by Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson: “Fanaticism is always a sign of repressed doubt.” (*Dune: The Butlerian Jihad*, page 442.)

    And another quote from Frank Herbert himself, from interviews and writings, in response to the well-known concept of Lord Action that power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. To that, Frank Herbert countered, “Power is a magnet that draws the corruptible.”

  153. Max wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Had an elder at my neocalvinist church who was all of 23+/- … The pastor put him in charge of church finances–removed a guy who was a CFO of a large nonprofit
    Ahhh … this is SOP in New Calvinist works. Young, restless and reformed pastors hand-pick “elder” teams that they can control. If it’s a new church plant, they bring their theological buddies with them; if it’s an established church, they turn it upside down by gutting congregational governance, moving the church to elder rule, and sending older non-Calvinist members packing. In the case you mention, the pastor essentially forsook the older man’s wisdom over the finances to put the books under his direct control through the younger fellow. And of course, the young elder idolized the pastor more, having been given position and power while still green behind the ears.
    The whole New Calvinist set-up in church leadership reminds me of the story of King Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12. Here’s the picture: young King Rehoboam rejected the wisdom of elders from Solomon’s reign and took the advice of the young guys he had grown up with. Israel rebelled and the kingdom split. In the end, it didn’t turn out well for Rehoboam or Israel. That’s the direction we are headed with New Calvinism; the American church will pay a terrible price for allowing this serpent to slither in.

    Together they ran the church completely into the ground until it disbanded. Both pastor and sycophant then moved their families to the head regional church of the neocalvinist “denomination” in another city. The young sycophant, still in his 20s, ingratiated himself to higher ups and when the pastor who’d elevated the young sycophant in the first place started wondering aloud about whether what he’d been doing all these years was really God’s will, the sycophant banded together with the leaders to excommunicate him and his family. It was a page out of the leadership manual of the Soviet Union. On the bright side, this shunning, shaming and excommunication caused the final epiphany in the pastor, and I now count him as a friend and as one who “gets it”.

  154. GovPappy wrote:

    @ Christina:
    If you were referring to me here, my apologies – I have no desire to minimize the TVC situation. Besides the abuse of Karen, the story puts a spotlight on church leadership abuse everywhere. But I can tip my cap to a single noteworthy act while simultaneously believing the system that led it to be necessary is off base, a twist of scripture, and inherently (if not always in practice) abusive.
    TVC is about 12k people – pastors and all – who need to wake up, just like I have been doing over the past year or so. My apologies for being both unclear and insensitive.

    No need to apologize. I am sorry for assuming things about your comment. It has been a rough past few weeks, as I just left an A29 church and had dealings with the elders there about the person from TVC coming into a leadership position. Didn’t really want to leave this church, but I am afraid that what is ahead will be the same as TVC. And I want to protect myself. I am sorry for jumping to conclusions.

  155. Law Prof wrote:

    when Jesus returns, He won’t come humbly on a donkey, He’s going to come crashing in on a white horse and He will set things right

    Someone needs to hire an aircraft and fly this behind it – He will set things right.

    James tell us not to become teachers lightly because we will be judged more strictly, and it bothered the apostle Paul that after preaching to others he might be disqualified.

    There is rank unbelief amongst pastors and sundry leaders in churches if they think that they can ever ‘get away’ with abuse of any sort. It may not be of immediate comfort to those who have been their victims, but one day they will have to give an account of the damage they have done. Everything will be revealed. Justice will be done, and will be seen to be done. Perhaps we should all fear God a bit more, and treat him as our Heavenly Buddy quite considerably less.

    I can only assume that the mentality of sinning and hoping to get away with it is a modern occurrance of what Paul wrote against in Romans 6 – shall we continue in sin that grace may abound. Paul says no, the abuser in his heart thinks yes.

