“If you do not tell the truth about yourself you cannot tell it about other people.” -Virginia Woolf link
Complementarian theology trumps kindness and support when it comes to domestic violence.
Last week we addressed Mary Kassian’s negative review of Ruth Tucker’s book Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife.
Furthermore, those who question the validity of her conclusion put themselves in the precarious position of being accused of questioning the validity of her experience, of being unsympathetic, of victim-blaming/shaming, or of condoning abuse. If I were a male who took exception to Ruth’s conclusion, I’d hesitate to even attempt a critique of her book.
But because I’m a woman, I believe I can ask the question: Was it truly the doctrine of male headship that caused Ruth to be abused? Or was something else to blame?
Her review piled heaps of blame on Ruth’s decisions in her life. Both Deb and I were shocked that a so-called ‘Distinguished Professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary’ would handle domestic abuse in such an unsympathetic manner simply because she thought that, as a woman, should could. In so doing, she caused further pain to an abuse victim, and that caused us to wonder what sort of an advocate for women would do such a thing..
We decided that it was about time that the life of Mary Kassian be looked at with fresh eyes. Thanks to one of our alert readers, Jerome, we learned about a whiplash lawsuit that Kassian filed against a driver who hit the car that her husband was driving. The entire Kassian clan was involved in the accident. The court document on this lawsuit provides an interesting perspective on how Kassian dealt with her own claim of injury. Recently she tweeted the following. The question is: does she live this out in her own life? Let’s see….
For your convenience, we have included the 2008 court document rendering the judge’s decision at the end of the post. Because Kassian is a Canadian citizen, the legal proceedings took place in Edmonton, Alberta. Kassian sued Paul Roy, who collided with the vehicle in which she was riding on December 24, 2002. Roy admitted to doing so.
We recommend that everyone read the entire decision. We doubt Kassian ever expected that Christians in the United States would have access to it. All of the information, unless otherwise noted, comes directly from the court document.
Who is Mary Kassian?
Kassian often refers to herself as an award winning writer and touts her position as a distinguished professor of women’s studies at SBTS.
Here is what she says about herself.
Mary Kassian is an award winning author, popular speaker, and a distinguished professor of women’s studies at Southern Baptist Seminary. She has published several books, Bible studies and videos, including: Girls Gone Wise, In My Father’s House: Finding Your Heart’s True Home, Conversation Peace, Vertically Inclined, and the Feminist Mistake.
Mary graduated from the faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine from the University of Alberta, Canada and has studied systematic theology at the doctoral level. She has taught courses at seminaries across North America She is a popular conference speaker and has ministered to women’s groups internationally. Mary has appeared on numerous radio and television shows, including Focus on the Family, Family Life Today, and Marriage Uncensored.
Mary was born and raised in Edmonton, Canada. She and her husband, Brent, have three adult sons and one daughter-in-law. Mary has mastered the art of cheering after spending countless hours in rinks, arenas, and gyms: her husband is chaplain for a professional football team, her two older sons play ice hockey, and her youngest, volleyball. The Kassians enjoy biking, hiking, snorkeling (when they can find some warm water!), music, board games, mountains, campfires, and their family pets: Miss Kitty and black lab, General Beau.
SBTS says she has an international reputation in women’s studies.
Mary Kassian is one of the authors of the Danvers Statement and claims to have invented the term *complementarianism*. She is a Distinguished Professor at the SBTS Women’s Institute.
“As distinguished professor of women’s studies, Mary Kassian brings an international reputation combined with deep biblical convictions and a tremendous ability to communicate, to teach and to share her passion for a biblical understanding of these issues.
Although she is touted as an expert on women’s issues, Mary Kassian appears to hold a degree ONLY in Occupational Therapy.
Neither the lawsuit nor our subsequent research has turned up any other degrees. She often mentions having studied “Systematic Theology on a doctoral level”. Her studies, according ot the lawsuit, commenced in 1997 through the University of South Africa — the same institution from which her friend Dr. Dorothy Patterson received her doctoral degree. We cannot find any peer reviewed doctoral level academic work and/or research on women’s studies. Also, an Occupational Therapy degree is not a degree which involves the study of women’s issues. Yet, this is what Kassian teaches at SBTS.
Mary Kassian’s husband, whom she often refers to as a chaplain or pastor, is actually a full-time physical therapist who runs the family business. Why she rarely mentions his occupation is puzzling.
Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, the family owned business. Mrs. Kassian had consulted part time at the Centre until 1998, but continues to be involved in various administrative roles.
He is a chaplain for one of the professional hockey teams so we believe that this is the extent of his pastoral duties.
