Tim Challies, Along with Other Neo-Reformed and/or SBC Leaders, Have a Child Sex Abuse Problem

Dedicated to those leaders who ignore child sex abuse: “If it takes a village to raise a child, it takes a village to abuse one.” – Mitch Garabedian link

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=32972&picture=briefcase-with-a-million-dollars
A Million Dollars

What is the Number 1 reason that churches get sued?

Recently, Church Law and Tax posted a great infographic. The number one reason that churches wound up in court, from 2010-2014, is due to sex abuse of a minor. Make sure you understand this. This is why churches are going to court these days. 

Screen Shot 2016-05-18 at 3.32.37 PM

Is the SBC deliberately ignoring the issue of child sex abuse?

In 2014, Political Research Associates, a group which challenges the Right, posted When the “Family Values” Agenda Includes Child Sex Abuse  At first, I was inclined to blow it off since it seemed to be politically driven. However, they made an excellent observation. Observing that Catholics and Baptist have much in common when it comes to child sex abuse, they quoted Boz Tchividjian.

Boz Tchividjian rattled the evangelical world in 2013, when he declared that the problem of child sex abuse in evangelicalism is “worse” than the problem in the Roman Catholic Church.

They proceeded to quote Robert Parnham of the Baptist Center for Ethics.

Tchividjian is not the only prominent evangelical speaking out. “Catholic and Baptist leaders have more similarities than differences on the child-abuse front,” wrote Robert Parnham, executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics. “Both have harmed church members and the Christian witness by not swiftly addressing predatory clergy and designing reliable protective systems.” –

They go on to quote Peter Lumpkins who believes that the SBC is ignoring his 2013 resolution. I think he is right.

Indeed, Rev. Peter Lumpkins of Georgia called for the SBC’s governing body to adopt “a zero-tolerance policy toward the sexual abuse of children in churches,” but now thinks church officials are ignoring his 2013 resolution. 

The article then throws in the zinger. It was written in 2014 which was the 5th year of statistics that showed that the number one reason churches are sued is due to child sex abuse. Yet, the ERLC did not think it important to make child sex abuse and the church a subject of discussion when it came to their conference on The Gospel and Human Sexuality.

As just one example, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC), SBC’s public policy arm, is holding an April “summit” in Nashville on “The Gospel and Human Sexuality.” Yet the program fails to include anything about child sex abuse. “From broken marriages to pornography to homosexuality, sexual confusion and sexual brokenness has ravaged our culture and can deteriorate the integrity of our churches,” the published program declares.  It assures prospective conferees that they can “discover” how their “church and local congregations can be a beacon of hope, clarity, and restoration as the gospel is brought to bear on human sexuality.” 

To add insult to injury, this sexuality summit featured a pastor who was entangled in the cover up of child sex abuse and it was not CJ Mahaney since he wasn't Baptist in 2014.

Adding insult to injury, Rev. Greg Belser, a man who epitomizes the problem in the SBC, is not only a member of the ERLC’s “leadership council,” but also a panelist at the sex summit.  The Senior Pastor at Morrison Heights Baptist Church in Clinton, Mississippi, Belser also happens to be at the center of a major, ongoing clergy sex abuse scandal.  In other words, the ERLC—the SBC body with delegated responsibility for addressing sex abuse within churches—features as a leader someone who himself is deeply entangled in a cover-up of abuse. 

I went over to the ERLC website and searched for posts about child sex abuse. There were 15 results, many of which did not deal with the issue at hand. Then, I searched homosexuality. There were 100 resources. It is rather obvious that the ERLC does not seem too concerned with child sex abuse.

It appears that Russell Moore is also a buddy of CJ Mahaney. Look at Moore's book, Adopted for Life at Amazon. He appears to stress that Mahaney wrote the Foreward to his book.

Adopted for Life (Foreword by C. J. Mahaney): The Priority of Adoption for Christian Families and Churches 

Here is what an astute commenter had to say.

I understand that a future version of the book will not have C.J. Mahaey's foreword. I cannot endorse a book that is supported by an organization that has continued to downplay the reality of child abuse in the church. 

Looks like the ERLC is doing some spring cleaning. It removed a post by Mahaney. I still have my usual question. Did CJ Mahaney or SGM contribute any money to the ERLC or to the ministry of Russell Moore? 

Some church leaders want to handle sex abuse cases internally.

In a 2016 article by Christianity Today, discussing the SGM scandals, some families said that they were told that churches should handle child sex abuse allegations via a Bible based Reconciliation process and they should keep the secular authorities out of the matter.

“Various families quoted in the article said church leaders recommended that allegations of child sex abuse be handled internally through a Bible-prescribed reconciliation process rather than turned over to secular authorities, something Sovereign Grace Ministries has denied” (“Tale of evangelical sex scandal hits Washington newsstands,” BaptistNews.com).

The article got something wrong. They claim that SGM ministries has denied that they counseled their people in such a manner. However, CJ Mahaney's brother in law, Grant Layman, admitted under oath, that he did not report the abuse to the authorities. So we know at least one SGM pastor did what was alleged.

The SBC demonstrates ignorance when it comes to child sex abuse.

LifeWay Resources posted an article on how to protect your church from lawsuits when it comes to children.

Require that there be no unsupervised cross-gender contact. For instance, don't allow a male youth worker to be alone with a female member of a youth group under any circumstance.

There should never be unsupervised contact between any youth worker and any child. In my former church, the MALE molester is spending 13 years after molesting a number of young MALE teens.

The SBC is now controlled by the Calvinists. Therefore, they get to deal with the problems and they get the blame as well.

Baptist News Global posted Child abuse a Calvinist problem, podcast says. We wrote about this podcast here. Let's take a closer look at one of the statements. Aimee Byrd states this could also demonstrate a disregard for the concerns of women who tend to be attuned to these issues. (Don''t worry, the Deebs know that many, many men are tuned into this as well.) Remember, Byrd is Reformed so she does not have a theological bone to pick.

Aimee Byrd, described on the blog as a wife, mother, blogger and author, said attempts by pastors to suppress and withhold communication about abuse cases can backfire into creating an environment of mistrust more — and not less — likely to breed false accusations.

“There’s wondering,” she said. “There’s mystery involved. ‘Was my child around these sex abusers I’m hearing about? Was my child in one of these people’s homes?’ Kids go through normal things in life like night terror and stuff like that, but you might have that in your home and think, ‘Maybe my child was sexually abused and this is going on and we’re not getting any answers. So maybe someone has abused my child.’ I can just see how if it isn’t communicated well, and if the proper steps aren’t made, then I would think there would be more false allegations because of that.”

Byrd said attempts by male leaders to minimize abuse also sends a message about “how women are viewed and treated in the church.”

“Is it a culture where women are hurt by these things?” she asked. “Are women just seeing boys clubs where they’re not being heard and it’s not even approachable for them?”

The article started with this statement.

Child abuse isn’t just a Catholic problem, it’s also a Calvinist problem, according to an April 20 podcast sympathetic to the so-called “young, restless and reformed” movement popular among evangelicals belonging to denominations including the Southern Baptist Convention

Why I believe that The Reformed and /or SBC leaders are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

The Deebs have still not recuperated from the joke that Al Mohler, who is the smartest man on the planet according to CJ Mahaney, told at T4G2016 about Googling Mahaney's name. Such a search of course, brings up all of the articles from around the globe dealing with the sex abuse scandals at Sovereign Grace Ministries. There were lots of giggles from the dudebros in attendance. How could they show such crass disregard for the pain and suffering of child sex abuse victims?!

We believe that the continued support for CJ Mahaney and his boys by men like Al Mohler demonstrates that T4G, The Gospel Coalition, and a number of SBC and Reformed seminaries are not taking child sex abuse seriously.

Enter Tim Challies…

Raw Story posted an excellent article Jesus wept: There were 12 reported incidents of Christian pastors molesting kids — in just the last month

According to the Crimes Against Children Research Center, 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse. The exact number of actual sexual assaults is unknown since many victims never speak up or, in some cases like Florida, the sexual assault is hushed up.

Sexual abuse within the Christian community that either ignores it or attempts to sweep it under the rug became a hot topic in 2015 after it was revealed that popular Christian celebrities Jim Bob and Michelle Duggar attempted to hide the fact that their son Josh had molested several of his sisters when they were younger. 

The Raw Story decided to interview Tim Challies! 

According to Christian writer Tom Challies, sexual predators gravitate to churches because Christians are taught to submit to authority in an atmosphere that encourages trust. Church programs also offer easy access to the children of parishioners.

Quoting from writer Deepak Reju’s On Guard: Preventing and Responding To Child Abuse At Church, Challies writes: “Many Christians don’t know how to distinguish likability and trustworthiness. They confuse the two categories, assuming that if someone is courteous and nice, they must also be trustworthy. Moreover, some Christians behave as though the problem doesn’t exist, and some look with suspicion on reports of abuse. They believe children are lying and are more prone to take an adult’s word. Sexual predators know that these dynamics operate in churches, and they know they can get away with a lot on account of it”

After I banged my head on the table and scared the pug dogs, I became angry. Tim Challies had a lot of nerve to say the following. 

some Christians behave as though the problem doesn’t exist, and some look with suspicion on reports of abuse. They believe children are lying and are more prone to take an adult’s word. 

Tim Challies is the poster boy for the Calvinistas who prop up and honor CJ Mahaney in spite of allegation after allegation. Here are some infamous statements by Challies regarding the SGM situation. He said learning about the allegations was not good time management and would not be spiritually beneficial. Could someone tell Tim that the kids who were abused probably didn't find it spiritually beneficial as well.

I recall meeting Mahaney only one time and for no more than two or three minutes. To my knowledge we have never corresponded by email or any other media. He and I have never shared a speaking platform and I have never spoken at a SGM event (though I did liveblog a couple of them several years ago). All this to say that I write as an outside observer rather than as a personal friend and write this article primarily for the benefit of other outside observers.

…For this reason I have deliberately avoided learning too much. I have had to question my motives, especially since I have repeatedly been on the receiving end of scathing criticism for not using my platform to speak out against Mahaney. I have chosen to read the news stories, to understand the basic facts, but conscience compels me to stop there. To do more may not be spiritually beneficial, it may not reflect good time management, and it may not be loving toward those who are involved.

In his original article he did not waste any time expressing concern for any possible victims. In fact, he claimed that silence was more loving. To make matters worse, he, along with unnamed BFFs with whom he discussed this, decided to "not have an opinion."

However, the majority of us are far on the outside with very little at stake. For this reason many of us simply do not need to have an opinion.

To make matters worse, he downplayed his relationship to Mahaney which we called him on a few days later. Here is an excerpt from that post.


Oh, we failed to call attention to Tim Challies' remark that he is a co-founder of Cruciform Press.  What a clever name for a Christian publishing company.  Cruciform means "forming or arranged in a cross". 

Challies first announced Cruciform Press in an April 2010 post on his website.  In case you missed it, here's the exciting news:

"…let me tell you about an exciting new venture I am involved in. Let me introduce you to [insert drum roll here] Cruciform Press.

Cruciform Press is an alternative publishing company designed from the ground up to operate in the digital marketplace. And it officially launches today.

This is a collaborative effort between Kevin Meath (book editor extraordinaire who has edited books for authors like C.J. Mahaney, Paul David Tripp and Dave Harvey), Bob Bevington (an entrepreneur and optometrist who also happens to co-author books with Jerry Bridges) and me. Together we see the need for a model of publishing that begins with, not extends to, the new realities of this digital world.

As a publisher getting its start at the cusp of the digital age, our model is slightly different from traditional publishers. We are focusing on books between 10,000 and 25,000 words (roughly 50 to 100 pages) and will offer them at great prices in print-on-demand, e-book and audiobook formats. And we intend to publish a new book on the first of every month."

Cruciform Press Founders

As mentioned above, Cruciform Press was co-founded by Kevin Meath, Bob Bevington, and Tim Challies.  Meath serves as the Publisher and Editor hat, Bevington is the Executive Director, and Challies is Strategy and Acquisitions

We believe Kevin Meath is the Smoking Gun.  Meath's bio on the Cruciform Press website says it all.  Here's how it begins:

"Kevin has more than 25 years professional experience as an editor, including eleven years as chief editor for Sovereign Grace Ministries. He has worked on more than 40 book projects for the Christian market, and has edited for C.J. Mahaney, Paul Tripp, John Piper, Jerry Bridges, Joel Beeke, Richard D. Phillips, Scotty Smith, Dave Harvey, and many others. He has worked with Multnomah, Crossway, Reformation Trust, Shepherd Press, New Growth Press, Founders Press, Sovereign Grace Ministries, Revive Our Hearts, Focus on the Family, Desiring God, and others."

Meath also features testimonials by the likes of C.J. Mahaney, Paul Tripp, Bob Kauflin, Dave Harvey, and Gary Ricucci.  Also, you might be interested to know that Kevin Meath was heavily involved in the publication of Sovereign Grace Magazine.  He writes:

"Sovereign Grace magazine was published for more than 20 years, most of that time as a bi-monthly. I served as Editor for the final seven years.

When it came time to plan an issue, C.J. Mahaney and I would work together to identify the issue theme, as well as the lead teaching articles and their respective authors. I would then work with the authors of the teaching, news, and testimony articles to bring the issue to completion, although sometimes I was also tasked with converting a sermon transcript or book chapter into an article on behalf of the author… The issues shown here included articles that later contributed to several books, including C.J.'s Humility: True Greatness, Living the Cross-Centered Life, and Worldliness, and Bob Kauflin's Worship Matters."

According to the testimonials link above, here are some of the projects on which Meath has collaborated:

  • When Sinners Say "I Do": Discovering the Power of the Gospel for Marriage – Dave Harvey
  • Love That Lasts:  When Marriage Meets Grace – Gary and Betsy Ricucci
  • Songs for the Cross Centered Life – Sovereign Grace Music
  • Upward:  The Bob Kauflin Hymns Project – Sovereign Grace Music
  • Sex, Romance, and the Glory of God:  What Every Christian Husband Needs to Know – C.J. Mahaney
  • Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood (Foundations for the Family Series) – Wayne Grudem
  • Valley of Vision – Sovereign Grace Music
  • The Cross Centered Life (both editions) – C.J. Mahaney
  • Awesome God – Sovereign Grace Music
  • Savior: Celebrating the Mystery of God Becoming Man – Sovereign Grace Music
  • Preaching the Cross – Together for the Gospel by Mark Dever, J. Ligon Duncan, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., C.J. Mahaney (2007)
  • All We Long to Sing – Sovereign Grace Music
  • Pastoral Leadership for Manhood and Womanhood (Foundations of the Family) – Wayne Grudem and Dennis Rainey
  • Why Small Groups? – C.J. Mahaney

Yes, we have Kevin Meath to thank for these 'gospelrific' projects.  Now you know the behind the scenes individual to thank…  As Cruciform Press gets established, you can be sure that they will be cranking out more of these kinds of projects.  Just what we need…

Getting back to Tim Challies, he established himself by riding the coattails of high profile Calvinistas like Mahaney.  Now that he's his own man and 'business' partner of SGM's former editor, he just doesn't want to know that much about the SGM mess.  After all, It's not good 'time management' and besides that, it's not good for 'business'


Child sex abuse does not appear to be a priority for the Neo-Reformed and/or SBC crowd but conferences, books, money, church discipline and homosexuality are. If they continue to demonstrate their lack of concern for child sex abuse within their tribes, they will continue lose (and are currently losing) in the court of public opinion. Just ask the Catholics.

We continue to believe that there is a lot of money involved in the Reformed and/or Baptist world when it comes to celebrity pastors. We also believe that CJ Mahaney has established himself firmly in this group as they have share stages, platforms, etc. We know that CJ Mahaney has given lots of money to SBTS, Wayne Grudem's ministry, Mark Dever's/ CHBC ministry, etc. It appears that it may have been a worthy investment resulting in many happy returns. However, people are watching and the giggles about child sex abuse cover up have been noted.


Another TWW tutorial

The following story is about a place where convicted sex offenders live in community. I found something lacking in the story. I bet our regular readers will get it. I challenge the Nwo-Reformed/SBC crowd to read it and see if they can see what is missing.

Inside ‘Pervert Park’: Safe Haven for Sex Offenders

Comments

Tim Challies, Along with Other Neo-Reformed and/or SBC Leaders, Have a Child Sex Abuse Problem — 306 Comments

  1. Thanks, Dee. Another excellent article about the epidemic of child sex abuse in the conservative evangelical church. (The Catholic Church has been litigated for decades, and there have been arrests and prosecutions of pedophile clergy, and it’s time now for the same to be done in the conservative Protestant church).

    Church Law & Tax should be releasing some updated charts and articles about the 2015 year in church litigation cases. I will send it to you (or tweet it) as soon as I get it.

  2. In many jurisdictions, taking a pee in the park will get one a conviction for indecent exposure with a requirement to register as a sex offender! Once on the list, no matter what the offense, employers who hire the RSO are harassed until they terminate the RSO, with callers telling them to fire the baby f’er or lose their business. Some are threatened with false reports of sexual abuse of minors against them.

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

  3. It is rather damning that they can say the right things then avoid following those words. Their own words convict them. Now, if only they would repent and do some good in supporting the victims.

  4. It really does beggar the mind. These big whigs in Neo-Cal land are obsessed with what consenting adults do with other consenting adults behind closed doors and yet they want to keep the lid on sex abuse of kids in their venues. Like I keep saying sooner or later the hammer is gonna’ fall and the courts will make an example of them.

  5. Dee, these guys have become adept at spin and propaganda over the years. They will do the same with this issue. They are just positioning themselves to be on the correct side now that they discern the wind changing direction. Maybe some good for children will come out of it in the end. If good can come from empty bags of wind.

  6. @ An Attorney:

    I agree…I think of what my Boy Scout troop did on hikes for restroom breaks. I know someone in the DC area who works at a think tank dealing with this very issue. Peeing outside is very different than raping a child.

  7. That said…reading about the guy who blames himself for being gay is an insult to gays. How many gays are going to molest a child or do something predatory? That part of the article was cr#p. (ed.)

  8. An Attorney wrote:

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

    Or the 19 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old in a state where 18 is the age of consent.

  9. An Attorney wrote:

    In many jurisdictions, taking a pee in the park will get one a conviction for indecent exposure with a requirement to register as a sex offender! Once on the list, no matter what the offense, employers who hire the RSO are harassed until they terminate the RSO, with callers telling them to fire the baby f’er or lose their business. Some are threatened with false reports of sexual abuse of minors against them.