  156. Law Prof wrote:

    wondering aloud about whether what he’d been doing all these years was really God’s will … one who “gets it”

    Law Prof, I keep praying for a denominational-wide wake up call of that sort in Southern Baptist ranks. There are numerous reports of church splits and associated weeping and gnashing of teeth wrought by the hand of young reformed rebels in SBC. A handful of SBC leaders are responsible for the proliferation of New Calvinism within SBC; I keep waiting for them to come to their senses, look around at what they have created, repent and try to do something about the mess. But with 7 of 11 SBC entities now under Calvinist control, any effort would be too little too late. The largest (previously evangelistic) denomination in the U.S. is now clearly trending toward Calvinism.

  157. Max wrote:

    The largest (previously evangelistic) denomination in the U.S. is now clearly trending toward Calvinism.

    And shrinking!

  158. Christina wrote:

    GovPappy wrote:
    @ Christina:
    If you were referring to me here, my apologies – I have no desire to minimize the TVC situation. Besides the abuse of Karen, the story puts a spotlight on church leadership abuse everywhere. But I can tip my cap to a single noteworthy act while simultaneously believing the system that led it to be necessary is off base, a twist of scripture, and inherently (if not always in practice) abusive.
    TVC is about 12k people – pastors and all – who need to wake up, just like I have been doing over the past year or so. My apologies for being both unclear and insensitive.
    No need to apologize. I am sorry for assuming things about your comment. It has been a rough past few weeks, as I just left an A29 church and had dealings with the elders there about the person from TVC coming into a leadership position. Didn’t really want to leave this church, but I am afraid that what is ahead will be the same as TVC. And I want to protect myself. I am sorry for jumping to conclusions.

    No one knows exactly what it’s like to go through what you’re going through except you and the Lord, but many of us here have been through similar experiences and we have some notion of the pain and confusion and anguish–and what it does to your psyche and dealings with others.

    I think I was half insane for some weeks after the final encounter with my last pastor; I could barely even articulate what had happened to friends who called me up wondering why we’d left the church, could hardly spit the words out, and when they did come out, all disjointed. They must have thought I was the one who was nuts (and I guess for a few weeks I was). Only over time, after getting completely away from Pastor Ed and the environment he’d created and how sick and vicious it was, did things I’d been shoving into the back of my mind for a couple years start coming back and I was able to process them and see them clearly (and wonder why oh why did it take so long for me to leave–what was I thinking?). It takes time to get well, you’re fine, you don’t seem to have done anything that really warrants an apology, don’t sweat it.

  159. Law Prof wrote:

    Only over time, after getting completely away from Pastor Ed and the environment he’d created and how sick and vicious it was, did things I’d been shoving into the back of my mind for a couple years start coming back and I was able to process them and see them clearly (and wonder why oh why did it take so long for me to leave–what was I thinking?).

    Because Pastor Ed was “shining his Stupid Ray” on you the whole time.

  160. Max wrote:

    Law Prof, I keep praying for a denominational-wide wake up call of that sort in Southern Baptist ranks. There are numerous reports of church splits and associated weeping and gnashing of teeth wrought by the hand of young reformed rebels in SBC.

    To paraphrase that line from Ghostbusters:
    “There is no Christ, there is only Calvin.”

  161. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    And another quote from Frank Herbert himself, from interviews and writings, in response to the well-known concept of Lord Action that power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely. To that, Frank Herbert countered, “Power is a magnet that draws the corruptible.”

    I heard the variant “Power is a magnet that attracts the already-corrupt and the easily-corrupted.”

  162. Law Prof wrote:

    Had an elder at my neocalvinist church who was all of 23+/-. Had a bachelor’s degree in education, his only degree, was a newly-minted a junior high teacher. The pastor put him in charge of church finances–removed a guy who was a CFO of a large nonprofit that employed over 1,000 and had a CPA to do it.

    But the CFO lacked the One True Qualification for Elder in charge of Finances:
    Total Absolute Loyalty to Pastor’s Regime.

  163. lydia wrote:

    It has been a huge problem.

    The first people I worked were genuinely interested in my future. There appeared to be genuine interest in how I could expand my horizon. I projected that experience into the church I attended. Without thinking I assumed that if anywhere it would be true, it would be in a church where people would want you to grow to your potential.

    I was apparently slow as it took thirty years to disprove the theory and another ten to figure out I was powerless to change the culture. All power was in the pastor and when the culture did change it became worse and became abusive.