One of her sons, Matt Kassian, played professsional hockey for a couple of years. He was known as “The Kassassin” and had a reputation for being the team’s enforcer, which usually means getting involved in fights. Mary seems to like the fact he fights. (Dropping the gloves in ice hockey is usually a prelude to beating up someone on the opposite team.) I guess it’s one of those complementarian/Mark Driscoll things that I do not understand. His fighting didn’t seem to work out for him, and he returned to business school.
Matt Kassian’s gift of providing a good quote is also in his genes. In an interview with the Minneapolis Star Tribune a couple of years ago, his mother Mary, an award-winning author, spoke about how “nerve-racking” it is to watch her big boy drop the gloves.
“I’m up on my feet and my heart’s pounding every time he’s in a fight, but I understand the role that plays,” she said. “He used to want to be a dentist. Now he knocks people’s teeth out.”
I think Mary decided to *drop the gloves* on Ruth Tucker. She does kind of like that fighting stuff.
09/24/19 Update Some of the links to this story are no longer working. Special thanks to a reader who provided us with the link to Way back.
The accident
Brent, Kassian’s husband, was driving. Mary was in the front seat with her seat belt on. Her 3 kids were in the back seats. Brent and the kids had minor injuries and their claims were settled out of court, which probably means the insurance company paid up. Mary declined any assistance from the ambulance that arrived and instead called her brother, who ‘attended at the scene and took her home’. Apparently, Mary wanted a bigger settlement than the insurance company was willing to provide, so she took the matter to court.
The injuries
You can read the full report below. She complained of pain in her neck, temporomandibular joints and tingling in her hands, headaches, pain in her back, etc. She said she could not sit in front of a computer. Apparently 4 days after the accident, she was given some medication so that she could make a 4 day business trip to the great state of North Carolina. Kassian claimed her activity level had dramatically declined.
[57] One point upon which Mrs. Kassian was quite adamant about was what an active person she had been – involved in sporting activities, skiing, hiking, along with all of the other activities she was involved in professionally.
She said she needed to make drastic changes
She has attempted to take steps to minimize the impact of her injuries on her work, such as changing her office arrangements, purchasing a second computer monitor and a new computer desk and chair, and switching from printed to electronic resources. Nevertheless, Mrs. Kassian reported her ability to work has decreased: she only can work up to 5 to 6 hours a day on a computer, and cannot comfortably use lap-top computers on aircraft because of the discomfort she experiences while looking downward. Her ability to read and research is similarly affected.
[63] She emphasized that she has not created a new publication, particularly a video curriculum, since the Accident. She alleged that she has missed deadlines for four publications, including “Vertically Inclined.”
After the accident she received medical assistance from 7 professionals over a period of years who provided information to the court. You can read the number of claims she made in regards to her long-term injuries. She appears to be inconsistent in her description of her handicaps from the injuries. Although there is no doubt she received some injury from the accident, the seriousness and long-term effects, as well as the areas of her body involved, were called into question by the judge, who did not find her to be a credible witness.
Inconsistent and Questionable Testimony by Mary Kassian.
As one who claims to be a teacher of Christian women as well as a Distinguished Professor in a seminary, the fact that her declaration was not only questioned by the judge, but in some instances described as unbelievable, should be a concern to all who listen to her teaching.
1. She claimed that she hired contract writers to help her only after the accident. False!
[64] She also testified that she had to hire contract writers to assist in preparation of her latest publications. In total, Mrs. Kassian testified she paid these writers $5,515.00, and further that these writers had demanded and received a part of her royalty payments, between $26,000.00 and $27,000.00 in total. Mrs. Kassian testified that she had never required assistance prior to the Accident. Worse, she claims that the product of these writers was unsatisfactory.
[65] On cross-examination, Mrs. Kassian acknowledged that prior to the Accident she had employed contract writers who engaged in analogous work and that she incurred similar costs for this assistance.
2. She was evasive in answering questions on cross-examination.
While Mrs. Kassian’s evidence on her direct examination was crisp and straightforward, on cross-examination, her memory seemed to be vague. Under cross-examination, she was evasive in answering straightforward and simple questions.
For example, she could not recall how long it was that she went to the exercise class prescribed by physiotherapist Gordon Ariza, under the supervision of Julie Patan. Nor could she recall the details of the treatment she received at Nor-Med or that she was treated after complaints of lifting boxes and standing on her feet all weekend on February 4th, 2003. Nor that she was feeling much better and had noticeable improvement as documented in those records in 2003.