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

    Yikes! When I was a kid we used to go on long family road trips. I remember us stopping on the side of the road cos us boys had to go and we’d disappear into the trees or behind bushes on the roadside. My dad did that a couple of times too.

  10. @ An Attorney:

    I’m not certain which jurisdiction you’re in, but that’s not the case in my state. Taking a pee won’t land you on Megan’s List. Child Porn, which violates federal and state laws, is a different matter. And someone usually has quite a collection of child porn. My concern about child porn is someone is sexually interested in children, and many have confessed to have gotten away with on-contact sex crimes against children.

  11. Good article. I remember when Challies blocked negative comments about Mahaney (probably still does). When I, and a couple others, pointed this out to Team Pyro, the illustrious Frank Turk called us “conspiracy theorists.” I commented that our claim could be easily checked out. He deleted that comment but continued to label us conspiracy theorists. The following day, he “hilariously” tweeted that some completely unrelated incident must be the fault of Mahaney according to conspiracy theorists. I tweeted him that he was a coward for deleting my comment the previous day. Can’t remember what his reply was, but he soon blocked me.

    On a related note, sometime before the Mahaney controversies, Turk wrote about Mahaney walking a few feet from him at a conference. It read like what a teenage girl would say about being near Justin Bieber. Yuk.

  12. @ JeffB:
    Turk is like radioactive material. Best to stay away or wear hazmat suit if one must handle. He has been trying to be famous in those circles from blogging and social media for 10 years.

  13. siteseer wrote:

    Dee, these guys have become adept at spin and propaganda over the years. They will do the same with this issue. They are just positioning themselves to be on the correct side now that they discern the wind changing direction. Maybe some good for children will come out of it in the end. If good can come from empty bags of wind.

    This is it. Now, It is more about image that sincere concern. How do we know? Because only corrupted minds respond to molested children by implying ignorance is more spiritual.

    I think it makes them just more deceptive and untrustworthy as in trying to save their reputation.

  14. I posted something about a pastor in mod right now, but it maybe doesn’t fit the raw story because there isn’t any molestation reported.

  15. @ Lydia:

    The links that people will go to in order to ingratiate themselves with perceived celebrity “gatekeepers” is both amazing and pathetic. They are all competing to have the loudest voice in an echo chamber.

    Lest I sound too judgemental, however, I recognize that the same tendency is within me but that I must war against it.

  16. Challies expends a lot of words to say “Don’t think, and if you do think, then shut up. We will tell you what to think, and we will tell you what you may say and to whom you may say it.”

    Very un-Reformational.

    His recent comments which utterly contradict what he said about SGM seem self-serving and an attempt to have his cake (continue the revenue stream from Cruciform and its connections with Mahaney) and eat it, too (I am concerned about the kids, and we should listen to them!) Which is it? How can those two positions be reconciled?

    This is why pageviews are not a measure of spiritual wisdom and why blogging does not make one a pastor.

  17. Beakerj wrote:

    What does this fruit tell us about the tree?

    All that we need to know. Attempting to learn more about the tree beyond the nature of its fruit would not be good time management nor spiritually beneficial nor would it be loving toward all. I’m pretty sure Challies should agree with you!

  18. IMO, Those who obtain and view child porn are entirely complicit in the victimization of the children photographed. How does the law treat this?

  19. dee wrote:

    @ Lea:
    As fas as I am concerned, child porn is child molestation since that is what it is depicting.

    That is true, I was just thinking maybe it didn’t fit the article parameters. But add this one to the pile. There have been way way too many lately.

  20. Gram3 is correct.. The practice of these guys is not at all consistent with the traditional Reformation/reformed movements… They repress intellectual dialog by the masses….
    Conversely, they are trying to maximize PR to bring people in which is very much an Armenian approach…. if everyone is “elect” you just need to get the message out, not “sale it”… They would not be trying to cover-up child molesters if the “elect” would come anyway..

    Gram3 wrote:

    Challies expends a lot of words to say “Don’t think, and if you do think, then shut up. We will tell you what to think, and we will tell you what you may say and to whom you may say it.”
    Very un-Reformational.
    His recent comments which utterly contradict what he said about SGM seem self-serving and an attempt to have his cake (continue the revenue stream from Cruciform and its connections with Mahaney) and eat it, too (I am concerned about the kids, and we should listen to them!) Which is it? How can those two positions be reconciled?
    This is why pageviews are not a measure of spiritual wisdom and why blogging does not make one a pastor.

  21. Are there any actual numbers to go along with that graphic??? I’d be incredibly interested in the number of lawsuits per year. Anyone?

  22. “The article got something wrong. They claim that SGM ministries has denied that they counseled their people in such a manner. However, CJ Mahaney’s brother in law, Grant Layman, admitted under oath, that he did not report the abuse to the authorities. So we know at least one SGM pastor did what was alleged.”
    +++++++++++++++

    don’t forget Grant Layman is CJ’s brother-in-law. very relationally entwined.

    -the brother of CJ’s wife
    -moved in with CJ & Carolyn and lived with them for a time at age 19
    -a pastor at CJ’s church, reporting to him

  23. Muff Potter wrote:

    It really does beggar the mind. These big whigs in Neo-Cal land are obsessed with what consenting adults do with other consenting adults behind closed doors and yet they want to keep the lid on sex abuse of kids in their venues.

    Remember: TEH FAG TEH FAG TEH FAG IS THE OTHER.
    But diddling kids?
    Privilege of Pastoral Rank.

  24. Lydia wrote:

    @ Beakerj:
    Everything we need to know. Problem is they have redefined good fruit as correct Doctrine.

    Purity of Ideology, Comrades.

  25. JeffB wrote:

    On a related note, sometime before the Mahaney controversies, Turk wrote about Mahaney walking a few feet from him at a conference. It read like what a teenage girl would say about being near Justin Bieber

    “I WANT TO HAVE HIS CHILD! SQUEEEEEE!!!!!”

  26. Patriciamc wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

    Or the 19 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old in a state where 18 is the age of consent.

    I understand in such cases, there’s usually no prosecution unless the age difference is more than 3-5 years.

    However, if you get a prosecutor whose eyes are fixed on County D.A., then State Attorney General, then the Governor’s Mansion, then the White House…

  27. David (Eagle) wrote:

    That said…reading about the guy who blames himself for being gay is an insult to gays. How many gays are going to molest a child or do something predatory?

    But that’s The Party Line.
    THEY’RE AFTER OUR CHRISTIAN CHILDREN!
    THINK OF THE CHILDREN, THE CHILDREN, THE CHILDREN…

  28. In his original article he did not waste any time expressing concern for any possible victims. In fact, he claimed that silence was more loving. To make matters worse, he, along with unnamed BFFs with whom he discussed this, decided to “not have an opinion.”

    “I KNOW NOTHINK! NOTHINK!”
    — Sgt Schultz, Stalag 13
    (Johann Banner, I’m getting so much mileage from your best-known character’s tag line…)

  29. Patty in Massachusetts wrote:

    IMO, Those who obtain and view child porn are entirely complicit in the victimization of the children photographed. How does the law treat this?

    Having child porn is a serious felony under federal law and state laws:
    1. from US Dept. of Justice website:
    https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/citizens-guide-us-federal-law-child-pornography

    https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/child-pornography

    Here’s a Los Angeles, CA based criminal defense attorneys’ website that explains criminal penalties for CA:
    http://www.shouselaw.com/child-pornography-crimes.html

  30. The SBC leaders cares about no one but themselves. IMO what was once a great organization is run by heartless men.

  31. Lydia wrote:

    only corrupted minds respond to molested children by implying ignorance is more spiritual.

    🙁 grotesquely true

  32. Gram3 wrote:

    This is why pageviews are not a measure of spiritual wisdom and why blogging does not make one a pastor.

    This is completely off the subject but a former mommy blogger named Josi Denise pretty much blew the lid off the mommy blogging industry this past week. I suspect many of her comments could be brought over the Reformed Industrial Blogging Complex.

  33. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:

    I once (a long time ago) was a few feet away from Gene Simmons (KISS) at a volleyball tournament our daughters were both playing at. He looked at me in a quizative sort of way like he couldn’t figure out how I wasn’t swooning like the other mothers. CJ and Gene enjoy completely different narcissistic supply. But the creepy ooze factor gets stuck in my throat all the same. Neither one feels more Christian than the other.

  34. mirele wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    This is why pageviews are not a measure of spiritual wisdom and why blogging does not make one a pastor.

    This is completely off the subject but a former mommy blogger named Josi Denise pretty much blew the lid off the mommy blogging industry this past week. I suspect many of her comments could be brought over the Reformed Industrial Blogging Complex.

    What is a ‘mommy blog’, and why did it have its lid blown off?

  35. Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:

    Gram3 is correct.. The practice of these guys is not at all consistent with the traditional Reformation/reformed movements… They repress intellectual dialog by the masses….
    Conversely, they are trying to maximize PR to bring people in which is very much an Armenian approach…. if everyone is “elect” you just need to get the message out, not “sale it”… They would not be trying to cover-up child molesters if the “elect” would come anyway..

    Being content to minister only to “the elect” would not bring much power, acclaim or wealth their way.

  36. Patriciamc wrote:

    Or the 19 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old in a state where 18 is the age of consent.

    Excellent example of spirit vs. letter.

  37. mirele wrote:

    mommy blogging

    Yeah, I heard about that, and I think there are many parallels. I never got the point of MommyBlogging, but I was never nominated for Mother of the Year, either. I mean, are there significant differences in organic diapers? And how important is it, really, to have the coolest Elf On A Shelf? Very similar to Theodebates online.

    ISTM that pastors who blog should be pastoring and mommies who blog should be mommying. We need more virtue and less virtue signaling. I feel ever-so-much more virtuous for pointing that out.

    Thanks for what you are doing regarding Driscoll. I suspect that Grudem is behind this move to PHX, at least in part.

  38. roebuck wrote:

    What is a ‘mommy blog’, and why did it have its lid blown off?

    If I tell you, you will want to read one, and I do not want to be responsible for what you might do to yourself or others.

  39. Gram3 wrote:

    This is why pageviews are not a measure of spiritual wisdom and why blogging does not make one a pastor.

    Don’t PORN sites get a LOT of pageviews?

  40. Gram3 wrote:

    roebuck wrote:

    What is a ‘mommy blog’, and why did it have its lid blown off?

    If I tell you, you will want to read one, and I do not want to be responsible for what you might do to yourself or others.

    Could you at least link us to Josi Denise’s blow-the-lid-off posting or news item?

  41. so, being very far removed from SBC anything (in geography, viewpoint / conviction, modus operandi…), I wondered what exactly is an erlc?

    from their website:

    Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission

    Mission

    The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission exists to assist the churches by helping them understand the moral demands of the gospel, apply Christian principles to moral and social problems and questions of public policy, and to promote religious liberty in cooperation with the churches and other Southern Baptist entities.

    Ministries

    1. Assist Churches in applying the moral and ethical teachings of the Bible to the Christian life.

    Provide research, information resources, consultation, and counsel to denominational entities, churches and individuals with regard to the application of Christian principles in everyday living and the nation’s public ife.

    2. Assist churches through the communication and advocacy of moral and ethical concerns in the public arena.

    Represent Southern Baptists in communicating the ethical positions of the Southern Baptist Convention to the public and to public officials.

    3. Assist churches in their moral witness in local communities.

    Provide information resources that inform and equip churches for active moral witness in their communities.

    4. Assist churches and other Southern Baptist entities by promoting religious liberty.

    Provide information and counsel to denominational entities, churches, and individuals regarding appropriate responses to religious liberty concerns; represent Southern Baptists in communicating the positions of the Southern Baptist Convention on religious liberty issues to the public and to public officials.
    ——————————————

    so, my questions:

    *ERLC does not consider sexual abuse as the #1 reason churches are sued important enough to include in their provision of information resources that inform and equip churches for active moral witness in their communities?

    *ERLC had/has every reason to report this and make it a demonstrable priority. I’ve perused their 15 articles on the subject. am I overreacting in thinking their response is anemic?

    in thinking about the big picture, would it be a fair assessment to say that their mission statement #4 (religious liberty, the free exercise of religion) trumps mission statements #1-3?

  42. Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:

    if everyone is “elect” you just need to get the message out, not “sale it”

    Indeed, but the “elect” business is all about bringing in business. What they are doing has nothing to do with getting the Good News out. I think it was Burwell who highlighted that aspect on the last thread. This is not about freely telling people the Good News. Otherwise it would look a lot more like freely telling people the Good News. I think it is what it appears to be, as Beaker wrote above, and that is a commercial enterprise.

  43. Gram3 wrote:

    If I tell you, you will want to read one, and I do not want to be responsible for what you might do to yourself or others.

    How thoughtful, Gram3! I am going to make it a point to NOT know what a mommy blog is. 😉

  44. @ Lydia:
    Oh I forgot, the fruit of the spirit is innerrancy, compatibilism, complementarianism, tithing, plagiarism, authoritarianism & callousness. Letter of Piper to the Calvinists Chapter 1 verse 1.

  45. Bridget wrote:

    If they get enough hits to their blog.

    I read one of the articles and it basically goes around in circles. They try to game hits, basically. Which is, like, the whole internet as far as I can tell (except people who get legit hits!)

    I don’t care about the fake nonsense bit. I love that she had a ‘crisis of conscience’ (that happily gets her a bunch of news coverage!) and as a result she…started another blog.

  46. an ERLC article from March 11, 2016:

    TOP FIVE INTERNATIONAL STORIES OF THE WEEK

    4. The United States is facing opposition to what would be the first-ever UN Security Council resolution against the ever-growing problem of sexual exploitation by UN peacekeepers. In 2015, there were 69 allegations of sexual abuse by peacekeepers with only 17 investigations completed by the end of January. More than half of the allegations involve rape or sexual abuse of children. In only one case of sexual exploitation did a country punish their soldier, but the punishment was merely a nine-day suspension. These cases are towering evidence of the failure of the UN to govern itself and the need to bring reform immediately.
    ———————-

    I my goodness, the irony would be utterly amusing if the subject matter weren’t so tragic.

    shall we substitute evangelical church data for UN country data?

    amazing, ERLC finds this significant enough to report on. but keeps information about its own opaque.

  47. Lydia wrote:

    This is it. Now, It is more about image that sincere concern. How do we know? Because only corrupted minds respond to molested children by implying ignorance is more spiritual.

    I think it makes them just more deceptive and untrustworthy as in trying to save their reputation.

    I am expecting them to start acting like they invented this area of concern, taking control of the narrative.

  48. @ Patti:

    GS, KISS
    +++++++++

    oh that is so funny. I think GS is very interesting. despite being an egocentric jerk, that is.

  49. @ Divorce Minister:
    Lea wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
    Could you at least link us to Josi Denise’s blow-the-lid-off posting or news item?
    My guess? They get paid to push products. The end.

    A lot of the fashion blogs I read are like that too, but some are honest about it.

  50. Lea wrote:

    My guess? They get paid to push products. The end.

    Exactly. Just like Mirele said, the business model looks similar to Challies’ and the others. And TgC, Lifeway, etc. TgC site is one big ad for products. I mean “resources.”

  51. Patriciamc wrote:

    fashion blogs

    If the Deebs start a fashion blog, I will read it. Not that it will help me any more than TWW helps the GG fanboys who read it.

  52. Gram3 wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    My guess? They get paid to push products. The end.

    Exactly. Just like Mirele said, the business model looks similar to Challies’ and the others. And TgC, Lifeway, etc. TgC site is one big ad for products. I mean “resources.”

    Yep! Follow the money is never a bad way to start, when looking at peoples motivations. I very much appreciate TWW (which btw, I tend to read as ‘the winds of winter’ because finish the book already GRRM!) and their approach to all of this – looking at the money and the connections.

  53. Lydia wrote:

    Turk is like radioactive material. Best to stay away or wear hazmat suit if one must handle. He has been trying to be famous in those circles from blogging and social media for 10 years.

    Well put.

  54. Patriciamc wrote:

    fashion blogs

    Does ‘Go fug yourself’ count as a fashion blog? I’m pretty sure that’s the only one I’ve ever read. But I got used to magazines being half adds (and another 1/4 sneaky ads that are really product placement) so nothing surprises me about that.

  55. @ mirele:

    “…pretty much blew the lid off the mommy blogging industry this past week. I suspect many of her comments could be brought over the Reformed Industrial Blogging Complex.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++

    anyone in the Reformed Industrial Blogging Complex want to come clean?

    not quite comfortable with being beholden to others through your blogging?

    is cognitive dissonance (over using your religion, Jesus, and other people for the sake of your career and revenue) bothering you enough yet?

    http://www.businessinsider.com/mommy-blogger-calls-b-on-the-mommy-blogging-industry-and-admits-much-of-her-blogging-was-fake-2016-5

  56. Lea wrote:

    I love that she had a ‘crisis of conscience’ (that happily gets her a bunch of news coverage!) and as a result she…started another blog.

    Yes. Very refreshing. Wish some bloggers in Christiandom would follow suit.

  57. @ David (Eagle):
    I have always assumed any information given to any sort of staff or leader is open to broadcast, any time, anywhere, is fair game for any use, hostile or otherwise. Information is power, and the trashier the info, the better.

  58. nathan priddis wrote:

    @ David (Eagle):
    I have always assumed any information given to any sort of staff or leader is open to broadcast, any time, anywhere, is fair game for any use, hostile or otherwise. Information is power, and the trashier the info, the better.

    nathan priddis wrote:

    I have always assumed any information given to any sort of staff or leader is open to broadcast, any time, anywhere, is fair game for any use, hostile or otherwise.

    I had always assumed pastors were using similar standards to therapists, at least for counseling sessions and similar type confidential conversations. Which I’ve been learning is not at all true.

  59. @ Burwell:
    Thankfully that is not my war. I have other wars, though.

    I just run the other way when it comes to “important” people. I have a friend who always wants me to help her host certain celebs at parties for Derby. (mainly B people because there is such a category, dontcha know) she loves that stuff.

    I refuse with humor every year. I cannot stand that sort of thing. I give my parents credit for that. They were adamantly opposed to such categories of people. I think that is why the seeker megas just freaked me out and wore me down.