    I’m now in a much better church but I’m still uneasy. I don’t know if it is what people would call PTSD. I have not suffered abuse similar to what so many have reported but I’m still wary that if I scratch the surface it will peel away and I’ll find myself back in a similar place.

    There was an episode from the old Twilight Zone back in the 60’s, a family tried getting out of a spooky town but no matter which direction they drove, turn a corner and they were back again.

  164. @ Christina:
    You most certainly don’t owe me an apology – I need to watch how my words can be taken! But thanks for understanding.

    Knowing what I’ve learned so far about the 9marks/A29 churches overall and experienced myself, I can understand why you’re stressed! These places don’t seem to ease your burdens – unless you line up 100%, they add to them.

  165. Bill M wrote:

    All power was in the pastor

    If there is one thing that to me stands out in the last few threads about ‘Dones’ and bad experiences in churches, it is pastors with or without elders who are acting like absolute monarchs who seem to be the most common cause of heartache and stress. If it goes wrong there, there is precious little you can do humanly speaking to change the situation.

    There is no doubt in my mind that American evangelicalism has lifted the ‘status’ of being a pastor way beyond anything you could ever get out of the pages of the NT. I’ve personally experienced a watered-down version of this in the UK, where the whole thing gradually gets to be man-centered. Bashing the hierarchies of the old denominations, only to replace them with an ‘apostolic team’.

    I’ve read plenty about those who have been on the receiving end when insecure men start protecting their power and influence, their little or not so little kingdoms.

    Whatever happened to the word minister, which has the root idea of serving the church rather than being a kind of CEO or managing director?

  166. Max wrote:

    A handful of SBC leaders are responsible for the proliferation of New Calvinism within SBC;

    Which wouldn’t be so bad if it were through democratic consensus building. Instead I have heard it plainly taught from several SBC professors, that new pastors should hide their Calvinism, and never answer that question directly, and only introduce their ideas slowly, so they can “educate” the flock. Which, you know, is essentially the opposite of Baptist polity. I’m not sure why anyone with a working ethical compass would think this is a good idea.

  167. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    Which wouldn’t be so bad if it were through democratic consensus building. Instead I have heard it plainly taught from several SBC professors, that new pastors should hide their Calvinism, and never answer that question directly, and only introduce their ideas slowly, so they can “educate” the flock.

    Stealth Takeover by Salami Tactics.
    Right out of Comrade Stalin’s playbook.

  168. Max wrote:

    The whole New Calvinist set-up in church leadership reminds me of the story of King Rehoboam in 1 Kings 12. Here’s the picture: young King Rehoboam rejected the wisdom of elders from Solomon’s reign and took the advice of the young guys he had grown up with. Israel rebelled and the kingdom split. In the end, it didn’t turn out well for Rehoboam or Israel. That’s the direction we are headed with New Calvinism; the American church will pay a terrible price for allowing this serpent to slither in.

    You took the words right out of my mouth.

  169. Law Prof wrote:

    Only over time, after getting completely away … did things I’d been shoving into the back of my mind for a couple years start coming back and I was able to process them and see them clearly (and wonder why oh why did it take so long for me to leave–what was I thinking?)

    So true. I found things were much clearer after we’d been out of it for some weeks. But it’s been nearly a year now, and I still have major struggles, especially in terms of my own faith.

  170. GovPappy wrote:

    These places don’t seem to ease your burdens – unless you line up 100%, they add to them.

    And of course there’s no way to line up 100%. Even the leaders and their cronies don’t. The difference between them and you is that they get a free pass, somehow.

  171. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    I’m not sure why anyone with a working ethical compass would think this is a good idea.

    because they have the truth (TM), and the sheep are too stupid to know truth when they see it, or to understand proper feeding, and so they must be gently led to the green pastures and still waters in order to come to saving knowledge and understanding, and begin to feed on the proper food…

  172. refugee wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Only over time, after getting completely away … did things I’d been shoving into the back of my mind for a couple years start coming back and I was able to process them and see them clearly (and wonder why oh why did it take so long for me to leave–what was I thinking?)
    So true. I found things were much clearer after we’d been out of it for some weeks. But it’s been nearly a year now, and I still have major struggles, especially in terms of my own faith.