In fact, it is recorded in Mr. Ariza’s July notes that she reported taking part in mountain rappelling for a video shoot, but she did not recall this under cross-examination. That incident deserves further commentary.
3. There was inconsistency in her claims of discomfort from her reported injuries.
[72] Her testimony was inconsistent as to the discomfort that resulted from her injuries. At her Examination for Discovery in 2006, she testified that her worst problem was the pain between her shoulder blades, and, similarly, that she does not get headaches if she wears her TMJ splint. That, of course, is different from her trial testimony of ongoing headaches and associated suffering, and her problems with her lower back while sitting, standing and travelling. At the Examination for Discovery, she testified that she had resumed ironing, and at trial, she claims that she has not been doing that.
[73] She claims to have had headaches and lower back pain through to this very day, but this is not what she is reported to have indicated to her caregivers, Dr. Adam and Dr. Major, and Mr. Ariza. Why this difference? On cross-examination, she was unable to recall or explain the very different reports of her evident recovery noted by these persons, and her alleged ongoing physical ailments.
4. The judge believed that her headaches were not caused by the injuries as she claimed.
[90] Given the lack of medical evidence to support existence of these allegedly ongoing and constant headaches and her apparently inconsistent testimony, I am suspicious that Mrs. Kassian is being less than forthright concerning these alleged headaches. This conclusion is fortified by the other inconsistencies in Mrs. Kassian’s testimony, as discussed previously. I therefore conclude that on this point, Mrs. Kassian’s testimony at trial is to be given very little weight. I find that the Plaintiff has failed to prove beyond a balance of probabilities that the Plaintiff experiences headaches on a nearly daily basis after May 2004. Further, I conclude that any headaches that she may have experienced after May 2004 must have had some cause other than the injuries she suffered as a consequence of the Accident.
5. There were outright deceptive claims surrounding the videos and photos produced for Vertically Inclined.
This is deeply disturbing to those of us who believe that authors should be truthful. This appears to be an outright lie.
[75] In July 2003, during the period where she testified she had yet to recover from her post-Accident injuries, Mrs. Kassian was preparing video and photographs of herself in a range of mountain climbing activities, all part of the video curriculum for her “Vertically Inclined” publication. When asked in cross-examination about these video materials and photographs prepared for “Vertically Inclined” in the summer of 2003, she identified the photographs of herself on page 154 of the workbook and the article from her website which talks about filming the videos where she describes herself as exhausted from a full day of filming, rappelling down the rock and dangling in the air while she gets the batteries replaced for her equipment, taking the crew whitewater rafting and “living for this stuff” as being “fabricated” for the purposes of selling the book. When asked in cross-examination, she admitted that she was not doing those things and that what was written and described in “Vertically Inclined” was not true. The photo from the shoot for the website, she testified, was “staged” in Nashville.
[76] Either she went rappelling as she is noted to have told her physiotherapist Mr. Ariza or she was not telling him the truth. Or she was not rappelling and let her target audience believe she was, so she was not telling them the truth. Or, she is not being truthful in court.
6. Busted. The judge states Kassian’s actions in court appeared to contradict her testimony. (Or perhaps she was healed during the trial?)
[77] I watched Mrs. Kassian during the course of this trial after she had given her evidence, sitting in various places in the courtroom, on the floor, leaning up against the wall, looking quite despondent. And then I noticed on Thursday afternoon, for the first and only time, that she was sitting upright in a chair, with her head lowered, taking notes during the course of the testimony of the expert chartered accountant Mr. Popik. Mrs. Kassian had testified previously that looking downward was a chief cause of her physical discomfort. This sudden change in her presentation was a surprise.
[78] Mrs. Kassian complains of having problems sitting, but in the courtroom she was provided with an antique oak armchair to sit on in the witness box, which did not come up past the mid-back. During the course of her evidence she would periodically stand and periodically sit. Her evidence was that she could not sit for long periods of time because of pain in her lower back. There does not appear to be any explanation for her ongoing low back complaints. Her thoracic and cervical spine complaints have been confirmed by both of the orthopaedic specialists who testified, but her inability to sit in a chair which does not compromise either her neck or her thoracic spine is a bit of a mystery.
[79] During three out of the four days she was in the courtroom, I did not see the purportedly smiling, charming, and confident person that counsel told me I would see. Rather, Mrs. Kassian appeared sad and despondent. She was required to leave Edmonton on the next day to give one of her motivational seminars. Presumably she would present herself as a smiling, charming and confident person at such a seminar.
7. Kassian is not a credible witness.
Whoa. This was said by an impartial judge in front of whom, I would presume, Kassian took an oath to tell the truth.