  60. mirele wrote:

    This is completely off the subject but a former mommy blogger named Josi Denise pretty much blew the lid off the mommy blogging industry this past week

    I tried to read her blog but it locked up my browser.

  61. Snark alert:
    So let me get this straight. The evangelical church is to be more concerned with controlling the sexuality and sexual behavior of mostly professed unbelievers in society than they are to be concerned with protecting children and aiding in healing those who have been abused in church settings?!
    Sorry for sarcasm but that is both sad and not what is said in the Bible about priorities.
    Smh.

  62. @ Patti:
    I once shared an elevator with Sophia Loren in NYC as a teen. It is just that I had no idea until I got off and my friends mom told us. Then explained who she was, movies…..blah blah.

    It is good to be ignorant sometimes, right Challies?

  63. @ elastigirl:
    Please don’t get me started on the ERLC. Can you even think of a more ridiculous reason for an organization to exist? I mean, shouldn’t such a thing be obvious with good fruit. Oh, I forgot. It is correct Doctrine and conformity.

    A guy like Russ Moore has hit the SBC jackpot in rubbing shoulders with the establishment and getting lots of face and column time in the secular media.

    It is just ridiculous. Millions spent on this sort of thing.

  64. siteseer wrote:

    I am expecting them to start acting like they invented this area of concern, taking control of the narrative.

    Yes! That is how it works. And instead of admitting their earlier actions/words, you are sinning if you bring them up.

  65. Lydia wrote:

    It is just ridiculous. Millions spent on this sort of thing.

    There do seem to be an awful lot of organizations/foundations/whathaveyou’s that exist solely to suck up money, rather than doing the hard work of missions and community service. They blog, they put out papers, they write books…what are these things, Christian “think” tanks? Doesn’t seem like a great use of time or money to me.

  66. Lea wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    It is just ridiculous. Millions spent on this sort of thing.

    There do seem to be an awful lot of organizations/foundations/whathaveyou’s that exist solely to suck up money, rather than doing the hard work of missions and community service. They blog, they put out papers, they write books…what are these things, Christian “think” tanks? Doesn’t seem like a great use of time or money to me.

    More like indoctrination camps. They exist to make a few well known and respected. It works on many people.

  67. @ Lydia:

    ERLC, & other similar organizationa/foundations
    ++++++++++++++++

    or job creation? for certain SBC elite? & to funnel other employees into?

  68. Lydia wrote:

    @ Gram3:
    It woukd be about cute shoes, I bet. :o)

    I have found that “cute” does not scale up very well. 🙂

  69. siteseer wrote:

    I am expecting them to start acting like they invented this area of concern, taking control of the narrative.

    Siteseer, I long ago came to the conclusion that Compassion(TM), Concern(TM), and Utter Sincerity(TM) are the Mark of a Sociopath.

  70. David (Eagle) wrote:

    @ An Attorney:

    I agree…I think of what my Boy Scout troop did on hikes for restroom breaks. I know someone in the DC area who works at a think tank dealing with this very issue. Peeing outside is very different than raping a child.

    How many weinie wavers say they were just taking a pee. Sorry that your boy scout leaders didn’t teach you that you weren’t in a 3rd world country and how not to be a health hazard.

  71. An Attorney wrote:

    In many jurisdictions, taking a pee in the park will get one a conviction for indecent exposure with a requirement to register as a sex offender! Once on the list, no matter what the offense, employers who hire the RSO are harassed until they terminate the RSO, with callers telling them to fire the baby f’er or lose their business. Some are threatened with false reports of sexual abuse of minors against them.

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

    Peeing in the park is against the law. Give me a break and skip the B.S.

  72. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Siteseer, I long ago came to the conclusion that Compassion(TM), Concern(TM), and Utter Sincerity(TM) are the Mark of a Sociopath.

    And the sociopath also plays on the normal person’s compassion, concern, and sincerity and good faith. People who do not understand how people are conned by sociopaths have never been conned by a sociopath. And sociopaths would not be so successful if they wore a “Sociopath” ID.

  73. Gram3 wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Siteseer, I long ago came to the conclusion that Compassion(TM), Concern(TM), and Utter Sincerity(TM) are the Mark of a Sociopath.

    And the sociopath also plays on the normal person’s compassion, concern, and sincerity and good faith. People who do not understand how people are conned by sociopaths have never been conned by a sociopath. And sociopaths would not be so successful if they wore a “Sociopath” ID.

    Folks if you have not dealt with a sociopath, read that again.

  74. Lydia wrote:

    I long ago came to the conclusion that Compassion(TM), Concern(TM), and Utter Sincerity(TM) are the Mark of a Sociopath.

    Gavin de Becker, who writes about stalking, domestic violence, and other crimes in The Gift of Fear, makes the same point using the term *nice* (which is frequently a manipulation of others).

  75. “Regardless, the abuse of one child is one child too many. Instead of pointing fingers, we should be learning from each other and working together to bring an end to this epidemic that permeates all of Christendom. In order to do this, Protestants are going to have to accept the fact that we have many more similarities than differences with our Catholic brothers and sisters when it comes to how we have failed to protect and serve God’s children.”
    (Boz Tchividjian)

    Without the ‘watchdog’ blogs, these neo-Cal pastors would continue unimpeded down a road to their own destruction . . . This blog, and the many others that call the neo-Cals to conscience are doing them a favor. I am Catholic and I see the attempts of the neo-Cals to avoid confrontation and protect their own quietly, but let them know that truth comes out in time. They can STOP the nonsense and prevent a lot of suffering or they can reap the hell they are enabling to continue. They have a conscious choice to make. They will own the results of their choosing.
    God have mercy. The children of the Church deserve protection from abuse, in the Name of Christ Our Lord. No neo-Cal pastor should ever be able to deny that by shielding predators under the guise of ‘Church discipline’.

  76. Gram3 wrote:

    People who do not understand how people are conned by sociopaths have never been conned by a sociopath.

    And will NEVER, EVER listen to someone who HAS been conned by a sociopath and is warning them.
    “But he’s so NICE! So POLITE! So SINCERE!”

    “Go ahead and squeal, Tattle-tale! You’re just the Crazy Kid and I’m the Sweet Little Angel!”

    And sociopaths would not be so successful if they wore a “Sociopath” ID.

    Successful sociopaths are masters of camouflage.
    We only hear about the dumb ones who slipped up and got caught.

  77. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Patriciamc wrote:

    An Attorney wrote:

    The entire RSO system needs to be revamped to distinguish the one-time porn purchaser from the serial child rapist, and especially the old man who can make it to a restroom in time and pees behind a tree.

    Or the 19 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old in a state where 18 is the age of consent.

    I understand in such cases, there’s usually no prosecution unless the age difference is more than 3-5 years.

    However, if you get a prosecutor whose eyes are fixed on County D.A., then State Attorney General, then the Governor’s Mansion, then the White House…

    Is the age of consent 18? Is 17 under the age of consent? The above looney tune reasoning will get you an elder seat in some Pseudo Christian churches we’ve been reading about on this blog.

  78. This is the “Ask Pastor John” topic for today: “I See a Church Leader Living in Sexual Sin — Should I Expose Him?” http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/i-see-a-church-leader-living-in-sexual-sin-should-i-expose-him.

    “Paul intends for that to happen when he says: Expose them. So the lion’s share of our lives is not devoted to passing judgments on all the sinners around us, but rather living such lives of God-centered purity that the darknesses specifically of God-neglect and impurity will just naturally be shown to be darkness — will be exposed.”

    Here again is a false dichotomy to guilt people away from taking real action in the case of abuse. Note also the “biblical” standard for guilt he discusses.

  79. “The following story is about a place where convicted sex offenders live in community. I found something lacking in the story.”

    I’m probably missing the point, but one thing I notice is a blurring of all distinctions among abusers. I think it might make the truly dangerous ones more difficult to track. And it probably takes the attention away from the abusers who need more focus.

    One of the big problems is we have a legal system that says abusers should be set free after they have served their time. But we have a cultural system that treats them like they should be locked away forever. When they do get released they get thrown onto the street with practically zero means to make ends meet because they have very limited access for jobs and housing, and they have very limited options for learning how to overcome their problems. They often have difficulty finding healthy places where they can become healthy because no one wants them around. Christians would love for them to receive proper care, but at some other church. They are treated like lepers. Not all of them want to get healthy, but many do. How do they get the help they need when they are so untouchable? It’s a tough issue. But even worse are the countless abusers who have not been held accountable for their crimes.

  80. Gram3 wrote:

    People who do not understand how people are conned by sociopaths have never been conned by a sociopath.

    Or at least, they weren’t aware of it 😉

  81. Ken F wrote:

    They often have difficulty finding healthy places where they can become healthy because no one wants them around. Christians would love for them to receive proper care, but at some other church.

    Mennonites in Canada and the U.S. have had special programs at some churches for sex offenders, whom are ministered to apart from the normal congregation.

    Volunteers are trained to work with sex offenders, there is a high degree of accountability, interaction with each sex offender’s parole officer, mental health professional, etc. It’s very time intensive and expensive. It has only been done on a small-scale for those reasons.

    http://sorl.org/535/

    http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2010/01/29/january-29-2010-ministering-to-sex-offenders/5591/

  82. Ken F wrote:

    “The following story is about a place where convicted sex offenders live in community. I found something lacking in the story.”

    I’m probably missing the point, but one thing I notice is a blurring of all distinctions among abusers. I think it might make the truly dangerous ones more difficult to track. And it probably takes the attention away from the abusers who need more focus.

    One of the big problems is we have a legal system that says abusers should be set free after they have served their time. But we have a cultural system that treats them like they should be locked away forever. When they do get released they get thrown onto the street with practically zero means to make ends meet because they have very limited access for jobs and housing, and they have very limited options for learning how to overcome their problems. They often have difficulty finding healthy places where they can become healthy because no one wants them around. Christians would love for them to receive proper care, but at some other church. They are treated like lepers. Not all of them want to get healthy, but many do. How do they get the help they need when they are so untouchable? It’s a tough issue. But even worse are the countless abusers who have not been held accountable for their crimes.

    Look up the statistics and studies on sex offenders. Psychiatrists dealing with sex criminals will tell you/and have written volumes that they are not rehabilitated. Sentencing them for horrific crimes and many destroyed lives is too often minimal. You like so many others seem to have more compassion for the criminals than for the victims and future victims. How often do we hear of horrendous crimes committed by previous sex criminals?

  83. Ken F wrote:

    elastigirl on Thu May 19, 2016 at 12:51 PM said:

    In Catholic circles, the traditional answer is to send the sex offenders to a monastery. But within the past year it so, I read an article claiming that the monasteries don’t want them. The offenders pose a very real danger to the young novices. Plus, who wants to be a dumping ground for pervs?? So the only answer is residential treatment facilities run by religious orders with psychiatric training, I know of several such. But the understanding has to be that you’re there for life. As we all know, there is a huge rate of recidivism and no known cure. For perps who will submit to residential treatment, it is purgatory on earth. But IMHO that’s what life is for most of us I’m this vale of tears. 😉

  84. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    Sorry for all the weird typos. I blame spellcheck. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!

    Everybody needs to learn how to spell, and turn off their spellcheckers. It’s not really that hard. 🙂

  85. Lea wrote:

    @ bc:

    Age of consent and related laws vary by state.

    I was responding to the example given but let me rephrase it

    Should the the person who is over the age of consent have sex with a minor younger than the age of consent? What if the younger is forced, deceived, mentally deficient, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol given by the seducer?

    Should anyone knowing of the crime report the crime or be charged as an accessory to the crime?

    What do you think about sex outside of marriage particularly for a minor and especially if it is perpetrated by an adult?

    Do you think minors can be raped by other minors?

    Look up the statistics of minors that are sex trafficked by others making money or favors off minor sex slaves and do you think the minors can consent to that?

  86. Catholic gate crasher …. I want you to know that I appreciate your opinions/perspectives
    Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    Ken F wrote:
    elastigirl on Thu May 19, 2016 at 12:51 PM said:
    In Catholic circles, the traditional answer is to send the sex offenders to a monastery. But within the past year it so, I read an article claiming that the monasteries don’t want them. The offenders pose a very real danger to the young novices. Plus, who wants to be a dumping ground for pervs?? So the only answer is residential treatment facilities run by religious orders with psychiatric training, I know of several such. But the understanding has to be that you’re there for life. As we all know, there is a huge rate of recidivism and no known cure. For perps who will submit to residential treatment, it is purgatory on earth. But IMHO that’s what life is for most of us I’m this vale of tears.

  87. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    So the only answer is residential treatment facilities run by religious orders with psychiatric training, I know of several such. But the understanding has to be that you’re there for life.

    That seems like the most realistic solution.

  88. bc wrote:

    Do you think minors can be raped by other minors?

    Certainly they can. It’s pretty well known that it’s best not to put foster children in the same bedroom, even if they are young. So many of them have been victims of CSA and there’s always the danger for one to act it out on another who is smaller/younger/less dominant.

  89. Lydia wrote:

    Turk is like radioactive material. Best to stay away or wear hazmat suit if one must handle. He has been trying to be famous in those circles from blogging and social media for 10 years.

    To be honest, that entire crew is toxic. They are essentially a walking billboard the works of the flesh and make sport out of crucifying the fruit of the Spirit. You shall know them by their fruits. Same goes for Challies. He has always been a bit of a meally-mouth, but consider that he endorses his church’s wicked and anti-Christ law that women aren’t allowed to read Scripture in church. Let that sink in for a moment. This guy is peddling something, but it isn’t Christianity.

  90. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    consider that he endorses his church’s wicked and anti-Christ law that women aren’t allowed to read Scripture in church. Let that sink in for a moment.

    Projection. They are firmly convinced that God is offended by hearing a female read his written revelation or pray to him because *they* are offended when they hear a female do those things which are *reserved* for them. I suppose that makes God a reflection of them. That is seriously disordered and twisted thinking, and I doubt that Paul Tripp will be able to help them. Or Jay Adams, either.

  91. bc wrote:

    Look up the statistics and studies on sex offenders. Psychiatrists dealing with sex criminals will tell you/and have written volumes that they are not rehabilitated. Sentencing them for horrific crimes and many destroyed lives is too often minimal. You like so many others seem to have more compassion for the criminals than for the victims and future victims. How often do we hear of horrendous crimes committed by previous sex criminals?

    You missed my point and completely misunderstand me. Why would you accuse me of having more compassion for the abusers than the abused? It’s a groundless accusation. Beware of binary thinking. John Piper is very good at forcing every issue to be one extreme or the other, but I believe we can do better than that. Most issues are much more complicated than that. This is one of them.

    I happen to know people who have been abused and people who have been abusers. It’s not a world that I ever wanted to know about, but God put people on both sides into my life. Part of me wished it would have been otherwise. Another part of me is glad for the opportunity. But it’s not an easy topic to dive into.

    Do you have a study that proves 100% recidivism for all abusers? Too many are repeat offenders, but not all. What is the difference? Is is the care they get? If Christians push them all away, who will they end up associating with? Other abusers? That does not sound like a recipe for success. It seems to me like we have a civic obligation to either 1) press for a change of laws that will lock them all up for life so that we don’t have to deal with them, or 2) we need to find a way to deal with the reality that they live in society and need resources to minimize the chances that they will become repeat offenders.

    I would be interested if you can find any examples of abusers who were not abused as children. One of the difficult realities is all of the abusers were first victims. That does not excuse their crimes because not all victims became abusers. But if we want the abusers to stop abusing then the root cause needs to be addressed. If their treatment does not take into account their victim status it will be an incomplete treatment. It’s a very difficult problem with no easy answers.

    The big issue is how God relates to the abusers. Does he love them in spite of their sins? Did Christ’s atonement atone for them also? Is there any hope possible for any of them or are they all doomed to be repeat offenders with no hope of recovery? Should churches ban all of them? If not, how should churches relate to them?

  92. Ken F wrote:

    “The following story is about a place where convicted sex offenders live in community. I found something lacking in the story.”

    I’m probably missing the point, but one thing I notice is a blurring of all distinctions among abusers. I think it might make the truly dangerous ones more difficult to track. And it probably takes the attention away from the abusers who need more focus.

    One of the big problems is we have a legal system that says abusers should be set free after they have served their time. But we have a cultural system that treats them like they should be locked away forever. When they do get released they get thrown onto the street with practically zero means to make ends meet because they have very limited access for jobs and housing, and they have very limited options for learning how to overcome their problems. They often have difficulty finding healthy places where they can become healthy because no one wants them around. Christians would love for them to receive proper care, but at some other church. They are treated like lepers. Not all of them want to get healthy, but many do. How do they get the help they need when they are so untouchable? It’s a tough issue. But even worse are the countless abusers who have not been held accountable for their crimes.

    They could try The Villiage church or SGM.

    Sorry,I don’t have any empathy for those who prey on Children.

    There are a lot of people who somehow manage, in their lives, not to harm innocents.

    And churches that run to the judge asking for leniency because the pervert con said ” sorry” while the victim and family suffer the nightmare the rest of their lives….makes me sick. It is barbarian. As if Christianity means no justice for innocents.

    If they want to get healthy there is a way.

    Anywho, I am much more concerned with the health of victims.

  93. @ Ken F:
    First, do no further harm. That means that churches must tell the congregation that there is a pedophile among them. If the person is truly repentant, he/she would encourage such transparency. The individual should never be alone if there are children in the church which means she/he needs an escort at all times.

    All pedophiles struggle with their proclivities for their entire lives. That does not mean that they WILL reoffend but it does mean that they are at high risk to reoffend. If a church truly wants to care for a pedophile, then they will figure out a way to minister to the individual. If this is too hard for the church, it means that the church is not willing to try to love an offender in a way that will provide security to all. They just want to pretend they care.

    Also, pedophiles are notoriously charming. Pastors, leaders and church members need to be carefully trained in caring for a seriously mentally ill individual and to be able to see through the bull. This is a hard ministry and I doubt there are many out there who are willing to serve in such a manner. Are you? If so, good for you. I would love to hear about your training in dealing with such individuals.

  94. Ken F wrote:

    Do you have a study that proves 100% recidivism for all abusers?

    And how would anyone know unless turned in? Would you ever trust a pronounced “cured” pervert to be alone with your kids?

    And that is the real problem. A “cured” pedophile is supposed be to accepted back into society? How is that guaranteed? We are talking about protecting innocents, right?

  95.  __

    “Are These Professional 501(c)3 Religion Folks Just Shining The Rest Of Us On ?”

    hmmm…

    They can’t hide from the Lord the kind of people they really are…can they?