    It’s been a little over two years for me. I got your major struggles right here, baby. I have had everything shaken and half of me feels like it’s fallen off, including some of my faith. Now, that said, do I mean I’ve lost my faith? Yes and no. I’m still clinging desperately to Jesus and know He’s the real deal and not a figment of my imagination or wishful thinking, I’ve seen too much and experienced too much to deny Him now or ever.

    But, the faith I had that was shaken o much by going from one cult to another was a mix of faith in Him and faith in a lot of worthless stuff that’s not Him. A lot of the Bible that was taught to me over the years, the way it was taught, was crap. A lot of the things I had faith in, such as my ability to discern much of anything, such as my self-perceived “giftings”, was false and stupid hope. A lot of my faith in humankind was worthless and misguided. I have nothing left I can hope in but Jesus and my closest family, who’ve seen me through this and proven themselves. But at least it seems like what I have left is real.

  173. @ Law Prof:

    Probably the best descriptor for what I have seen and experienced. Thanks. It took me a long time to realize there really are lots of deceptive, immature people attracted to ministry who wake up in the morning thinking of their “place and position” and how to protect and enlarge it. And thinking that is a righteous thing…even a God ordained thing. And they will even refer to themselves as big sinners with wicked hearts throwing a lot of people off the scent.

    I find them some of the most dangerous people in the world because they believe this about themselves wrapped in Jesus wrapping paper.

  174. Bill M wrote:

    The first people I worked were genuinely interested in my future. There appeared to be genuine interest in how I could expand my horizon. I projected that experience into the church I attended. Without thinking I assumed that if anywhere it would be true, it would be in a church where people would want you to grow to your potential.

    I was in organizational development for many years and that is how I approached it, too. There should be nothing more rewarding than helping people grow to heights way beyond our own. However, in hundreds of companies every year I started to notice a shift in the late 90’s of more and more incompetents being rewarded. More narcissistic types being promoted in companies who looked the part and had the “charisma” but cared nothing for really developing their people’s talent. More and more managers and leaders wanted people they could control.

  175. Lydia wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    Probably the best descriptor for what I have seen and experienced. Thanks. It took me a long time to realize there really are lots of deceptive, immature people attracted to ministry who wake up in the morning thinking of their “place and position” and how to protect and enlarge it. And thinking that is a righteous thing…even a God ordained thing. And they will even refer to themselves as big sinners with wicked hearts throwing a lot of people off the scent.
    I find them some of the most dangerous people in the world because they believe this about themselves wrapped in Jesus wrapping paper.

    They mistake the good feelings and the thrills they get from grabbing power or brushing up against the powerful leaders or fantasizing about it for the power of God. But some of them neither serve God nor know God. Others know Him, but are so full of self that they stay in a perpetual state of obsession over “My Calling” and “the Primacy of the Local Church” and dreams of their own potential and greatness within the system. It is utter idolatry. And they act just like idolaters: defensive to the utmost, externally pious, internally hateful and selfish. The Bible tells us to have nothing to do with such people except to expose their evil.

  176. @ brad/futuristguy:

    Some critics have been especially savage toward the writing team of Herbert & Anderson. If folks based their reading conclusions solely on what ‘enlightened pundits’ say, we truly would have a drab and uniform populace. I very much enjoy reading Herbert & Anderson’s Dune installments.

  177. Muff Potter wrote:

    Some critics have been especially savage toward the writing team of Herbert & Anderson. If folks based their reading conclusions solely on what ‘enlightened pundits’ say, we truly would have a drab and uniform populace. I very much enjoy reading Herbert & Anderson’s Dune installments.

    Preach it, M.P.!