[81] Given these conclusions, I must treat Mrs. Kassian’s testimony with caution. I do not find her to be a particularly credible witness. I also recognize a significant risk that the evidence she provides may be fabricated, or exaggerated. As such, I look with particular care for evidence of corroboration and consistency, as well as a physical foundation for the injuries, dysfunction, and pain that she claims to experience. That analysis follows.
8. The judge agreed that she had some injury, but not to the extent that she was claiming.
[140] On the testimony of Mrs. Kassian and the medical experts, I have concluded that after May 2004, Mrs. Kassian had, and will likely continue to have, a certain degree of discomfort associated with her cervical and thoracic spine and associated musculature. I find as fact that the proportion of that ongoing dysfunction is a consequence of a pre-existing arthritic condition, and Mrs. Kassian’s adopting an inappropriate and harmful therapeutic regime. I have taken this into consideration in determining an appropriate award. I also take into account the expert opinions of Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie that some degree of ongoing upper back and neck discomfort will probably be present for the remainder of Mrs. Kassian’s life.
[141] In the general damage component of the award I have made, I have considered the loss of enjoyment of life. I have considered the fact that Mrs. Kassian now no longer water skiis, that she no longer goes fishing because she finds it uncomfortable to sit in a boat, that going to the movies is difficult, and she now chooses to sit at the back of the church because she does not want to be a distraction when they go to church. I have considered the fact that she no longer assists with the yard cleanup that she used to enjoy, and that her social activities have now been diminished because of her pain. All of these factors go into the components that make up a general damage award for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life.
9. The judge disagreed that her injury led to a loss of publication, as claimed. The judge said her personal publishing record was a foundation built on sand.
iv. The Probability of a Lost Publication
[183] I disagree. The Plaintiff has certainly failed to prove that the injuries she experienced in the accident have undoubtedly resulted in her failing to produce one or more publications and/or curriculum materials. However, that degree of proof is not necessary, the Plaintiff need only first demonstrate that the alleged loss is a real and substantial possibility and not mere speculation. If that prerequisite minimum has been met, the Court should assign an actual probability for that missing publication. What, then, is the evidence to support that proposition?
[184] Mrs. Kassian’s personal publishing record is no more than a foundation built on sand. Between 1992 and 1999, she published nothing at all. No evidence was advanced to support the proposition that authors of Christian motivational literature typically publish at regular, predictable intervals for decades at a time
10. The judge called her Vertical Inclined graphics *very juvenile* that had nothing to do with her injury.
International reputation is being built here folks but the reputation is not stellar.
[203] Instead, Mrs. Kassian testified that “Vertically Inclined” did not do as well as “Conservative Peace,” and she attributes that to the accident, testifying, for example, that the graphics on the cover are very juvenile. She claims that this is because she did not reject the graphics when they were sent to her for approval because of the pain she was suffering from the accident. I find this to be rather ingenuous. A simple “yes” or “no” could have been easily made to the graphic artist’s work. To blame the juvenile presentation of this curriculum work on the Accident is a stretch for me in the circumstances of her activities and the comments especially recorded by Mr. Ariza, her physiotherapist, during his assessment and progress reports of her treatments during 2003.
[204] Further, I saw the cover design of Mrs. Kassian’s “hit” publication, “Conversation Peace,” published 2001, and the allegedly juvenile “Vertically Inclined,” published 2003. Both covers incorporate stylized “cartoon” characters, bright colours, and title text with very asymmetric design and fonts. Personally, I have little ability to distinguish either one as being a more “juvenile presentation.” Side by side, these book covers appear far more alike than they are different.
11. The judge rejects any loss of royalty and writing income due to injury.
[208] As such, I entirely reject Mr. Popik’s projections on Mrs. Kassian’s lost writing and royalty income.
12. The judge asserted that Mary was the cause of some of her injuries due to her own pursuit of therapy, but she gets some compensation for lost speaking engagements.
[220] I have previously concluded that by failing to follow the advice of Dr. Adams and her engagement in inappropriate therapy for her pain exacerbated rather than mitigated her discomfort. I had determined that after January, 2005, two-ninths (22.2 percent) of Mrs. Kassian’s ongoing neck and upper back problems were a result of a pre-existing condition now aggravated by inappropriate treatment. As a consequence, I reduce the award of damages for lost speaking engagements during 2005 by two-ninths. Mrs. Kassian is awarded damages as follows: 2003, $7,000.00; 2004, $7,000.00; and 2005, $5,444.44. The total award is then $19,444.44.
13. The judge nixed Kassian’s claim for the extra cost of flying business class.
The judge says she can get an aisle seat in economy. Besides, this problem does not seem to related to the accident.