    (It may not bring victim relief, but I think that it is important point none the less.)

    Will they will say in that day, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 

    (tears)

    Sopy

  96. dee wrote:

    All pedophiles struggle with their proclivities for their entire lives. That does not mean that they WILL reoffend but it does mean that they are at high risk to reoffend.

    There is a camp that argues that sex offenders don’t re-offend and the statistics are low. I think that sex offenders do re-offend but they just aren’t caught, which is how many of them get away with sex abusing so many children in the first place.

  97. It would be horribly triggering for a victim to attend church with a predator.

    There are so many Christians out there claiming the victims are just unforgiving which is why they can’t move on from it. They dont get it at all. There are some things that one will carry with them until the ither side. It is our duty to try to walk in their shoes in understanding.

    And they don’t seem to get that predators are very believable. That is part of their con process.

    I have been shocked at how cruel Christians can be to victims. We seem to have lost the ability to recognize evil and call it what it is.

  98. Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:

    He has always been a bit of a meally-mouth, but consider that he endorses his church’s wicked and anti-Christ law that women aren’t allowed to read Scripture in church. Let that sink in for a moment. This guy is peddling something, but it isn’t Christianity.

    Again and as always, these guys swear up and down that they’re only teaching “The Word of God” and that the problem is you for not “believing the Bible”.

  99. Velour wrote:

    dee wrote:

    All pedophiles struggle with their proclivities for their entire lives. That does not mean that they WILL reoffend but it does mean that they are at high risk to reoffend.

    There is a camp that argues that sex offenders don’t re-offend and the statistics are low. I think that sex offenders do re-offend but they just aren’t caught, which is how many of them get away with sex abusing so many children in the first place.

    They have found that when a predator is caught you are only seeing the tip of the iceberg for there are many many many more victims than the one they are caught for.

    I agree with the comment about how painful for the family and the victim to attend church and find the criminal (YES CRIMINAL) also attending. That is sick sick sick to do to the victim.

  100. @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:

    Sounds to me like a realistic and pragmatic way forward. As I’ve commented before, in many ways Catholicism leads Christendom in progressive solutions to otherwise intractable problems. Contrast the example you’ve cited with the utter failure in some sects of fundagelical Protestantism to deal with child sex abuse. I think many Neo-Cals would blanch at the prospect of adopting a workable Catholic pioneered alternative for predators in their ranks. I suspect also that many would be leery because they may feel that it denies their doctrine of “The Sufficiency of Scripture” for all areas of faith, life, and Church Practice.

  101. Muff Potter wrote:

    I think many Neo-Cals would blanch at the prospect of adopting a workable Catholic pioneered alternative for predators in their ranks. I suspect also that many would be leery because they may feel that it denies their doctrine of “The Sufficiency of Scripture” for all areas of faith, life, and Church Practice.

    The NeoCals believe that their Calvinist’ Jesus is more powerful than the Catholic’s Jesus. If a NeoCal sex predator says a few words about Jesus, he is *cured* and safe to be around children. A sort of Christian pixie dust/magic wand.

    The Catholics aren’t among The Elect and don’t have a *true understanding of the ‘Real’ Jesus* according to the NeoCals, therefore the Catholic Jesus can’t cure a child sex offender.

  102. Ken F wrote:

    Do you have a study that proves 100% recidivism for all abusers? Too many are repeat offenders, but not all.

    Sexual urges do not seem to be something that can be changed. The person must be willing to live within confines that keep them away from temptation.

  103. Lydia wrote:

    I have been shocked at how cruel Christians can be to victims. We seem to have lost the ability to recognize evil and call it what it is.

    The phenomenon of the victim getting treated cruelly while the perp is protected is not confined to the church. Our military is doing the same thing. Just read this tonight: http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/05/19/478576716/new-report-says-pentagon-not-doing-enough-for-sexual-assault-

    The church should do BETTER than secular organizations like Penn State or the military. But I think it would be useful to figure out why so many organizations seem to have the same general pattern of response. When Christians and the secular world are transgressing at the system level in the same pattern, it’s worth analyzing. What is there is common? What gain do the organizations get from the pattern? What perceived negative do they avoid by this pattern?

  104. Lydia wrote:

    Would you ever trust a pronounced “cured” pervert to be alone with your kids?

    This is the bottom line. Many people believe that Jesus will *cure* everyone. However, we know that Jesus does not cure every sick person. Therefore, why are we so sure that He will heal a pedophile? Part of living with a thorn in one’s flesh is to accept one’s infirmities and openly deal with them. Pedophilia is not simply a sin or a mistake. It is a serious psychiatric malfunction that is difficult, and some would say, nigh on impossible to fully cure.

    A pedophile has a life long problem-a proclivity to want sex with kids. He may fight the urge but he will still have the compulsion to do so. Therefore, part of dealing with that thorn in his side is to openly admit his past to everyone at his church and social contacts and always stay away from children. If said pedophile refuses to do so, one can be sure that he is refusing to deal with his problem. Therefore, one can assume that he is thinking about molesting again.

    A lot of naive pastors think they *understand* what repentance looks like. However, many do not understand what needs to be involved in repentance of a pedophile. Better yet, few pastors and leaders are willing to give the time and effort in working with a repentant pedophile. They are unwilling to be trained in the psychiatric situation and are certainly not willing to spend the hours and hours of training and cursing through the charming defensiveness that many pedophiles are adept at.

  105. @ Ken F:
    Well, I guess it is time for my view of the article.

    Not one of the offender spoke in any detail about the remorse they felt for having molested a child. None of them showed any empathy for the lifelong pain they dumped on an unsuspecting child. I heard a lot of crocodile tears. My suspicions is that these guys have a high likelihood of reoffending unless you, Ken F, can set up a program at your church to take them in and get them the intensive one on one counseling and followup that they need in order to be safe.

    I hope, Ken, that you deliver on providing the type of intensive careened followup that these guys need since you seem to be rather down on readers who express well warranted fears of sex offender who tend to reoffend, big time. Hopefully, you can develop a program which will show the rest of us , over time,how to prevent such a high recidivism rate.

  106. Muff Potter wrote:

    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:

    Sounds to me like a realistic and pragmatic way forward. As I’ve commented before, in many ways Catholicism leads Christendom in progressive solutions to otherwise intractable problems. Contrast the example you’ve cited with the utter failure in some sects of fundagelical Protestantism to deal with child sex abuse. I think many Neo-Cals would blanch at the prospect of adopting a workable Catholic pioneered alternative for predators in their ranks. I suspect also that many would be leery because they may feel that it denies their doctrine of “The Sufficiency of Scripture” for all areas of faith, life, and Church Practice.

    Are we talking about the same Catholic church? In the investigative book “Lead us not into Temptation they found the church was sending pedophile priests to a 30 “treatment” center on the way to another unsuspecting parish. The psychiatrist who was in the middle of this “treatment” of this turned out to be a person of suspect motives and behaviors himself.
    Only when the church started getting hit in their coffers did some of this come out in the open and it’s questionable that many of the caught priests are still avoiding criminal punishments and church discipline.

  107. elastigirl wrote:

    anyone in the Reformed Industrial Blogging Complex want to come clean?
    not quite comfortable with being beholden to others through your blogging?

    We can hope. God willing, people will start coming clean, if there is anything dirty/deceptive/hidden which needs to come forward.

  108. So is the word biblical bandied about because it’s the search word d’jour (or d’this era in Christianity?) Is this why it seems so ubiquitous in their writing, etc?

    Speaking of search words
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches
    Sovereign Grace Churches

  109. Melody wrote:

    Snark alert:
    So let me get this straight. The evangelical church is to be more concerned with controlling the sexuality and sexual behavior of mostly professed unbelievers in society than they are to be concerned with protecting children and aiding in healing those who have been abused in church settings?!

    More Snark alert:

    Yes, because 1) this is the Church, and we can’t really be having problems like that, and 2) if we don’t get the pagans in line, God will judge America and we will lose our cushy middle class lifestyles.

    I doubt anyone would state the case that boldly, but I strongly suspect these thought processes lie behind a lot of the nonsense you have noticed…

  110. dee wrote:

    I would love to hear about your training in dealing with such individuals.

    I am completely unqualified to deal with such individuals. You don’t know how much I wish God would have taken that into account when he thrust such people into my life.

  111. I was abused as a young teenager by my father. It was not rape, and it only happened a handful of times, but I can testify that the memory is indelible. (I am now 62, and happily married). I can barely imagine what the lingering pain is like for those abused at younger ages, and abused more seriously. Add to that a church structure that seems to regard women and children as lesser beings (gotta protect the Important Man, ya know), and . . . Lord, have mercy.
    Patriarchy too often edges into idolatry, and in that idolatrous system women and children can end up being sacrificial lambs.

  112. P.S. I recommend Louis Theroux’s documentary “A Place for Pedophiles.” I do feel compassion for these men.

  113. @ dee:
    Dee, yes, everything you said! I would add chemical castration to your list, though I’d imagine the data of the effectiveness of that is still not clear.

  114. My husband and I are friends with a man who preyed upon young male students at the Christian college where he was a professor. Years later, he doesn’t seem to understand why they are angry with him and have cut off contact. And his victims’ secular friends don’t understand what the big deal was–after all, they were of legal age. But it’s always abuse when there’s a power differential. A religious power differentials may be the most damaging of all.
    That said, I have experienced firsthand the ambivalence one can feel when the perpetrator is a friend. I want him to have to face up to what has happened, but I also feel compassion for him and for his (long-suffering) wife.
    So yes, this issue is deeply personal for me, all the way around.

  115. Ken F wrote:

    am completely unqualified to deal with such individuals. You don’t know how much I wish God would have taken that into account when he thrust such people into my life.

    The victims often feel the same way.

  116. bc wrote:

    Lea wrote:

    @ bc:

    Age of consent and related laws vary by state.

    I was responding to the example given but let me rephrase it

    Should the the person who is over the age of consent have sex with a minor younger than the age of consent? What if the younger is forced, deceived, mentally deficient, or under the influence of drugs or alcohol given by the seducer?

    Should anyone knowing of the crime report the crime or be charged as an accessory to the crime?

    What do you think about sex outside of marriage particularly for a minor and especially if it is perpetrated by an adult?

    Do you think minors can be raped by other minors?

    Look up the statistics of minors that are sex trafficked by others making money or favors off minor sex slaves and do you think the minors can consent to that?

    Is this directed at me? I mean, obviously minors can rape each other. And I am against sex slavery. Does that even need to be said?

    I think what was pointed out is that when they started enacting these laws they caught some consensual sex between, for instance, high school sweethearts where the boyfriend was a year or two ahead. Which is why they went back and modified the laws in many cases to fix that, because that wasn’t what was meant to be punished.

  117. @ Stunned:
    So long as they stay on their medications, it is effective. However, many decide not to follow through after being on the meds. I do support the offering of this treatment. It is interesting to note that most pedophiles do not want to go this route. Guess why?

  118. Ken F wrote:

    I am completely unqualified to deal with such individuals.

    Well, actually I am relieved to hear that. It always worries me when people in the church start quoting the Bible that “Jesus heals” in regards to issues like this. The statistics re horrible when it comes to pedophiles and long time *cures.* This is not simply a “I want to have sex .” It is I want to have sex so with a 4 year old.”

    Normal people desire sex with consenting adults, not kids. Pedophilia is a serious aberration which is, unfortunately, a life long struggle. I truly wish Jesus would instantly heal a pedophile. But just about all of them struggle with their deviant proclivity for a life time.

    So, to say a church should love a pedophile is very nice in theory. But most churches will not spend the time and effort that is needed to effectively intervene in a pedophile’s life. Fewer still will get the training necessary to even begin working with such an individual. They want the easy “Hey, I repented, got baptized and now want to be your poster boy.” It rarely works like this. Real love takes a lot of work. Most churches today don’t want that sort of effort.

  119. Ken F wrote:

    The big issue is how God relates to the abusers. Does he love them in spite of their sins? Did Christ’s atonement atone for them also? Is there any hope possible for any of them or are they all doomed to be repeat offenders with no hope of recovery? Should churches ban all of them? If not, how should churches relate to them?

    Those are tough questions. Romans 1 (NIV) gives us a glimpse at what God thinks about the habitual sexually impure. “God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another” (v. 24). “God gave them over to shameful lusts” (v. 26). “God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done” (v. 28).

    The Phillips translation of the same passage paints a more dire picture for such abusers: “They gave up God: and therefore God gave them up — to be the playthings of their own foul desires in dishonouring their own bodies … These men deliberately forfeited the truth of God and accepted a lie, paying homage and giving service to the creature instead of to the Creator … God therefore handed them over to disgraceful passions … since they considered themselves too high and mighty to acknowledge God, he allowed them to become the slaves of their degenerate minds …”

    It appears that there is a point – a line in the sand – that some abusers cross and are abandoned by God to their own lusts. Are they beyond the atonement of Christ if God has given them over to their sin? Is it possible for them to repent and turn from their wickedness if God has given them over to a depraved mind? Is there anything the church can do if they have rejected God in favor of being slaves to their degenerate ways?

  120. dee wrote:

    A lot of naive pastors think they *understand* what repentance looks like

    From what I read there are all too many “pastors” less interested in repentance than in who chooses to be the most servile. The manipulative abuser ingratiating himself to the “pastor” wins out every time over the victim who wants justice.

  121. ION: Cricket.

    For any new Wartburgers, a brief explanation of the first Test between England and Sri Lanka at Headingley:

    function stopGame() {
    gameOn = 0;
    guessCount = 0;
    document.getElementById("stopButton").style.display = "none";
    document.getElementById("goButton").style.display = "inline";
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.visibility = "hidden";
    marvin=0;
    hard=0;
    document.getElementById("adamsButton").innerHTML = "Spare button";
    }

    // Works out the average time
    //

    function averageTime () {
    var totalTime = 0;
    var averageTime = 0;
    for (i=0;i 0) {
    thisTime = (guessTimes[guessCount] - guessTimes[(guessCount-1)]) / 1000;
    refinedTimes[guessCount-1] = thisTime;
    document.getElementById("infoDiv").innerHTML = "Latest reaction time: " + thisTime + " seconds"
    + "Average reaction time: " + averageTime() + " seconds"
    + "Number of tries: " + guessCount + "";
    }
    else {
    document.getElementById("infoDiv").innerHTML = "";
    };
    if (rndDivShape == 0) {
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.borderRadius = 50 + "%";
    }
    else {
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.borderRadius = 0;
    };
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.backgroundColor = rndColor();
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.visibility = "visible";
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.left = rndDivLeft + "px";
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.top = rndDivTop + "px";
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.height = rndDivSize + "px";
    document.getElementById("rndDiv").style.width = rndDivSize + "px";
    guessCount++;
    };

    IHTIH.

  122. Ken F wrote:

    The big issue is how God relates to the abusers. Does he love them in spite of their sins? Did Christ’s atonement atone for them also? Is there any hope possible for any of them or are they all doomed to be repeat offenders with no hope of recovery? Should churches ban all of them? If not, how should churches relate to them?

    The question is not whether God loves them but perhaps whether the abuser loves God and others.

    I am not sure what the point of the Cross/resurrection if it means one can be assured of salvation no matter what they continue to do. I know athiests who would never harm a child. The atonement is not fire insurance. It is conquering death. It is about the ability to move toward new creation now..

    I believe being fully human would look more like the image of our Lord in action. Child predators are less human to me. Barbarians who prey on the weak and innocent.

  123. @ Lydia:
    I don’t mean to say overcoming such a heinous proclivity is easy but if Jesus meant anything close to what he said about cutting off your hand if it causes you to sin, this is the perfect issue to map to that verse.

  124. More seriously, and on topic, I believe there are professional clergymen who would benefit from some instruction in what “repentance” actually is. Regular Wartburgers will recall the recently-cited example of
     perpetrator of domestic violence goes to his pastor / dad with, evidently, some show of remorse
     pastor/dad describes him as the most repentant man he had ever seen in 30 years of pastoring

    But you can’t see repentance. You can only see remorse (generally accompanied by tears etc) which, in itself, means nothing – it might be genuine or fake, and even if genuine, it might be a stress reaction that is no more than temporary. Observing repentance is much harder; you can only tell someone has repented because they produce long-term fruit in keeping with it. As someone once said: nothing changes your life unless it changes something you do every day.

  125. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Regular Wartburgers will recall the recently-cited example of perpetrator of domestic violence goes to his pastor/dad with, evidently, some show of remorse; pastor/dad describes him as the most repentant man he had ever seen in 30 years of pastoring

    I have SEEN a perpetrator of abuse turn the Genuine Repentance (and Deep Sincere Remorse) on and off like a light switch. CLICK ON! CLICK OFF! CLICK ON! CLICK OFF!

    It’s another aspect of “Transforming Himself to Appear as an Angel of Light”.

  126. Lydia wrote:

    I am not sure what the point of the Cross/resurrection if it means one can be assured of salvation no matter what they continue to do.

    TWW has long cataloged a type example of this and its effects — the Predestined Elect of the Truly Reformed.

  127. Bill M wrote:

    From what I read there are all too many “pastors” less interested in repentance than in who chooses to be the most servile. The manipulative abuser ingratiating himself to the “pastor” wins out every time over the victim who wants justice.

    Suck up, Kick down. WIN.

  128. Max wrote:

    It appears that there is a point – a line in the sand – that some abusers cross and are abandoned by God to their own lusts. Are they beyond the atonement of Christ if God has given them over to their sin? Is it possible for them to repent and turn from their wickedness if God has given them over to a depraved mind? Is there anything the church can do if they have rejected God in favor of being slaves to their degenerate ways?

    This touches upon “The Unpardonable Sin”, a concept which has been obscured by a lot of baggage (such as the de facto definition “Whatever YOU do that *I* don’t”).

  129. anonymous for now wrote:

    But it’s always abuse when there’s a power differential. A religious power differentials may be the most damaging of all.

    Because a religious power differential ups everything to Cosmic-level Importance.

  130. dee wrote:

    So long as they stay on their medications, it is effective. However, many decide not to follow through after being on the meds. I do support the offering of this treatment. It is interesting to note that most pedophiles do not want to go this route. Guess why?

    I have not taken the time to really research this, so forgive me if I’m repeating a myth, but I have read in several pieces that even physical castration has failed to effect a change when it was tried. The reason given is that pedophilia is not just about sex drive, it is about power drive, about having the utmost power over someone vulnerable and powerless.