    The team of Herbert and Anderson have come up with some zinger quotes that are immensely provocative for the work I do in attempting to help people understand power dynamics in abuse, and the need for changing a paradigm and not just tinkering with behaviors, that kind of thing. For instance:

    “Assumptions are a transparent grid through which we view the universe, sometimes deluding ourselves that the grid is that universe.” (*Dune: The Butlerian Jihad*)

    P.S. I look for literature with a good-enough storyline that keeps my interest and says something important to what I’ve been thinking about — whether it is a children’s book, YAL, sci-fi, dystopian, utopian, biography, whatever. If it turns out to be good enough for me to re-read (even multiple times) then you get to the point where you stop reading it, and it starts reading you … And those kinds of works seem few and far between.

  178. Lydia wrote:

    promoted in companies who looked the part and had the “charisma” but cared nothing for really developing their people’s talent.

    That is another part I have more recently been able to articulate. Someone has “charisma” so they are automatically put to the head of the line.

    Speaking from my own experience, charisma seems to be a contra-indicator of good leader capability, especially if you toss out the word leader and replace it with servant.

    This is likely part of the shift in western culture from one of character to one of personality. So many of these twits would not have made it past the first cut if character was valued.

  179. Bill M wrote:

    This is likely part of the shift in western culture from one of character to one of personality. So many of these twits would not have made it past the first cut if character was valued.

    Bill, I spent 40+ years in corporate America. I observed a dynamic that is common to most organizations, including the church … the institution takes on the personality of its leadership. Why don’t we have good business ethic in most of the fortune 500 companies? They are led by characters having more persona than moral character? Why are arrogant twits rising to stardom in New Calvinism? They have a cute persona that may draw a crowd, but not a congregation of the Lord. But in the end, character flaws are revealed (as evidenced on various TWW posts). God never gives big assignments to little characters. New Calvinism will eventually run out of steam because God’s desired character for both leader and follower is Christlikeness … an exhortation you won’t hear ringing from the pulpits of the totally depraved / God loves us the way we are / it’s all about cultural relevance mumbo-jumbo of 21st century church.

  180. Bill M wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    promoted in companies who looked the part and had the “charisma” but cared nothing for really developing their people’s talent.
    That is another part I have more recently been able to articulate. Someone has “charisma” so they are automatically put to the head of the line.
    Speaking from my own experience, charisma seems to be a contra-indicator of good leader capability, especially if you toss out the word leader and replace it with servant.
    This is likely part of the shift in western culture from one of character to one of personality. So many of these twits would not have made it past the first cut if character was valued.

    We had such a charismatic type at my neocalvinist church: very young man, barely out of undergraduate school. Nearly movie star handsome, former major college athlete, a back-slapping, good fella type; had a near model beautiful blonde wife who cared more about fingernails and window treatments than theology (so she wouldn’t get in the way). But he had (and has) an arrogant edge under the All American Boy exterior, and you don’t have to scratch the surface very deeply to find it.

    Quite naturally, he was the one whom the regional leaders noticed when they visited to see that we were doing things the appropriate “Local Church” way, and they quickly invited this cub along to conferences where he got to meet the national Big Guys. They were grooming him for greatness, and the guy appears to have few, if any, servant qualities. I didn’t have many at his age either, and I wasn’t 6′-2″ and handsome. Anyway, fortunately something fell through, and now this kid is in another church where hopefully he won’t be tapped for leadership. He has about 20 years of hard knocks necessary before he’d even be half fit for leadership.

  181. The last two comments by Bill M and Max sparked a lot of thoughts for me. Over the past few years, I’ve been distilling out what I think makes for systems of control in churches, and boiled it down to three types: control through compliance (attempted moral perfection through legalistic application of rules and regulations), control through chaos (supposed freedom from rules and regs), and control through celebrities (people with highly magnet personas). An intriguing conclusion I came to is that each of these systems has one or more “charismatic” people as its initial leader, otherwise, people wouldn’t be drawn in. So, there’s that factor to consider.

    And then, there’s this quote I’ve been mulling over for 15 years that I think is relevant here. It comes from business author Price Pritchett, who says in The Ethics of Excellence, “The organization can never be something the people are not.”

    Because of what I’ve seen in toxic systems run by malignant ministers, I came up with my own corollary: “The organization will eventually become whatever its leaders are.”

    These factors together are what I find both sad and scary about so much of the Neo-Calvinist / Neo-Reformed / Neo-Puritan / Resurgence movement. To put it bluntly, it seems to be dominated by so-called “leaders” who turn out to be UNqualified due to spiritual immaturity and lack of relational ministry skills, and/or who turn out to be DISqualified for severe character deficiency issues or behavior patterns explicitly prohibited among leaders. In other words, these men fail the biblical test because they are missing what the overseer / elder / deacon passages tell us are “must haves” and they demonstrate they live by what those passages tell us are “can’t haves.”

    Sooner or later, we can expect their organizations will implode because integrity with those core scriptural principles of true leadership has been corroded. But in the meantime, dozens, hundreds, even thousands of people will have their spiritual vitality quenched from the abuse — and in the case of Neo-Calvinism, that seems to be mostly through compliance and charisma. They harm, not equip, believers, and so deserved to be watchblogged to warn the flocks of false shepherding.

  182. P.S. Similar sentiments to that last comment of mine show up in what I believe is one of the more important articles I’ve ever posted on my blog, in analyzing the core of a “culture of contempt” that showed up with Mark Driscoll and, sadly, seems to be locked into the spiritual and organizational DNA of the Neo-Calvinist / Resurgence movement.

    https://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/capstone-2-7-mark-driscolls-culture-of-contempt/

  183. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    in the meantime, dozens, hundreds, even thousands of people will have their spiritual vitality quenched from the abuse

    Brad, that has been my concern all along with New Calvinism. Sooner or later, multitudes of young folks will become disillusioned with the mess. It was good to see the 20s-40s returning to church, but we might not see them try again after taking the NC ride.

  184. P.S. The Achilles heel that breaks New Calvinism will most likely be when women who are treated as lesser citizens of the Kingdom get wise to the scheme (reformed theology preaches to men). Visit an NC church near you (e.g., one of the cool SBC church plants) – look carefully, you can see the oppression on the countenance of women members. Look for a mass exit from NC ranks by women leading the pack as they drag their sorry husbands and boyfriends out of the mess.

  185. Max wrote:

    Sooner or later, multitudes of young folks will become disillusioned with the mess.

    Either you or someone else was saying somewhere on here that many of the churches being ‘taken over’ by new calvinism were prayerless and Wordless. Even if you don’t agree with calvinism in whole or in part, if it corrects the deadness of so much church life, is it any wonder people will embrace it?

    I got involved in the nearest the UK got to a kind of shepherding movement precisely because they took the bible seriously where the mainline traditional churches had long since ditched it. What I got into was a mixture of good and bad, and I can imagine the whole calvinist thing in the States is much the same.

  186. Bill M wrote:

    This is likely part of the shift in western culture from one of character to one of personality. So many of these twits would not have made it past the first cut if character was valued.

    Being somewhat of a shallow rogue that talks his way out of things with technicalities also came into fashion. What is the meaning of “is”? That sort of thing. Yes. Personality became more important than character. Now we are redefining character.

  187. Lydia wrote:

    Now we are redefining character.

    I’m wondering if “results” and “followers” now measures “character.” Or, actually, if supposed “orthodoxy” and being “biblical” and “gospel-centered” IS NOW the essence of “character” — conformity to a set of abstract theological propositions instead of integrity with concrete Kingdom abilities and Christlike relationships.

  188. Lydia wrote:

    You see, I don’t think they are presenting the truth to people about who Jesus is or how He operates. I think it is another religion altogether. But that is just my opinion as I am hoping people realize that supporting these systems just perpetuates the abuse. See, I am really mean.

    You are really right, IMO.

  189. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    I’m wondering if “results” and “followers” now measures “character.” Or, actually, if supposed “orthodoxy” and being “biblical” and “gospel-centered” IS NOW the essence of “character” — conformity to a set of abstract theological propositions instead of integrity with concrete Kingdom abilities and Christlike relationships.

    Yes to both, I think, in my experience. How is success, in whatever venue, defined. Who defines and why?