  131. dee wrote:

    So, to say a church should love a pedophile is very nice in theory.

    You can love someone, and still hate what they do. You can love someone, and still take whatever measures deemed necessary to prevent them from repeating crimes and hurting others. And you’re right. Most people are not willing to commit to that long term effort, unless it directly affects their loved ones.
    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    But you can’t see repentance. You can only see remorse (generally accompanied by tears etc)

    Yup. We see it on TV and in the movies all of the time. Some actors get paid much dinero to fake remorse.

  132. siteseer wrote:

    The reason given is that pedophilia is not just about sex drive, it is about power drive, about having the utmost power over someone vulnerable and powerless.

    That explains why so many of these Pastors(TM) look the other way and nudge nudge wink wink.

    “ONE OF US!
    ONE OF US!
    GOOBLE! GOBBLE!
    ONE OF US!”
    — Todd Browning, Freaks

  133. @ bc:

    “Only when the church started getting hit in their coffers…”
    ++++++++++++++++++

    re: sexual abuse in church environments —

    does anyone think the evangelical, SBC, etc. effort to clean up its act, get its act together, etc. has been anything other than anemic and the bare minimum to get negative publicity off their back?

    it’s an infuriating disappointment that threats to money, power, & image may be what motivates the church institution to awaken and demand of itself what is right, honest and compassionate. Moral conviction does not seem to be enough.

  134. Nancy2 wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    But you can’t see repentance. You can only see remorse (generally accompanied by tears etc)

    Yup. We see it on TV and in the movies all of the time. Some actors get paid much dinero to fake remorse.

    An actor (“Hypokritos” in Koine Greek) is honestly giving a performance.

    No deception involved (at least, not in the sense of an abuser “faking remorse”).

    Deception begins when you “give that performance” offstage IRL for your own ends.

  135. Lydia wrote:

    And churches that run to the judge asking for leniency because the pervert con said ” sorry” while the victim and family suffer the nightmare the rest of their lives….makes me sick. It is barbarian. As if Christianity means no justice for innocents.

    I remember Boz T’s claim that in all his years as a prosecutor specializing in child sexual abuse cases, he had NEVER seen a church support the victim. Always “RALLY ROUND THE PERP, BOYS!”

  136. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    This touches upon “The Unpardonable Sin”, a concept which has been obscured by a lot of baggage (such as the de facto definition “Whatever YOU do that *I* don’t”).

    And it touches on something else. Here are predators who have heard that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the world. Many profess to follow him. But people are still thinking God is going to forcibly override their evil desire and force a renewed mind on them? Where does this thinking come from?

    You see this all the time: If we pray hard enough, God will change them. This is the church mantra for DV, too.

    Yes, God can move mountains but does He also steer purposely parked cars?

  137. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    remember Boz T’s claim that in all his years as a prosecutor specializing in child sexual abuse cases, he had NEVER seen a church support the victim. Always “RALLY ROUND THE PERP, BOYS!”

    I have mentioned here before my old college chum, who is an athiest judge. This was a huge pet peeve of his about Christians. He said they would pack out the courtroom on a zoning violation for an adult shop but would turn around and ask for leniency in sentencing a pedophile….. because he now loves Jesus.

  138. @ Stunned:

    “So is the word biblical bandied about because it’s the search word d’jour (or d’this era in Christianity?) Is this why it seems so ubiquitous in their writing, etc?”
    +++++++++++

    to saavy church leaders it’s the swinging watch to hypnotize their audience into “yessss, maaaaaster” mode. other church leaders copy the lingo (& intonation) like junior high kids.

    (but i’m sure you didn’t need my enlightenment here)

  139. bc wrote:

    Is the age of consent 18? Is 17 under the age of consent?

    That varies from country to country and from state to state, influenced by the cultural traditions of the country and state.

    For instance, I understand that in Louisiana (and some other Former Confederate States) the age of consent is around 16, not 18.

    And anime fans have told me that in Japan it’s either 14 or 16. (Operating from memory here.) This means that hentai (anime erotica) that would be consenting adult (over the age of consent) in Japan becomes child pornography (under the age of consent) in the States where the general age of consent is 18.

  140. Lydia wrote:

    God can move mountains but does He also steer purposely parked cars?

    God ain’t going to move your mountain or your car if you want both of them parked where they are! He has given us a will to receive or reject what He desires for us. That’s the very point where the Calvinist mind and mine depart ways. God will not override a totally depraved mind if that mind chooses bondage over freedom in Christ.

  141. @ Melody:

    “The evangelical church is to be more concerned with controlling the sexuality and sexual behavior of mostly professed unbelievers in society than they are to be concerned with protecting children and aiding in healing those who have been abused in church settings?!”
    ++++++++++++++++++

    (some) Christians, especially (some) leaders who never leave their cultural bubble, are squeamish. they don’t want to see the people who make them uncomfortable. until recently they could pretend they didn’t exist.

    now they can’t pretend that anymore. so they turn it all into moral & spiritual heroics as they take their stand, with either head held high or head shaking in sanctimonious disdain, jowells jiggling away.

    they have no idea how silly they look.

    but they have a very selective ick factor, don’t they. funny what doesn’t bother them.

  142. @ anonymous for now:

    “I want him to have to face up to what has happened”
    ++++++++++++

    the indelible mark you describe – it is simply true. it can be spiritualized away in order to make a theological algebraic equation go equal. but it is pretend. i’m very sorry for what you experienced.

    did this man ever face the laws of the land? criminal charges?

  143. Lydia wrote:

    Yes, God can move mountains but does He also steer purposely parked cars?

    I think that where predators of children are concerned, we are talking about cars with no engines under the hood. The exterior may be all shined up but that car has no power to go anywhere.

  144. roebuck wrote:

    Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    Sorry for all the weird typos. I blame spellcheck. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!
    Everybody needs to learn how to spell, and turn off their spellcheckers. It’s not really that hard.

    Actually I’m an excellent speller…won a bunch of spelling bees when I was a kid. Worked as a printer’s proofreader right out of college. Etc. etc. It’s that AUTO spellcheck that trips me up. I need to proof before I post!

  145. bc wrote:

    Are we talking about the same Catholic church?

    Yes we are. The point is that the Catholic Church has acknowledged there’s a problem but Protestant fundagelicalism has not. TWW has scads of documentation attesting to the fact that in the Neo-Cal religion, child sex abuse is still swept under the rug and the perps shielded.
    And yes you’re very right, the Catholic Church has paid out vast sums in awards to victims. It’s just a matter of time before the wealthy bastions of fundagelicalism suffer the same fate.

  146. The real irony is that the Bible is full of forgiveness; but most of the characters that recieved some level of firgiveness still had justice done to them in this/her life… Think Sampson, David, etc
    Another example of our current “leaders” selective Biblical interpretation…

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    And churches that run to the judge asking for leniency because the pervert con said ” sorry” while the victim and family suffer the nightmare the rest of their lives….makes me sick. It is barbarian. As if Christianity means no justice for innocents.

    I remember Boz T’s claim that in all his years as a prosecutor specializing in child sexual abuse cases, he had NEVER seen a church support the victim. Always “RALLY ROUND THE PERP, BOYS!”

  147. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    roebuck wrote:

    Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    Sorry for all the weird typos. I blame spellcheck. That’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!
    Everybody needs to learn how to spell, and turn off their spellcheckers. It’s not really that hard.

    Actually I’m an excellent speller…won a bunch of spelling bees when I was a kid. Worked as a printer’s proofreader right out of college. Etc. etc. It’s that AUTO spellcheck that trips me up. I need to proof before I post!

    Can you figure out how to turn it off? I mean, if it’s working against you…

  148. @ roebuck:

    Also, I should add that if folks make honest straightforward spelling mistakes, well, that’s not a problem. It’s usually quite easy to see what they meant. I’m not a spelling fanatic. Though it helps reading speed/flow/comprehension if the spelling is vaguely ‘orthodox’, as it were 😉

    It’s when the dang spell-checker puts it what it thought you meant that it can slow down reading. If folks would turn the spell-checker off (if you even can?) and get their own spelling in the ball park, things will be fine…

  149. bc wrote:

    Muff Potter wrote:
    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    Sounds to me like a realistic and pragmatic way forward. As I’ve commented before, in many ways Catholicism leads Christendom in progressive solutions to otherwise intractable problems. Contrast the example you’ve cited with the utter failure in some sects of fundagelical Protestantism to deal with child sex abuse. I think many Neo-Cals would blanch at the prospect of adopting a workable Catholic pioneered alternative for predators in their ranks. I suspect also that many would be leery because they may feel that it denies their doctrine of “The Sufficiency of Scripture” for all areas of faith, life, and Church Practice.
    Are we talking about the same Catholic church? In the investigative book “Lead us not into Temptation they found the church was sending pedophile priests to a 30 “treatment” center on the way to another unsuspecting parish. The psychiatrist who was in the middle of this “treatment” of this turned out to be a person of suspect motives and behaviors himself.
    Only when the church started getting hit in their coffers did some of this come out in the open and it’s questionable that many of the caught priests are still avoiding criminal punishments and church discipline.

    You are quite correct. And yes, it took huge lawsuits to force a turnaround. But there is ample evidence that there has been a turnaround.

    We are the 800-lb. gorilla. We don’t fly under the radar, as many other churches do. So yes, our toes are being held to the fire — not only by the public and the media but by sincerely concerned laypeople and clerics. Most of the moms I know, including myself, were fighting-mad when the scandal broke. Personally, although I love our priests here in the Charlotte Diocese, I wouldn’t let my sons get too near them. No overnights at the rectory, thank you very much!

    Can you cite actual examples of “caught priests” who are still at large and presumably still molesting? I have not heard of any such cases, but in a Church of 1.3 billion, I suppose anything is possible.

  150. Useless information #583,759:

    Whether one is a good speller or not has little to do with the amount of time ones spends studying and nearly everything to do with hereditary. Turns out that is the important deterrent, according to studies.

  151. Stunned wrote:

    Spell check mistakes are often entertaining to me. I like when it happens most of the time.

    Actually, yes, they can be entertaining at times, when they’re obvious enough. I guess what’s worse is people relying on the spell checker, and poking in 5-10 single-letter typos on their phones that just happen to be actual words so the spell checker passes them. It can really screw up the flow of their thought, and make it kind of annoying to stop at each wrong word to try and figure out what was intended…

  152. @ Max:

    Romans 1 and “It appears that there is a point – a line in the sand – that some abusers cross and are abandoned by God to their own lusts. Are they beyond the atonement of Christ if God has given them over to their sin? Is it possible for them to repent and turn from their wickedness if God has given them over to a depraved mind? Is there anything the church can do if they have rejected God in favor of being slaves to their degenerate ways?”
    ++++++++++

    can’t quite tell if your questions are rhetorical.

    to me, this is going a little overboard in applying the bible as a textbook.

    when I read Romans 1 I hear someone with a formal religious pedigree, with lots of zeal for principle (whether right or wrong — think of a ‘Saul/Paul’ doll in a box of cereal — “turn him this way he’s Saul! turn him this way he’s Paul! new, in every box of Christ Crunchies!”).

    I think there’s a kernel of truth in these verses, but do we really think that there is a sin that is beyond Jesus’ sacrifice of himself? that is more potent than Jesus’ blood?? do we really think that God would truly abandoned and reject a person for good?

    I don’t. I hear Paul speaking as someone steeped in religious thinking and feeling, religious acting and reacting. I hear someone wired very tight with religious sexual ick factor.

    as to that kernel of truth… I imagine we’d need a table in a café (with candle) reserved for all day and deep into the night, with various bottomless beverages and snacks with blue cheese.

  153. @ Ken F
    I recommend Anna Salter’s book Predators as a good place to start to understand this whole horrific phenomenon. I would LOVE it if we really saw a lot of change in those charged with paedophilia but it appears rare…I don’t know why. This book will also touch on the question of what percentage of abusers were abused, it’s not all of them by any means, & those who have been deserve our understanding as well as our judgement. We need especially to help those who have recognised they have an attraction to children but have never acted on it. The Circles of accountability schemes are also great, I wrote a reference for someone to do that just the other day. But churches have been & some continue to be, absolutely ignorant on this subject & this means more kids get assaulted. It’s more than tragic.

  154. @ Max:

    to clarify my previous comment, I don’t imagine paul had pedophilia on his mind with these verses. my belief is the main issue is hurting someone. on this topic, violating a human being against their will.

  155. elastigirl wrote:

    I think there’s a kernel of truth in these verses, but do we really think that there is a sin that is beyond Jesus’ sacrifice of himself? that is more potent than Jesus’ blood?? do we really think that God would truly abandoned and reject a person for good?

    I think a lot of really bad people are counting on Him not rejecting them as they plunder and pillage children through life.

    I don’t know how it all works exactly…. but I do believe people can refrain from using children sexually for their own gratification or profit. If they did not know better or had no control, there would be no grooming process and it would not be done secretly.

    We seem to be talking about different things. Not sure. The point is we have more of a duty to protect children than we do toward a repentant predator. That sounds mean, I know. But I think it is wise.

  156. The Deebs have still not recuperated from the joke that Al Mohler, who is the smartest man on the planet according to CJ Mahaney, told at T4G2016 about Googling Mahaney’s name. Such a search of course, brings up all of the articles from around the globe dealing with the sex abuse scandals at Sovereign Grace Ministries. There were lots of giggles from the dudebros in attendance. How could they show such crass disregard for the pain and suffering of child sex abuse victims?!

    I don’t think there’s any intentional disregard or that this was in any manner an intentional slap in anyone’s face, be they victim of sexual abuse, parent or loved one thereof, watchblogger who’s been following the scandal and producing uncomfortable truths for public consumption, law enforcement authority investigating the claims, or disappointed plaintiff in a lawsuit that may well have had merit but was dismissed on a bare technicality.

    I don’t think this was intentional on their part, it just seems that all of the above parties are simply outside of their scope of concern, I think they consider them nonentities, things of absolutely no relevance. I don’t think the leaders, many of whom I believe to be just given utterly over to evil, care about anything other than themselves, and I don’t think the dudebros and worshipful sycophants care about anything other than the objects of their worship.

    It’s nothing personal, Dee, Deb, and all the abused victims, because to them, you are quite simply not a person.

  157. @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    A former close colleague of mine, a mentor, retired early to go full time on the scandal. She is a devoted Catholic, sent her kids through Catholic schools, etc. She is articulate, professional and well connected. For her, it was about saving Catholicism. I admire her very much

  158. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    bc wrote:

    Is the age of consent 18? Is 17 under the age of consent?

    That varies from country to country and from state to state, influenced by the cultural traditions of the country and state.

    For instance, I understand that in Louisiana (and some other Former Confederate States) the age of consent is around 16, not 18.

    And anime fans have told me that in Japan it’s either 14 or 16. (Operating from memory here.) This means that hentai (anime erotica) that would be consenting adult (over the age of consent) in Japan becomes child pornography (under the age of consent) in the States where the general age of consent is 18.

    Interesting that you know that info.
    Yes there are countries that allow foreigners to visit and pay to have sex with children who are sex slaves.

    Yes, there are cultures that allow gang rapes on children.

    The Love Man boy clubs don’t think there should be any such laws.

    What do you think the age of consent should be?

    MOD: Read GBTC comment below before replying to this or similar.

  159. @ elastigirl:
    Yes, my questions are rhetorical in nature to add to those that Ken F posed. I, personally, do not believe that anyone is beyond the atoning sacrifice of Christ, except those who commit the “unpardonable” sin of continually resisting, rejecting, and blaspheming the Holy Spirit (Mark 3 and Matthew 12). Sexual sin of whatever sort can be forgiven and the sinner cleansed from all unrighteousness, unless such sinful behavior is accompanied by the unpardonable sin of rejecting the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, which renders forgiveness for anything else ineffective. A sinner must first be convicted of sin, before repentance and cleansing can follow. By continually rejecting the Holy Spirit, a depraved mind slips further into depravity and the sinner becomes isolated from the only hope he has to overcome.

  160. Law Prof wrote:

    I don’t think this was intentional on their part, it just seems that all of the above parties are simply outside of their scope of concern, I think they consider them nonentities, things of absolutely no relevance. I don’t think the leaders, many of whom I believe to be just given utterly over to evil, care about anything other than themselves, and I don’t think the dudebros and worshipful sycophants care about anything other than the objects of their worship.

    I agree. And I think it’s time to put them out of the church. They are not Christians, they show no fruit.

  161. bc wrote:

    Interesting that you know that info.
    Yes there are countries that allow foreigners to visit and pay to have sex with children who are sex slaves.
    Yes, there are cultures that allow gang rapes on children.
    The Love Man boy clubs don’t think there should be any such laws.
    What do you think the age of consent should be?

    This comes too close to a personal attack on HUG. Lets stop this. Just because he knows details about sexual practices in other countries doesn’t mean he condones or promotes them. It just means he knows about them. Some of us read a LOT about a lot of topics.

    And HUG. Tone down some of your comments please. Not this one but others or we’ll stop letting them through. You can make your point without yelling.

  162. Gram3 wrote:

    Thanks for what you are doing regarding Driscoll. I suspect that Grudem is behind this move to PHX, at least in part.

    There are days I wonder why I’m doing this (usually after the on-again, off-again boyfriend says to me, “why is this YOUR problem?”) but then I remember there are real human beings involved and someone has to warn them that being in the clutches of a self-centered charismatic pastor can really, really hurt. Trust me, I can think of many other things to do on a Sunday morning.

    Now, totally off the subject, but Driscoll is going whole-hog on the whole Mid-Century Modern aesthetic. I guess I need to get a tie-dyed t-shirt to blend in. In the meantime, I think this weekend’s sign will say “Mark Driscoll does not stand for Medical Doctor,” because he should not be giving medical advice to people, particularly not to people with anorexia nervosa. Deebs, he was talking about how demons could be involved in anorexia in his video (you can see it at Warren Throckmorton’s place). It sounds like he’s drinking hard from the Robert Morris stream.

  163. GuyBehindtheCurtain wrote:

    bc wrote:

    Interesting that you know that info.
    Yes there are countries that allow foreigners to visit and pay to have sex with children who are sex slaves.
    Yes, there are cultures that allow gang rapes on children.
    The Love Man boy clubs don’t think there should be any such laws.
    What do you think the age of consent should be?