    You might run a business into the ground that the Feds protect or bail out but still receive a huge bonus. That is success. You built protection for yourself into your contract while others lost—that is considered success.

    You grow a following, are on the speaking/book circuit and that is considered success.

    You have what the current powers to be consider “correct doctrine” and that means “truth” which is part of the success formula. (This one was more obvious with Driscoll as so much vileness for so long was dismissed because “he preaches the Gospel”) Personally, I don’t think the Pipers, Akins, Mohler’s etc as such actually liked Driscoll or his ways—-but they wanted access to his growing list of followers which were everywhere. They were potential consumers of their conferences, books, etc.

    Character has been slowly redefined in a more mass consumption way. I am not saying there have not ever been such examples, it is just seems to be more universally accepted today. We have people who are celebrities for no other reason than they sought fame. And they are followed for entertainment purposes only. Kardashians, Paris Hilton, etc. What have they done? Accomplished? People have always responded that waywith Royalty but who are these sorts and why?

    Take MOhler as an example. Exactly what had he accomplished when he was appointed President of SBTS at age 33? Why has he been lauded as so theologically brilliant? Facts don’t back that up. It was mostly propaganda to deflect his youth and inexperience. But now, very few actually question the assertion he is brilliant and a great man.

  190. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t think the Pipers, Akins, Mohler’s etc as such actually liked Driscoll or his ways—-but they wanted access to his growing list of followers which were everywhere. They were potential consumers of their conferences, books, etc.

    Bingo! Follow the money!

  191. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t think they are presenting the truth to people about who Jesus is or how He operates.

    If you listen to New Calvinist sermons, you will hear a lot about God, less about Jesus, and hardly a mention of the Holy Spirit. I’ve actually sat and listened to podcasts of prominent YRR “pastors” with notepad and pencil in hand, inscribed with 3 columns of the trinity, and marked when their names were dropped. It’s all about God. The message of the Cross, ministry of Jesus, and ability to have a personal relationship with Christ gets lost in reformed jibber-jabber.

  192. Ken wrote:

    Even if you don’t agree with calvinism in whole or in part, if it corrects the deadness of so much church life, is it any wonder people will embrace it?

    Yes, sadly that is the case. The American church at large is approaching apostasy. Young folks see apathy in organized religion and long for something different than the faith of their fathers. Unfortunately, New Calvinism with all its bells and whistles is filling that void with a generation that can so easily be led astray. I continue to pray for a genuine revival and spiritual awakening in America … our only hope to purge the error and right the ship.

  193. Max wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    I don’t think they are presenting the truth to people about who Jesus is or how He operates.
    If you listen to New Calvinist sermons, you will hear a lot about God, less about Jesus, and hardly a mention of the Holy Spirit. I’ve actually sat and listened to podcasts of prominent YRR “pastors” with notepad and pencil in hand, inscribed with 3 columns of the trinity, and marked when their names were dropped. It’s all about God. The message of the Cross, ministry of Jesus, and ability to have a personal relationship with Christ gets lost in reformed jibber-jabber.

    The YRR sermons I’ve heard in person or known of tended to be about:

    MONEY (our duty to give more)
    AUTHORITY (of the husband over the wife or the pastor over the laity)
    SUPREMACY (of any position the leaders hold vis-a-vis any other conceivable position)
    PRIMACY (of the “Local Church”–i.e., their particular church over which they have assumed control–over any other, including the worldwide Church comprised of all believers)

  194. Law Prof wrote:

    PRIMACY

    New Calvinists will tell you that they alone are the keepers of the true gospel (Calvinism = Gospel). All other Christian expressions of faith do not deliver the correct message … they alone have a corner on truth. The YRR truly believe they are 21st century reformers to restore the gospel that the rest of us have lost.

    NC leaders spur young Calvinsts to rebellion with words like “Where else are they going to go? If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going to end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there, and that’s something that frustrates some people, but when I’m asked about the New Calvinism—where else are they going to go, who else is going to answer the questions, where else are they going to find the resources they are going to need and where else are they going to connect. This is a generation that understands, they want to say the same thing that Paul said, they want to stand with the apostles, they want to stand with old dead people, and they know that they are going to have to, if they are going to preach and teach the truth.” (Dr. Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary)

    Such arrogance! Such error!

  195. Max wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    PRIMACY
    New Calvinists will tell you that they alone are the keepers of the true gospel (Calvinism = Gospel). All other Christian expressions of faith do not deliver the correct message … they alone have a corner on truth. The YRR truly believe they are 21st century reformers to restore the gospel that the rest of us have lost.
    NC leaders spur young Calvinsts to rebellion with words like “Where else are they going to go? If you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your theology is just going to end up basically being Reformed, basically something like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there, and that’s something that frustrates some people, but when I’m asked about the New Calvinism—where else are they going to go, who else is going to answer the questions, where else are they going to find the resources they are going to need and where else are they going to connect. This is a generation that understands, they want to say the same thing that Paul said, they want to stand with the apostles, they want to stand with old dead people, and they know that they are going to have to, if they are going to preach and teach the truth.” (Dr. Albert Mohler, President of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary)
    Such arrogance! Such error!

    I’ve said elsewhere, words to the effect of when an immature young man is elevated to a position of authority far beyond what his wisdom warrants and then proceeds to cut off correction from those older and wiser than he will not only fail to become wiser in time, but will become markedly more stupid.

    Mohler was elevated to a position of authority when he was barely clear of his university studies. He had no business there and he now appears to be a middle aged man with perhaps less wisdom than he had a couple decades ago. The fruits of such an ill fit are so obvious as to hardly need elaboration. At least Billy Graham at about that same age realized he was in over his head as President of Northwestern College and stepped down before he could do too much damage.

    There is some wisdom is knowing that you don’t know. That’s not a very high standard. graham had it–apparently Mohler did not and does not.

  196. Law Prof wrote:

    Mohler was elevated to a position of authority when he was barely clear of his university studies. He had no business there and he now appears to be a middle aged man with perhaps less wisdom than he had a couple decades ago.

    Yes, but in his mind he is standing with the apostles and old dead people. The apostles certainly had more wisdom. The old dead people he has patterned his life after did not. But, he somehow made it to the top of the SBC heap any way! His spiritual alignment may be off, but he has certainly spearheaded a remarkable takeover of SBC traditional belief and practice. He appears to be untouchable as the New Calvinist movement spreads its tentacles throughout SBC life.

  197. Max wrote:

    Law Prof wrote:
    Mohler was elevated to a position of authority when he was barely clear of his university studies. He had no business there and he now appears to be a middle aged man with perhaps less wisdom than he had a couple decades ago.
    Yes, but in his mind he is standing with the apostles and old dead people. The apostles certainly had more wisdom. The old dead people he has patterned his life after did not. But, he somehow made it to the top of the SBC heap any way! His spiritual alignment may be off, but he has certainly spearheaded a remarkable takeover of SBC traditional belief and practice. He appears to be untouchable as the New Calvinist movement spreads its tentacles throughout SBC life.

    Perhaps yes, perhaps no. Perhaps he will just go on and on with his campaign until one day he grows old and is nudged aside for younger men to take his place, then fades away and dies to face the Lord, Who will deal with him in a manner far more just and kind than and altogether right than any of us could.

    Or perhaps he will build and build and grow greater and greater in his own mind until one day he lives to see his empire collapse or turn upon him, such as Misters Driscoll, Phillips, Bakker, Mahaney and Gothard have lived to see. And then we will see the measure of the man, is he capable of repentance? There is not a good track record for that, based on that list. But with God, all things are possible.

  198. brad/futuristguy wrote:

    And then, there’s this quote I’ve been mulling over for 15 years that I think is relevant here. It comes from business author Price Pritchett, who says in The Ethics of Excellence, “The organization can never be something the people are not.”

    How true is that.

  199. Max wrote:

    Shunning is an ancient church practice that has been given new energy by the New Calvinist movement. Members who see the names of others plastered on the wall will soon learn not to question the message and method of church leadership, lest their John Henry also be put on public display.

    Make an Example of one and you silence a hundred.