    This comes too close to a personal attack on HUG. Lets stop this. Just because he knows details about sexual practices in other countries doesn’t mean he condones or promotes them. It just means he knows about them. Some of us read a LOT about a lot of topics.

    And HUG. Tone down some of your comments please. Not this one but others or we’ll stop letting them through. You can make your point without yelling.

    Sorry to offend some sensibilities. I think I’ll just drop out. Thank you

  164. Lydia wrote:

    A former close colleague of mine, a mentor, retired early to go full time on the scandal. She is a devoted Catholic, sent her kids through Catholic schools, etc. She is articulate, professional and well connected. For her, it was about saving Catholicism. I admire her very much

    My on-again, off-again boyfriend is Catholic. I remember, after the scandal burst in 2002, he went to an open meeting at his parish to talk about it. He came out of there and told me he was convinced the pastor of the church was lying when he (pastor) said that everything was out there. Turns out my bf was right, as the pastor was later indicted on misdemeanor counts of alleged sexual contact with teens and young adults. The pastor later pled those down to delinquency of a minor and indecent exposure.

    Now…what happened to the pastor? Well, he was removed from his parish, but he couldn’t stay away from the limelight. So he set up another church with another priest (who I believe had been laicized). The RCC couldn’t find it within themselves to laicize this guy (i.e., remove his priestly faculties) while he was preying on teenage boys, being indicted, and then pleading guilty, but start another church and by golly, they’ll drop-kick you out of the priesthood so fast your head will spin. He’s still running his “praise and worship center” and he’s still calling himself “Father,” and apparently he is now offering communion, which of course puts him outside the pale of the Catholic church. (For a long time, apparently he wasn’t offering communion.) And he apparently has a crowd around him, from praise and worship center’s bulletin, it looks like they’re pulling down around $35K a month, with about as much going out in expenses.

  165. Lydia wrote:

    I think a lot of really bad people are counting on Him not rejecting them as they plunder and pillage children through life.

    Really. I don’t think they are giving any thought to God at all.

  166. Law Prof wrote:

    I don’t think there’s any intentional disregard or that this was in any manner an intentional slap in anyone’s face, be they victim of sexual abuse, parent or loved one thereof, watchblogger who’s been following the scandal and producing uncomfortable truths for public consumption, law enforcement authority investigating the claims, or disappointed plaintiff in a lawsuit that may well have had merit but was dismissed on a bare technicality.
    I don’t think this was intentional on their part, it just seems that all of the above parties are simply outside of their scope of concern, I think they consider them nonentities, things of absolutely no relevance. I don’t think the leaders, many of whom I believe to be just given utterly over to evil, care about anything other than themselves, and I don’t think the dudebros and worshipful sycophants care about anything other than the objects of their worship.
    It’s nothing personal, Dee, Deb, and all the abused victims, because to them, you are quite simply not a person.

    I think there’s also an element of unconscious privilege; in other words, in their world (and frankly, the world in general), the white guys are on top whether they consciously buy into this or not. Well, they definitely buy into the man-is-boss mentality. Anyway, they’re used to living as a class at the top of their society, so if they’re not bothered in any way by an abuse situation, then others aren’t either. Because they’re the people who count.

  167. patriciamc wrote:

    Anyway, they’re used to living as a class at the top of their society, so if they’re not bothered in any way by an abuse situation, then others aren’t either. Because they’re the people who count.

    The HIGHBORN.
    Just like in Game of Thrones.

  168. Max wrote:

    Sexual sin of whatever sort can be forgiven and the sinner cleansed from all unrighteousness, unless such sinful behavior is accompanied by the unpardonable sin of rejecting the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, which renders forgiveness for anything else ineffective

    God’s forgiving sin is one thing. Protecting other people, including children, from sexual abuse by a predator is another thing. Most predators are highly manipulative and know Christian-ese and to play the Jesus card, which gives them access to more victims. Sex offenders should be ministered apart from the normal congregation by people who are highly trained. (I posted links above in a prior post to the Mennonite churches in Canada and the U.S. who have done this on a small-scale because of how hard the work is and how expensive it is.)

  169. Beakerj wrote:

    I recommend Anna Salter’s book Predators as a good place to start to understand this whole horrific phenomenon. I would LOVE it if we really saw a lot of change in those charged with paedophilia but it appears rare…I don’t know why.

    I also posted the link to Dr. Anna Salter’s 5-part interview about sexual predators on the show Tier Talk, for the corrections/prison industry. (I posted that above here on May 18th.

  170. @ Max:

    It’s interesting to me that Calvinists/NeoCalvinists warn everyone all of the time about the dangers of alcohol (perhaps a leftover from Prohibition?) but don’t give the same dire warnings about sex offenders. No alcohol for communion (grape juice only), for meals, admonishments not to drink alcohol in your home or as a Christian “lest you make someone stumble” and “think less of Christ”. Admonishments by e-mail for gatherings in restaurants that we aren’t supposed to order alcohol less we “make someone stumble”, especially if there is a recovering alcoholic in our midst and to help our “weaker [brother/sister]”.

    And no such safety protocols are put in place with sex offenders, no warnings, no protections. If the NeoCal Jesus cleaned up the sex offender and all is “safe”, then why not the alcoholic? If the alcoholic needs enormous protections in the church then why not the sex offender?

  171. bc wrote:

    Interesting that you know that info.

    Slick plausibly-deniable insinuation/accusation there, BC.

    1) Many years ago I was talking with a business owner from Louisiana (he was catering the TechEd I was attending) who mentioned he’d married at 16 and how that was the age of consent in that state. Probably a holdover from the 19th Century when Louisiana was first colonized.

    2) I’ve been involved in various fandoms starting with SF litfandom in 1975, and fandoms of any sort have a grapevine. Anime’s a fairly-large fandom these days and a bit more mainstreamed than others, so knowledge of its internal shticks and terminology is more widespread.

  172. elastigirl wrote:

    did this man ever face the laws of the land? criminal charges?

    These were college-age students, so it wasn’t criminal activity, just highly unethical, especially in a Christian setting where students and faculty sign “life and conduct statements” that prohibit sex outside of marriage.

  173. Velour wrote:

    Protecting other people, including children, from sexual abuse by a predator is another thing. Most predators are highly manipulative and know Christian-ese and to play the Jesus card, which gives them access to more victims.

    Because of the nature of (and reaction to) their predation, the dumb and obvious ones tend to get weeded out pretty quick, leaving you with the Expert Masters of Camouflage and Mimicry.

  174. @ patriciamc:

    “…not bothered in any way by an abuse situation, then others aren’t either.”
    ++++++++++++

    my husband tends to do this — if he’s ready to go (leave to go somewhere, leave to return home), then he announces ‘let’s go’. he assumes since he’s ready, done, had enough, therefore the other 5 people in the family are surely ready, as well. he misses the fact that I’ve been attending to the 3 little’ns and haven’t begun to get ready myself.

    if he wants to watch Deadliest Catch or Gas Monkey at the end of the day, he simply turns on the TV, settles into bed, and that’s that. when I mention I’m not particularly interested in these shows, he looks surprised, then kindly says ‘oh ok. here, watch whatever you want.’ then turn over and goes to sleep. he misses the notion that perhaps we could find something we both like and enjoy ourselves together. you know, compromise.

    he’s extremely kind, sensitive, and very considerate in general. but it’s like if he’s comfortable, then what’s the issue? if he’s uncomfortable, then of course it’s everyone’s issue.

  175. Stunned wrote:

    So is the word biblical bandied about because it’s the search word d’jour (or d’this era in Christianity?) Is this why it seems so ubiquitous in their writing, etc?

    There’s an interesting, if disturbing, parallel here with the variola virus (responsible for smallpox).

    The genome of the virus was mapped a wee while ago – being a virus, it’s comparatively simple – and scientists were surprised to discover that a large proportion of its genes are human genes – that is, genes it has in common with us. This is the key to why smallpox is such a dangerous disease – one strain is fatal in over 90% of cases. Long story short, the variola virus uses its “human” genes to dull the immune response of an infected person. Even as the virus is wreaking havoc, the immune system waves it past because it is fooled by a few crucial proteins on the virus’ surface.

    Likewise, Christians too can be fooled – our willingness to critically examine is reduced and our discernment suppressed by certain triggers that cause us to trust or be impressed by people. I would be tempted to say “those poor saps at Mars Hill” rather than “Christians” and “our”, were it not for the ways in which Lesley and I have been suckered by false friends over the last few years. We all have different discernment-suppressors, but we have them nonetheless. For large numbers of Christians, “biblical” is just such an immune suppressant. Anybody who repetitively quotes scripture or whose books are “packed with scripture” (from an actual review of Mark Driskle’s effluent) is given servile obedience no matter how ungodly his behaviour. Because he’s “biblical” and “preaches the gospel” (meaning, he pushes certain particular doctrines). Or he’s a good speaker; or he attracts crowds; etc, etc, etc.

  176. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    For large numbers of Christians, “biblical” is just such an immune suppressant.

    And if you’ve happened to see behind the scenes in this one it turns into a tell.

  177. Ken F wrote:

    This is the “Ask Pastor John” topic for today: “I See a Church Leader Living in Sexual Sin — Should I Expose Him?” http://www.desiringgod.org/interviews/i-see-a-church-leader-living-in-sexual-sin-should-i-expose-him.

    “Paul intends for that to happen when he says: Expose them. So the lion’s share of our lives is not devoted to passing judgments on all the sinners around us, but rather living such lives of God-centered purity that the darknesses specifically of God-neglect and impurity will just naturally be shown to be darkness — will be exposed.”

    Here again is a false dichotomy to guilt people away from taking real action in the case of abuse. Note also the “biblical” standard for guilt he discusses.

    I made two posts yesterday. The one asking hard questions about ministering to RSOs got quite a lot of attention. But this one about John Piper providing the theological top-cover to protect abusive church leaders got no comments. I’m not sure what to make of that. I guess it’s because Piper has gotten so much attention already?

  178. @ Ken F:

    I have not listened to the recording, but am familiar with John Pipers twisted interpretations. What I don’t understand is the people who are infatuated with his writing and teaching.

  179. Velour wrote:

    It’s interesting to me that Calvinists/NeoCalvinists warn everyone all of the time about the dangers of alcohol

    While the “Old” Calvinists may frown on alcohol consumption, the “New” Calvinists do not. In fact, YRR leaders in my area are seen out and about swigging a beer or two at dinner. Darrin Patrick, the Acts 29 VP and pastor who recently fell, came to fame in St. Louis when his Journey Church sponsored “Theology at the Bottleworks,” a discussion group in a bar where alcohol was available to attendees. You can bet that raised a few eyebrows among Missouri Southern Baptists (Journey Church is an SBC church), but it didn’t become a big enough issue to chastise the young pastor … so he continued playing his part in the New Calvinist rebellion until his other misgivings caught up with him.

  180. Ken F wrote:

    But this one about John Piper providing the theological top-cover to protect abusive church leaders got no comments. I’m not sure what to make of that. I guess it’s because Piper has gotten so much attention already?

    I don’t think it means much that no one picked up on that and ran with it except that he has been providing cover for evil for decades. We have his ‘endure abuse for a season’ and ‘how to say no to a threesome properly so hubby can maintain his leadership role’. And much more….most of it seems like sexual arrested development and little man syndrome, anymore.

    The man is positively bonkers and continues to provide us examples in his tweets, too. The scarey part are his sycophants. Thousands and thousands of them, young and totally indoctrinated, at a church near you and me. I can promise you that. Sad stuff.

    If only the indoctrinated would strip away all the flowery verbosity and really analyze what he says. Frankly, I am not convinced they are able!

  181. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    bc wrote:
    Interesting that you know that info.
    Slick plausibly-deniable insinuation/accusation there, BC.
    1) Many years ago I was talking with a business owner from Louisiana (he was catering the TechEd I was attending) who mentioned he’d married at 16 and how that was the age of consent in that state. Probably a holdover from the 19th Century when Louisiana was first colonized.
    2) I’ve been involved in various fandoms starting with SF litfandom in 1975, and fandoms of any sort have a grapevine. Anime’s a fairly-large fandom these days and a bit more mainstreamed than others, so knowledge of its internal shticks and terminology is more widespread.

    Man, ” back in the day” Louisiana let females marry at age 12. I know some females who got married at that age….and they’re not that old….

  182. @ K.D.:

    I’m pretty sure they were also the last state to let their arms be twisted into upping the drinking age to 21!

  183. Lydia wrote:

    If only the indoctrinated would strip away all the flowery verbosity and really analyze what he says. Frankly, I am not convinced they are able!

    I’ve heard Christians describe him as “deep.” My first though to that was outhouses are also deep. I remain completely baffled that people cannot see through his horrific teaching.

  184. dee wrote:

    So, to say a church should love a pedophile is very nice in theory. But most churches will not spend the time and effort that is needed to effectively intervene in a pedophile’s life. Fewer still will get the training necessary to even begin working with such an individual. They want the easy “Hey, I repented, got baptized and now want to be your poster boy.” It rarely works like this. Real love takes a lot of work. Most churches today don’t want that sort of effort.

    This is exactly the point I was trying to make, but you did it much better.

    15 years ago I had the same attitudes as the folks here who are worried about me putting the needs of RSOs above the needs of victims. Back then I would have been one of the first to throw them under the bus. But then God put me into very close contact with one – the details are interesting but not relevant here. It’s as if God was saying, “here’s one who wants to repent, and I want you help him.” That was a big cage-rattling experience for both my wife and me. Especially because we had young children at the time. Most of my contact with him for the first 9 years was via letter exchange while he was in prison. That helped quite a lot because it gave me time to process what I was doing. I was always asking if I was doing the right thing. My wife supported me and I kept getting the sense that I was supposed to stick with him as a brother. I had to ask myself a lot of hard questions when he got out of prison a few years ago because his release would mark a new reality.

    Here’s why I decided to take on this “mentoring” role:
    1) I felt like I was supposed to.
    2) I wanted to know if the gospel makes a difference in hard cases like this or whether the gospel only works for easier cases. In a way, it was to test my own faith. I wanted to know if Christianity was true to the core or only on the surface.
    3) I felt like I had a civic responsibility to do what I could with this one man because I knew he would be released back into a society where he would have almost no chance of getting back on his feet, and that he would very likely be a repeat offender if he did not find new life. I was the only person who did not abandon him by the time he was released (many people parted ways with him because of the wake of destruction he left).

    I think the primary reason I was able to stay connected with him through these years is my deep distrust of people in general. I have a trust issue that I need to work on, but in a twisted sort of way my lack of trust was a gift because it helped me to keep asking both him (and me) the hard questions without getting duped by manipulation.

    1 Cor 6:9-11 kept me going: “Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.”

    “Such were some of you.” I wanted to find out if a RSO could become a “has been” in the sense of this verse. I believe this friend of mine is now a “washed”-up has-been because of the knot-hole God pulled him through over the last 13 years. I’ve heard people talk about God’s “severe mercies.” I got to see what this means. It’s not that he someone paid for his sins in a temporal sense, but the process was so hard that he had to continually determine to not give up. It’s also worth noting that he was terribly abused growing up (not a justification for becoming an abuser), which caused him, among other things, to have terribly erroneous views about God and people.

    I’ve seen miraculous changes in this man. It’s been a very costly road for him (and me) as he has put everything he had into transformation from sickness to health. Like all of us, his full recovery might not happen on this side of eternity, but I am so amazed by what I’ve seen God do with and through him over the years. He’s not the same man I met all those years ago. I think God used it to show me what only He can do. I also think this type of repentance is rare. But it makes me wonder why it is so rare. Would it be less rare if strong Christians did more? How many children could be better protected it we pew-sitters knew more about what to look for and how to minister to offenders? It could stop both the immediate abuse and the future abuse. But this could be an unrealistic hope.

    I agree that RSOs should be monitored in church. But I also wonder if RSOs are less of a threat than the offenders who have not been caught because we at least know who the RSOs are. We don’t know the ones who have not been caught (are they better at slipping through the cracks?). This is where the church needs to be much shrewder than it is. And it’s why I applaud Dee and Deb for what they are doing to expose this type of abuse.

    I apologize to victims out there if my postings stirred up old memories and feelings. That was not my intent.

  185. @ Lydia:

    Lydia, that’s really pretty much just how I feel about Piper. The man has real problems. And yet, he has his multitude of fans. It is so puzzling and disappointing and weird.

  186. @ anonymous for now:

    you mentioned ‘victim’, which made it seem like it wasn’t consensual.

    also, “his victims’ secular friends don’t understand what the big deal was” — am I reading between the lines that this was traumatic for the student? are you sure there was nothing criminal to it?

  187. @ roebuck:
    I am out of ideas. Has Piper become normal? This started long ago for me when some extended family members went to work and study with him after Wheaton. They came home to visit and were arrogant zombies. The whole family was blown away. Their personalities totally changed…for worse. It was like they were in a cult. They were but we did not have the tools to recognize it then.

    That was about 15 years ago and I started following his trajectory, reading his books, etc. I did not get it. I think Piper has to get them young. And from there they don’t develop.

  188. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    insinuation/accusation

    The distinction between cover-ups and false accusations is a lurking issue in today’s comments. Parts of this discussion have veered into the realm of “when did you stop beating your wife?”

    False accusations do sometimes happen. Cases now obviously false, but once widely accepted as true, include the Salem witch trials, the Army-McCarthy hearings, the hounding of Richard Jewell after the Olympic Park bombing, and the UVA fraternity story.

    Most TWW regulars would feel compassion if they sat with the falsely accused and heard their stories. However, we’re accustomed to perpetrators claiming, “I’m the real victim here!” Cover-ups often include claims of false accusation as well as repentance. Blind acceptance of these claims puts people at risk.

    We all need to think critically even as we listen with compassion to new information. TWW does an excellent job of analyzing evidence and patterns over time. I would not expect false accusations to take root here. It is good that TWW asks hard questions without trafficking in hypotheticals.

  189. @ Ken F:
    His appeal is emotional. “Deep” would require an actual discussion. Piper followers are only capable of parroting. I know as I have been talking to hundreds of them who seek to be pastors or are pastors at ground zero for 10 years. It is scary. I mean really scary.

  190. @ Ken F:

    “But this one about John Piper providing the theological top-cover to protect abusive church leaders got no comments. I’m not sure what to make of that.”
    ++++++++++++

    i read it, thought about replying, but i realized…

    i have no idea what jp is talking about.

    not really sure what point jp was trying to make. i would have had to turn my brain inside out like a paper cup to make enough sense of it for diaglogue.

    i think he’s been staring at the text and breathing his own exhales in his ivory-tower-shaped balloon for far too long. i think he’s gone right peculiar. which impressionable people mistake for brilliance! 😐

    i think brilliance (fully developed) is being able to explain things with an economy of words that every-man-woman-even-child can understand.

  191. @ Friend:
    Back when I was on the board of a crisis center ( dealing with lots of lawyers and pastors, too!) the stats were about 4℅ were false. I have no idea what it is today.

    It is just as important to exonerate the innocent as it is to convict the guilty. This is the hardest crime to convict, btw, without getting too explicit. It is unbelievable how many adults were molested as children/teens. I have seen stats of 1 out of 6 adults. Most predators are never reported.

  192. elastigirl wrote:

    think he’s gone right peculiar. which impressionable people mistake for brilliance!

    I like Piper to the character, Chance the Gardner, in “Being There”.

  193. elastigirl wrote:

    not really sure what point jp was trying to make.

    What I read into it (I read the transcript rather than watching the recording because I cannot stand his histrionic style teaching style), is his attempt to tell us that to expose church leaders we have to come up with multiple witnesses (which is nearly impossible in most cases), but even more important, we are not supposed to go around looking for problems in the first place. Our only role is to live exemplary lives. This is grooming pew-sitters to sit on their hands and ask no hard questions ever.

  194. elastigirl wrote:

    i think he’s been staring at the text and breathing his own exhales in his ivory-tower-shaped balloon for far too long. i think he’s gone right peculiar. which impressionable people mistake for brilliance!

    I think he made an amazing admission in his devotional from yesterday:
    “God contradicts what human merit might dictate. He hides from the wise and reveals to the most helpless and unaccomplished.”

    If he believes the rest of his theology about God’s unconditional election, he just stated that the elect are unwise and unaccomplished. That might explain things…

  195. @ Ken F:

    “If he believes the rest of his theology about God’s unconditional election, he just stated that the elect are unwise and unaccomplished. ”
    +++++++++++++++++++

    it’s hard for me to believe he’s that organized in his mind.

  196. Bridget wrote:

    I have not listened to the recording, but am familiar with John Pipers twisted interpretations. What I don’t understand is the people who are infatuated with his writing and teaching.

    Bridget, thank you for saying that! I have always thought i was the only one who didn’t like his (and most other Christian top dogs) writing. I used to try over and over but eventually gave up. I mean, I don’t think I like ONE “Christian” book written by anyone “known”. (Except a little CS Lewis and Hannah Hurnard.) Other than that, I’ve always preferred the bible. Oh, and I like Eternity in the Hearts, written in the 80’s. Other than that zilch. Glad to know I’m not the only one who never liked a few of the other popular ones. I haven’t even tried since the mid 90’s.

  197. Stunned wrote:

    Other than that, I’ve always preferred the bible.

    The Bible has always worked for me 🙂 As far as I’m concerned, Paul’s expansion and exposition of the Gospels is all the ‘commentary’ I can possibly handle. Sometimes I have a hard time handling that. Piper and his ilk? Not so much…

  198. Lydia wrote:

    His appeal is emotional.

    WHAT??!?? Lydia, my dear (whom I barely know, but go with me on this one), I almost always agree with what you say, but I must swerve my car waaaaay into another lane on this one. My few experiences with watching this man or his reading materials, which make dry toast seem rich to me, speaks volumes of unbelievable OPPRESSION of emotions. A decent therapist would have a field day with this guy’s lack of coming close to exploring his emotions (in my useless opinion.) What in heaven’s name do you see that would cause emotional appeal with this guy? If anything, I suspect he appeals to people who don’t want to feel their real emotions. I see him as the antithesis of emotions. “Bury ’em deep, Boys! Let’s just look at the law so we don’t have to figure out what we’re feeling or why. Make up lots of rules and live by ’em so you don’t have to do the work to actually get emotionally healthy. Rules will save ya, don’t ya know.”

    Again, a thousand apologies if I am a mile off but I’m sharing my impressions and curious what it is about this man that you see as appealing to emotions (other than a bit of fear of emotions.)

    Or maybe I completely misread you.

    Waiting for my friends who love this guy to come on a witch hunt after me. Then again, all I have to do is start hugging them and they’ll run away. 😉

  199. elastigirl wrote:

    i think brilliance (fully developed) is being able to explain things with an economy of words that every-man-woman-even-child can understand.

    Love that Einstein quote, “If you can’t explain it to a 6 year old, you don’t understand it yourself.”

  200. elastigirl wrote:

    i think brilliance (fully developed) is being able to explain things with an economy of words that every-man-woman-even-child can understand.

    I sat under an English prof. many years ago who said this:

    “Never spend three thousand words on something for which three hundred will do nicely.”

  201. @ Stunned:
    OK, my brain not working so well. Suppression of emotions is what I meant to say, not Oppression. When I wrote it I stared at it for half a minute thinking something seemed wrong, but I couldn’t figure it out. Sorry about that. And for the horrible punctuation. Let’s pretend the proper stuff was in there, can we, please?

  202. @ Lydia:
    Yes. And to clarify my earlier comment, Challies is not at all like them in that regard. He is only like them in that he peddles a false Christianity.

  203. elastigirl wrote:

    to which I reply that exemplary living is questioning authority when it errs.

    Paul agrees with you. Piper and the Gospel Glitterati disagree with you and Paul.

  204. Stunned wrote:

    A decent therapist would have a field day with this guy’s lack of coming close to exploring his emotions (in my useless opinion.) What in heaven’s name do you see that would cause emotional appeal with this guy?

    Not speaking for Lydia, but I took her to mean the way that he plays to other people’s emotions with his histrionics, as someone mentioned upthread. Piper is histrionic, and that is what we might expect from someone who is covering up his real emotion with the histrionic display. His audience mistakes their emotional reaction to his histrionic display as being confirmation from the Spirit that what Piper is saying is deeply true and real. Of course it is nothing of the kind. I think you are probably right. I have read Paul Tripp, so I must be right.

  205. @ Stunned:

    An appeal to emotion does not mean his listeners understand that is the appeal. They mistake it for brilliance and intellectualism.

    Watch his body language, tone and the plethora of flowery strange words that really communicate nothing when you strip away all the verbs and adjectives. (He makes up words and mixes incongruent concepts) He feigns passion. He boldly “declares” with feigned passion.

    Who are his biggest fans and loyal foot soldiers? Young men.

    He can make them believe cancer is a gift from God. That is emotional appeal. He can turn Hedonism into a godly pursuit. He can teach that Jesus was damned and they are overcome with conviction. They think it is theological intellectualism.

    Does that help explain what I mean?

  206. @ Gram3:

    to which I reply that exemplary living is questioning authority when it errs.
    ——
    Paul agrees with you. Piper and the Gospel Glitterati disagree with you and Paul.
    +++++++++++++

    ….as well as when you suspect the possibility of error. no need to tip toe around. we’re all adults, are we not? i mean, i know I’m an adult, and the authority at least looks like an adult…

  207. Ken F wrote:

    But this one about John Piper providing the theological top-cover to protect abusive church leaders got no comments. I’m not sure what to make of that. I guess it’s because Piper has gotten so much attention already?

    I too didn’t comment. I don’t waste my time on John Piper, who seems too bizarre for words across a whole range of topics. He hasn’t been able to get anything right, ever. I wrote him off long ago. (I also wonder in years to come how many of these guys we’ve heard were also abusers to family, church goers, etc.)

  208. Lydia & Gram 3, thank you for taking the time to help me understand what you mean by the phrase.

  209. @ Stunned:

    He was raised in the world of Bob Jones fundamentalism with a traveling evangelist father and as an only child. I would say you are on to something. The fact he spends so much energy on male/female roles, sexual innuendo, Gods authority (not love), speaks for itself.

  210. Lydia wrote:

    Watch his body language, tone and the plethora of flowery strange words that really communicate nothing when you strip away all the verbs and adjectives. (He makes up words and mixes incongruent concepts) He feigns passion. He boldly “declares” with feigned passion.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S0FDjFBj8o

  211. Gram3 wrote:

    Not speaking for Lydia, but I took her to mean the way that he plays to other people’s emotions with his histrionics, as someone mentioned upthread. Piper is histrionic, and that is what we might expect from someone who is covering up his real emotion with the histrionic display

    “Histrionic” is commonly called “Drama Queen”, letting it all hang out with over-the-top emotion.

  212. Now I feel a little badly. I didn’t mean to be so rough and rude. Not trying to tear the poor guy apart. Just wish we could all be healthier, especially those who have influence on the younger generation. My heart aches as I see so many of them following in similar footsteps which led to a painful, rocky, legalistic path. I wish I could somehow stop them and let them know what God has been so kind to show me over the past fifteen years. Maybe I need to trust Him, that if He did it for me, He will do it for others. But my heart goes out to them as I’m seeing the leaven of the Pharisees being sprinkled into their bread of life. Sad it makes me.

    Signed,
    Unhealthy rescuer Stunned

  213. Max wrote:

    Those are tough questions. Romans 1 (NIV) gives us a glimpse at what God thinks about the habitual sexually impure. “God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another” (v. 24). “God gave them over to shameful lusts” (v. 26). “God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done” (v. 28).
    The Phillips translation of the same passage paints a more dire picture for such abusers: “They gave up God: and therefore God gave them up — to be the playthings of their own foul desires in dishonouring their own bodies … These men deliberately forfeited the truth of God and accepted a lie, paying homage and giving service to the creature instead of to the Creator … God therefore handed them over to disgraceful passions … since they considered themselves too high and mighty to acknowledge God, he allowed them to become the slaves of their degenerate minds …”
    It appears that there is a point – a line in the sand – that some abusers cross and are abandoned by God to their own lusts. Are they beyond the atonement of Christ if God has given them over to their sin? Is it possible for them to repent and turn from their wickedness if God has given them over to a depraved mind? Is there anything the church can do if they have rejected God in favor of being slaves to their degenerate ways?

    Someone here has said: “A pedophile has a life long problem – a proclivity. He may fight the urge but he will always have the compulsion.” In other words, it is highly improbable that the pedophile will ever be freed. If the Bible is true, there is a line that gets crossed to the point of no return.

    Romans 1:24-27 describes individuals who are given over to sexual sins. Maybe some people think there’s a sliding scale, or that Romans 1:24-27 contains a qualifier like, “The sinners described here are given a pass if they work hard and are nice people.” I don’t read that there, but it’s possible someone might read that into the text.

    Allow me to play the Devil’s Advocate here a bit….

    The Christian states: “God created everything to be a certain way but somehow the world fell and everything is not as it should be, therefore we need to accept that the fallen world produces many things that were not intended.”

    To that the Christian adds: “Our job is to muddle through the difficulties that are presented to us. As Christians we should be concerned with how we treat people who must deal with the reality of who they are, leave the justice part to God, and just share His love with everyone.”

    Sound reasonable so far? Continuing on….

    The Christian suggests: “Let’s leave sin to the Prophets; that’s their job. What we as Christians should do is sink deeper into the lives of people and seek to understand them first. What we don’t need to do is tell someone their sin is a sin. They already know that. What we need to do is become friends with these people and share our love with them.”

    Additionally, the Christian instructs: “We should try and go deeper and find out what is wrong or painful in their lives in hopes of understanding why they behave the way they do?” It would follow this should apply to the pedophile since it’s known that many of them were abused themselves? Or are we going to say it’s just the pedophile crossing the line in Romans 1:24-27, therefore they should be the only ones restricted? Where is the boundary as far as others are concerned? Is there not one? How then are we to interpret Romans 1:24-27 and who it applies to? Are we saying there should only be a standard in regards to deviant sexual behavior involving children, and that other acts of deviancy are less abhorrent and should, in fact, be treated with compassion and tolerated?

    The Christian may “nuance” this a bit further and suggest: “After all, we need to learn to live along side those who disagree with us because we’re commandeded, as much as possible, be at peace with all men. After all, how do we know if it isn’t biological or the result of trauma? Aren’t we supposed to have compassion for those who do not feel the way you feel or you think they should feel? What if years down the road we discover that there is a receptor issue in the body or the lack of a chemical that causes them to feel differently?” If this is true, is it not true for the pedophile? Is what the Christian saying true, or relatively true?

  214. Lydia wrote:

    It is unbelievable how many adults were molested as children/teens. I have seen stats of 1 out of 6 adults. Most predators are never reported.

    The stats I’ve seen are 1 out of 4 girls and 1 out of 6 boys are sex abused by age 17.
    (Stats I’ve seen on predators are that 1 out every 10 people is a predator.)

  215. Mirele, the perp pastor you mention who decamped to found the praise center: He was not by any chance the founder of Life Teen? Was this in Arizona?

  216. @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    Exactly! That was also the motivational speaking…err…seeker mega sermon world.

    I remember how stunned I was when Piper and Mahaney did the “scream of the Damned” tag team sermon thing at the Palm Springs Resolved conference in 2008. About the only Reformed blogger who took them on at the time was Steve Camp.

  217. Velour wrote:

    (Stats I’ve seen on predators are that 1 out every 10 people is a predator.)

    That is hard to believe. Not sure it is a good number. It would mean that in the US alone there would be 30 million predators (not sure if this refers to sexual predators only).

  218. Lydia wrote:

    His appeal is emotional.

    After reading your description and watching that great youtube video posted above, I might say his appeal is winning or persuasive or manipulative. (Not that I am saying I know his heart so I don’t want to conjecture motive. Listen to what a hypocrite I am, right after I say I think someone is suppressing their emotions, I say I don’t know someone’s heart. Again, come Lord Jesus, come!)

  219. Bridget wrote:

    That is hard to believe. Not sure it is a good number. It would mean that in the US alone there would be 30 million predators (not sure if this refers to sexual predators only).

    I heard that number from attorneys who dealt with sex crimes. There must be a high percentage of sex predators – whatever the number actually is – in the population for so many young people, girls and boys, to be sex abused by age 17.

  220. One in 25 people are sociopaths/psychopaths (according to the stat that says 4% of the population.) I’d be really shocked if 1 in 10 are sexual predators. Let’s hope it’s less, at least.

  221. Velour wrote:

    I wrote him off long ago.

    I regularly check his site to see what he is up to. The timing of what he posts vs what TWW posts can be freaky at times.

  222. Stunned wrote:

    Suppression of emotions is what I meant to say, not Oppression.

    The original wording is better than the correction. I once showed my wife a Piper video and she actually had to run to the bathroom to puke.

  223. @ Paula Rice:
    Over the last 2,000 years, I see the church taking the uncomfortable black & white painted in Scripture and turning it into shades of gray. In doing so, we’ve turned “Thus saith the Lord” into “Thus saith us” and confused what should not be confused by accepting what the culture around us accepts. The early church was counter-culture to the world; the 21st century church is a sub-culture of it. When it comes to tough issues, we look to Christian psychology rather than Biblical truth and fail to tell sinners the truth in love. The early church cast out the reprobate and unrepentant; we make room for them in their sin. This might seem harsh, but we are in a war between light and darkness and its getting darker.

  224. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Max:
    to clarify my previous comment, I don’t imagine paul had pedophilia on his mind with these verses. my belief is the main issue is hurting someone. on this topic, violating a human being against their will.

    I’ve read some things about the ancient world, especially the ancient Mediterranean world, which suggests that sexual license was pretty much the rule, and that it wasn’t uncommon, for example, for girls to be legally married at the age of 12 and for pederasty to be commonly practiced. Also, I read that Paul most likely wrote his letter to the Romans from Corinth, which was known for it’s sinful sexual practices. So, I’m guessing Paul had a wide range of things in mind when he wrote Romans chapter 1 and verses 18-32 that included consensual sexual relationships.

  225. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    “Histrionic” is commonly called “Drama Queen”, letting it all hang out with over-the-top emotion.

    I say, with all the authority of having read Paul Tripp, that he is histrionic. Piper, that is. On the flip side, I know a guy who is a huge Piper fanboy who is cold as ice. He projects cool, but the way he speaks about certain people is ice cold. Except when he is in icy burn mode, if that makes any sense.

  226. Pingback: The Powerful Men of Evangelicalism Suddenly Care about Sexual Abuse of Children? Prove it. | Jessica Veldstra UNITED STATES

  227. @ Max:
    I’m in agreement, Max. And it’s important to understand what is truly “counter-cultural” opposed to what someone says is “counter-cultural.” For example, the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood claim Complementarianism is “counter-cultural,” and men like Kevin DeYoung believe this to be so critical to the Gospel™ that its his “hill to die on.” But does it fit with the gold standards of the New Testament?

    Pete Briscoe, along with is elders at Bent Tree Church, did an incredible job explaining why they believe women should be allowed to preach and teach in the church.

    Briscoe also addressed the “Slippery Slope Argument.” He says in the video (beginning at the 53:30 minute mark) and quoting William Webb (author of “Slaves, Women and Homosexuality”): https://youtu.be/fSXcAyP33rM?t=49m15s

    He (Webb) also studied every verse in scripture having to do with homosexuality. And this is what he found – the line looks like this: (draws a straight, horizontal red line across the chart) No matter where you read all the way through scripture, the message is the same, that the practices and behavior that goes along with with that lifestyle are sinful. They are not what God has for you. God has something better for you.

    And so it’s really important that you understand that these conversations (referring to the conversation about the redemptive movement of scripture that takes us toward his creation ideal, and the effect of this trajectory upon slaves, women and homosexuals) – they’re very different conversations. I shared this with you because I know some of you are wondering, “Ok, is this going to lead us to endorsing gay marriage?” Because it’s the slippery slope argument. The slippery slope argument says that if you go to “A” you’re going to end up at “Z”. Right?

    Let me state categorically that no, we are not going to endorse gay marriage. Marriage, as we have stated on a number of occasions, is between one man and one woman, always has been always will be. It started that way here (pointing to the board, where Genesis has been indicated on the chart) and it is that way all the way through. We’re not going to change on that. This is a different conversation. It’s not a slippery slope.

    Addressing gender equality in the church and the participation of women is not the same thing as gay marriage. It’s a different conversation. But I don’t think homosexuality and pedophilia are two entirely different conversations. We can certainly make distinctions and say, with the full force of scripture, that one who causes a child to stumble should be thrown into the sea with a millstone hung around their neck. However, I don’t think we can separate homosexuality out of Romans 1:24-27 and then afford it a defensible position – not if we’re going to be consistent, that is.

    And this doesn’t address the manner in which we are to demonstrate our concern for those trapped in sin and alienated from God, assuming we’re dealing with individuals who haven’t crossed that line – and I think we need to recognize the difference. The Apostle Paul certainly did.

  228. Paula Rice wrote:

    And this doesn’t address the manner in which we are to demonstrate our concern for those trapped in sin and alienated from God, assuming we’re dealing with individuals who haven’t crossed that line – and I think we need to recognize the difference.

    Honestly, most Christians in the church have absolutely no ground to stand on. They are abusive, self-centered, haven’t taken the numerous logs out of their own eyes, haven’t worked on themselves, and are constantly hunting for “sin, sin, sin” in other people. They pick on gays relentlessly, meanwhile giving themselves and all of their friends (and family) a pass on equally egregious sins.

    Could I order a person to get a certain hairstyle? Why ‘no’.

    My gay boss is a far nicer and more decent person than most of the Christians that I know, and he is hands down a better human being than ALL of my ex-pastors/elders at my NeoCal church.

  229. @ Paula Rice:

    being gay and pedophilia have nothing to do with each other. to be gay does not mean to be alienated from God. Gay people find God and know God with great affection and want to live for God just as straight people do.

  230. Lydia wrote:

    Watch his body language, tone and the plethora of flowery strange words that really communicate nothing when you strip away all the verbs and adjectives. (He makes up words and mixes incongruent concepts) He feigns passion. He boldly “declares” with feigned passion.

    I could never figure out what people saw in John Piper. Occasionally he’d say something good but by and large he seemed shallow and fake. He would wax passionate about bizarre things that nobody could possibly be that passionate about. Once I listened to him go raspy voiced over the need for seminary students to study the original languages. Not even Greek professors get that worked up about it. His academic papers left me with a headache from trying to figure out how his points were in anyway connected to the text or to each other.

    But I’d also say he’d be a case study in being out of touch with his emotions. Maybe his emotions aren’t really fake but are misdirected.

  231. Christiane wrote:

    Without the ‘watchdog’ blogs, these neo-Cal pastors would continue unimpeded down a road to their own destruction . . . This blog, and the many others that call the neo-Cals to conscience are doing them a favor. I am Catholic and I see the attempts of the neo-Cals to avoid confrontation and protect their own quietly, but let them know that truth comes out in time. They can STOP the nonsense and prevent a lot of suffering or they can reap the hell they are enabling to continue. They have a conscious choice to make. They will own the results of their choosing.
    God have mercy. The children of the Church deserve protection from abuse, in the Name of Christ Our Lord.

    Amen!!

  232. Velour wrote:

    dee wrote:

    All pedophiles struggle with their proclivities for their entire lives. That does not mean that they WILL reoffend but it does mean that they are at high risk to reoffend.

    There is a camp that argues that sex offenders don’t re-offend and the statistics are low. I think that sex offenders do re-offend but they just aren’t caught, which is how many of them get away with sex abusing so many children in the first place.

    I agree with you. But here is a way to NOT re-offend: Kill people instead. Lots & lots of people. In my area, we had a notorious serial killer who went on a killing spree. He was finally caught, convicted, & locked up for life– for murder. He had been in prison for child molestation, didn’t like what the other cons did to him, so he practiced his sociopathy on grown-ups when he got out.
    Oh, & nobody knew he was around, because the folks who let him out thought he had “reformed”.
    A lot of us, reading the papers, wondered how the h*!# the parole board missed the fact that there aren’t a lot of children wandering around inside prison walls…….Of course he hadn’t re-offended; he didn’t have any victims available.

  233. Muff Potter wrote:

    @ Catholic Gate-Crasher:
    Sounds to me like a realistic and pragmatic way forward.

    I totally agree. It also shows, IMO, a great deal of compassion for those who choose to separate themselves from society as a part of their lives forever afterward.

  234. Abi Miah wrote:

    The church should do BETTER than secular organizations like Penn State or the military. But I think it would be useful to figure out why so many organizations seem to have the same general pattern of response. When Christians and the secular world are transgressing at the system level in the same pattern, it’s worth analyzing. What is there is common? What gain do the organizations get from the pattern? What perceived negative do they avoid by this pattern?

    The military gives off an air of “well, we didn’t want any women in the 1st place, so let them deal with it”. Which is wrong on so many levels…..

  235. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Max wrote:

    It appears that there is a point – a line in the sand – that some abusers cross and are abandoned by God to their own lusts. Are they beyond the atonement of Christ if God has given them over to their sin? Is it possible for them to repent and turn from their wickedness if God has given them over to a depraved mind? Is there anything the church can do if they have rejected God in favor of being slaves to their degenerate ways?

    This touches upon “The Unpardonable Sin”, a concept which has been obscured by a lot of baggage (such as the de facto definition “Whatever YOU do that *I* don’t”).

    I have said this before, but I believe that the “unpardonable sin” is sociopathy/psychopathy. These people cannot be forgiven because they don’t WANT to be forgiven. They think they are just fine the way they are, & that the rest of us are just a bunch of old meanies for locking them away in the 1st place, yada, yada, yada, ad nauseum.

  236. Muff Potter wrote:

    Yes we are. The point is that the Catholic Church has acknowledged there’s a problem but Protestant fundagelicalism has not.

    Exactly!

  237. roebuck wrote:

    If folks would turn the spell-checker off (if you even can?) and get their own spelling in the ball park, things will be fine…

    I have mine turned off. I am a good speller. It was driving me crazy. Spellcheck is, apparently inflexibly American, & I spell *most* things in the manner of my Irish ancestors. Always have. Even as a child. (I have one-& only one cousin who does the same thing; go figure).
    I got a computer savvy friend to email me the instructions in actual English (as in, in the dictionary before 1965). I printed it out, & it still took me three tries to get it off. All errors are therefore the result of my abominable typing.
    And it is truly abominable…I think the teacher passed me to get me out of there.

  238. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t know how it all works exactly…. but I do believe people can refrain from using children sexually for their own gratification or profit. If they did not know better or had no control, there would be no grooming process and it would not be done secretly.

    Hence the comment I have up there hanging in cyberspace, about the guy who changed from one abomination to another when he got out of the Big House.

  239. Bridget wrote:

    @ Stunned:

    Sometimes hilarious. . . Like when it changed Detwiler to detailed

    I once upon a time (on another site, in a universe not totally unlike this one) had “colour” changed into an internal bodily part & did not catch it until it was past my poor power to change it back……

  240. mirele wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    A former close colleague of mine, a mentor, retired early to go full time on the scandal. She is a devoted Catholic, sent her kids through Catholic schools, etc. She is articulate, professional and well connected. For her, it was about saving Catholicism. I admire her very much

    My on-again, off-again boyfriend is Catholic. I remember, after the scandal burst in 2002, he went to an open meeting at his parish to talk about it. He came out of there and told me he was convinced the pastor of the church was lying when he (pastor) said that everything was out there. Turns out my bf was right, as the pastor was later indicted on misdemeanor counts of alleged sexual contact with teens and young adults. The pastor later pled those down to delinquency of a minor and indecent exposure.

    Now…what happened to the pastor? Well, he was removed from his parish, but he couldn’t stay away from the limelight. So he set up another church with another priest (who I believe had been laicized). The RCC couldn’t find it within themselves to laicize this guy (i.e., remove his priestly faculties) while he was preying on teenage boys, being indicted, and then pleading guilty, but start another church and by golly, they’ll drop-kick you out of the priesthood so fast your head will spin. He’s still running his “praise and worship center” and he’s still calling himself “Father,” and apparently he is now offering communion, which of course puts him outside the pale of the Catholic church. (For a long time, apparently he wasn’t offering communion.) And he apparently has a crowd around him, from praise and worship center’s bulletin, it looks like they’re pulling down around $35K a month, with about as much going out in expenses.

    I wish I didn’t have a clue as to who this guy is, but I thought there was something hinky going on behind the scenes. I now know what. (My antennae were a-twitching back then, & apparently for good reason……)

  241. Regarding the “1 in 10” statistic about sexual predators, mentioned earlier in this thread:
    Dr. Gene Abel estimates that between 1% and 5% of our population molest children
    -CNN Specials Transcript #454-Thieves of Childhood.
    That seems more like it, but it;s still a lot of predators.

  242. elastigirl wrote:

    @ anonymous for now:
    you mentioned ‘victim’, which made it seem like it wasn’t consensual.
    also, “his victims’ secular friends don’t understand what the big deal was” — am I reading between the lines that this was traumatic for the student? are you sure there was nothing criminal to it?

    I meant “victim” in the non-legal sense, but I see your point. I don’t think anything was forced, but to have your professor hit on you has got to be massively confusing, especially given the subculture.

  243. Paula Rice wrote:

    it’s important to understand what is truly “counter-cultural” opposed to what someone says is “counter-cultural.” For example, the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood claim Complementarianism is “counter-cultural,” and men like Kevin DeYoung believe this to be so critical to the Gospel™ that its his “hill to die on.” But does it fit with the gold standards of the New Testament?

    Agreed Paula. You and I are on the same page. Certain aspects of the “culturally-relevant” belief and practice of New Calvinism stands contrary to the whole of Scripture. I’ve listened to their “hill to die on” arguments on several fronts and their claim that Calvinism = Gospel. Such thinking is far from the NT gold standard of Truth and is not the hill that Christ died on! When we water down NT standards to make them more tolerable and appealing to cultural whims, we swim in diluted half-truth and error. The Church of the Living Christ should not walk on a road of shifting sand to accommodate the culture; we need to return to the ancient paths. Oh, we can do church by going with the flow … but we will do it without God.

  244. zooey111 wrote:

    They think they are just fine the way they are, & that the rest of us are just a bunch of old meanies

    And that is the very reason that God has given them over to a depraved mind (Romans 1) … stinkin’ thinkin’ and low livin’ got them in that place. And the matter is made worse when much of the organized church tells them they are OK the way they are! Us “meanies” hold forth the Truth in love as a lifeline to them … a tough love that is their only hope.

  245. @ anonymous for now:
    The problem is we can only count what is reported. I hate to be crass but there is no measuring the uncle who tried to cop a feel or the person in the restroom that “helped” the little boy at church. etc. The episode might have gone down in minutes but the effect is lasting.

    The little boy I mention was 7 and the only reason anyone knew is he asked his 10 year old brother what it meant and the 10 year old told his mom.

    Ask a room full of adults about any experience with such and many hands go up. This does not mean those types always crossed another line but it does speak to a huge problem in respecting the innocents.

  246. Lydia wrote:

    Back when I was on the board of a crisis center ( dealing with lots of lawyers and pastors, too!) the stats were about 4℅ were false. I have no idea what it is today.

    It is just as important to exonerate the innocent as it is to convict the guilty. This is the hardest crime to convict, btw, without getting too explicit. It is unbelievable how many adults were molested as children/teens. I have seen stats of 1 out of 6 adults. Most predators are never reported.

    Good information, thanks.

  247. elastigirl wrote:

    being gay and pedophilia have nothing to do with each other. to be gay does not mean to be alienated from God. Gay people find God and know God with great affection and want to live for God just as straight people do.

    Ditto here. And even if there is an associativity, I think it’s more incidental than causal.

  248. elastigirl wrote:

    being gay and pedophilia have nothing to do with each other

    Two separate things with an occasional incidental overlap?

    Though I remember someone citing a study in one of these blogs about same-sex pedophilia. And how there was a major difference between same-sex pedophilia (pre-puberty/children) and ehebephilia (post-puberty/adolescent/sexually mature but still legally underage, commonly called “jail bait”).

    Same-sex ehebephiles self-identified as gay; same-sex pedophiles self-identifed as straight. And some sort of arousal testing seemed to bear this out.

    Ehebephila seemed to be just going after YOUNG but sexually mature within the orientation. Like an exaggerated form of an older man seeking out young fresh partners for whatever reason. As Voddie Baucham put it, “As a man ages, his eye turns to younger women”. Just these guys take “younger” too far, below the age of consent.

    But same-sex pedos identifying as straight? The study postulated that for pedos, it was the feminine characteristics of pre-pubescent children that was the arousal trigger. Pre-pubescent males do not have the secondary sexual characteristics of an adult male — heavy body/facial hair, rougher skin, deeper voice. And their primary sexual characteristics (prominence of genitalia) are much less obvious. So to the pedo, they come across as “female” — smooth skin, no facial hair, high-pitched voice, no visible genital bulge through clothing.

    Taking that into account, “gay” and “same-sex pedo” should NOT overlap, at least for males.

  249. roebuck wrote:

    I guess what’s worse is people relying on the spell checker, and poking in 5-10 single-letter typos on their phones that just happen to be actual words so the spell checker passes them.

    You see that type of misspellings on fanfic site uploads all the time.
    ALL. THE. TIME.
    DRIVES. ME. CRAZY.
    “Spellcheck didn’t flag anything!” (As they stare at their Social Media Screens…)

  250. elastigirl wrote:

    being gay and pedophilia have nothing to do with each other

    Two separate things with an occasional incidental overlap?

    Though I remember someone citing a study in one of these blogs about same-sex pedophilia. And how there was a major difference between same-sex pedophilia (pre-puberty/children) and ehebephilia (post-puberty/adolescent/sexually mature but still legally underage, commonly called “jail bait”).

    Same-sex ehebephiles self-identified as gay; same-sex pedophiles self-identifed as straight. And some sort of arousal testing seemed to bear this out.

    Ehebephila seemed to be just going after YOUNG but sexually mature within the orientation. Like an exaggerated form of an older man seeking out young fresh partners for whatever reason. As Voddie Baucham put it, “As a man ages, his eye turns to younger women”. Just these guys take “younger” too far, below the age of consent.

    But same-sex pedos identifying as straight? The study postulated that for pedos, it was the feminine characteristics of pre-pubescent children that was the arousal trigger. Pre-pubescent males do not have the secondary sexual characteristics of an adult male — heavy body/facial hair, rougher skin, deeper voice. And their primary sexual characteristics (prominence of genitalia) are much less obvious. So to the pedo, they come across as “female” — smooth skin, no facial hair, high-pitched voice, no visible genital bulge through clothing.

    Taking that into account, “gay” and “same-sex pedo” should NOT overlap, at least for males.Lydia wrote:

    @ Friend:
    Back when I was on the board of a crisis center ( dealing with lots of lawyers and pastors, too!) the stats were about 4℅ were false. I have no idea what it is today.

    So 4% false alarms. Just enough that you can’t rely on the report and have to check it out and eliminate the false positives.

    It is just as important to exonerate the innocent as it is to convict the guilty. This is the hardest crime to convict, btw, without getting too explicit.

    And one of the easiest to wreck someone’s life permanently with a malicious false accusation or insinuation. Lotsa bang for the whisper. Given that, I’m surprised the false alarms are as low as they are.

  251. Velour wrote:

    I also posted the link to Dr. Anna Salter’s 5-part interview about sexual predators on the show Tier Talk, for the corrections/prison industry. (I posted that above here on May 18th.

    I managed to miss that Velour, sorry. Thanks for the link.

  252. @ Ken F:
    Ken this is a great thing to have done. I so totally want to see more of this kind of involvement, but it takes a special person to do it. Because of my work I’d find this impossible, & actually couldn’t mix with a known sex offender without declaring it to my Bosses. I sometimes work with victims & occasionally with young people with sexually problematic behaviours, but never convicted adults. I’m glad there are those that can, particularly those who have been abused themselves.

  253. zooey111 wrote:

    The military gives off an air of “well, we didn’t want any women in the 1st place, so let them deal with it”. Which is wrong on so many levels…..

    This has changed over time, and it depends on the branch of service and on the individual assignment (combat, desk…). Military folks tend to be clean living, disciplined, respectful, and hard working. But every group has some bad apples, and endless war has broken many who serve. Give us fifteen years of peacetime and I’m willing to believe that rates of domestic violence, suicide, substance abuse, etc., will go down. We owe these good men and women so much, and we can’t do enough to make them whole.

  254. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Given that, I’m surprised the false alarms are as low as they are.

    Me too. But we are talking about children which changes the dynamic. If my child were having night terrors/tremors, I would suspect something extremely serious happened and investigate…no matter what Aimee Bird suggests otherwise.

  255. Beakerj wrote:

    Ken this is a great thing to have done.

    Thank you for your kind words. This particular RSO has become a dear friend of mine. 15 years ago I could have never have imagined that happening. I had to do a lot of soul-searching and working on myself in the process. In hindsight, I am very grateful that God put this man into my life. It’s been a huge blessing for both of us. But I cannot see myself doing this with many others because I feel so ill-equipped.

    Sexual addiction is very complicated. I’ve read a lot of books, but nearly all miss the mark on how to deal with it. Nearly all focus on various forms of the “white-knuckle” approach. But this doesn’t work in the long run. The only approach I’ve found that makes sense is that of Ted Roberts. He spoke at a men’s event in a church I attended in CA about 17 years ago, so I read his book (Pure Desire). Here is the link to his ministry: http://www.puredesire.org/en/. I’ve been wanting to purchase this DVD series, but I’ve not had the funds and I’m in a church that does not recognize the problem (yet): http://conquerseries.com/.

    He has one good sermon on YouTube that I highly recommend watching if you have time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MF-6CobxMvY. You can skip the first 2:22 because it’s all introduction. 3:36 – 9:45 is a segment from the Conquer Series. One of the reasons it’s worth watching is the statistics he talks about concerning sexual addiction among churches and pastors. The numbers are stunning. I’m very interested to know how this video impacts abuse victims. Does his approach appear solid? I have not found any evidence of him being connected to YRR or CBMW.

  256. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Two separate things with an occasional incidental overlap?

    Though I remember someone citing a study in one of these blogs about same-sex pedophilia. And how there was a major difference between same-sex pedophilia (pre-puberty/children) and ehebephilia (post-puberty/adolescent/sexually mature but still legally underage, commonly called “jail bait”).

    Same-sex ehebephiles self-identified as gay; same-sex pedophiles self-identifed as straight. And some sort of arousal testing seemed to bear this out.

    This how I view it as well. Obviously this is an issue with same sex and opposite sex individuals. I have never seen any stats on whether the frequency varies in those two groups. I think pedophilia is it’s own thing (although even there there may be preferences it seems like, but it’s different)