[226] The alleged problem appears to be her sitting for long periods of time. Even in business class, she will still have to sit for extended periods. Certainly, in economy class, with an aisle seat she can get up and walk around and stand as needed during the flight. In my view, this is not an appropriate cost to pass on to the Defendant in this circumstance. Again, I point out that the problem appears to be in the mid-back and neck and not in the lumbar spine, and, accordingly, the postural issues as identified by Dr. McKenzie, if properly addressed, might rectify these extended sitting issues. As previously noted, Mrs. Kassian’s injuries do not appear to be significant enough to be causing the kind of symptomology she demonstrates as arising from the complaints of low back pain.
14. The judge allows for the cost of Advil at $29 per year along with mattresses, etc.
Advil???? Good night! How cheap can you get…
[227] Ms. Kennedy reports Mrs. Kassian’s purchase and use of an ObusForme high back rest, which high back rest apparently assists her with her neck and mid-back pain. The Defendant has agreed to pay the cost of this ObusForme high back rest, which is $96, and will have to be replaced every eight years. In addition, Mrs. Kassian uses a TENS machine Maxima II which costs $500 every six years. Mrs. Kassian’s orthopaedic surgeon, and Dr. Lavoie, the second orthopaedic surgeon, recommend that she not have any therapy except exercise and the occasional Advil to deal with her pain. Accordingly, I would allow the Advil, as identified by Mrs. Kennedy, at $29 per year.
iii. Beds
[228] Mrs. Kennedy recommended two twin mattresses and box spring sets in order to provide Mrs. Kassian more comfort when she is sleeping. Accordingly, per Mrs. Kennedy’s recommendation that this be purchased once only to assist Mrs. Kassian in sleeping better with her upper back and neck problems, the sum of $3,044 would be allowed on cost of future care as well.
15. The judge rejects her claims for payment to contract writers since she did this prior to the accident as well.
Mrs. Kassian claims the contract writers were required to assist her after the accident; however, in both 2001 and 2002 it is obvious that she paid salaries, wages and benefits to someone, in a similar amount. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that money paid to others was not out of the ordinary, or a consequence of injuries suffered as a result of the Accident. The royalties paid to these writers come from minor publications and, the sales of those publications are minimal, as demonstrated in the royalty payments in Tab 19, and, accordingly, do not demonstrate the kind of loss that the Plaintiff submits exists. I therefore reject this claim.
16. The judge rejects the claim for yard work since her husband and sons did it but allowed steam cleaning, painting, laundry and ironing for 2003 and 2004.
I guess that real men in the complementarian setting do not do laundry or ironing.My husband and son are applauding this decision since they have been known to help in this area around here.
She also claims for the cost of the 2003 and 2004 yard cleanup. Her testimony is that the yard cleanup was something that her husband and sons participated in, and that she assisted when a part of the cleanup was a two-person job. That claim will not be allowed in the circumstances. However, the steam cleaning, painting, and the laundry and ironing from 2003 and 2004 will be allowed.
17. Here is the most ridiculous allowance for Mary Kassian: Her husband must make meals and he needs to be reimbursed for doing so, but she is fully capable of shoveling snow!!!
Take a look at this tweet from 2012. Mary *Whiplash* Kassian is out in the Canadian winter shoveling snow. But, bless her heart, she is unable to help with the meals.
Now let’s look at what the judge allowed.
I. Meal preparation work that cannot be done in the future is also a form of pecuniary loss. Ms. Kennedy’s evidence is that Mrs. Kassian is capable of doing the housekeeping work but that it is simply difficult for her. However, in my view, it seems reasonable, with her neck and upper back pain problems, that Mr. Kassian take over the making of the meals. This is a task that she performed prior to the accident and that he has taken over out of necessity since the accident. Accordingly, in my view, she will probably not resume making meals after the trial, and this, too, is part of the pecuniary damage claim, even though it is replaced by Mr. Kassian. I accept Mr. Kassian’s evidence on this point. In light of my findings concerning Mrs. Kassian’s failure to mitigate, I will award Mrs. Kassian seven-ninths of the cost of Mr. Kassian’s meal preparation, that is, $5,278.00 per year until Mrs. Kassian is 62 years of age.
Mary Kassian was 42 in 2002. This means the insurance company will pay Mary Kassian for meal preparation done by her husband until 2020 – twelve years after the court settlement. Mary is out there shoveling snow; however, she can’t open a can, slice a tomato, or press a button on the microwave for the next 8 years (2020 – 2012 when she posted the tweet)??? This is a complementarian witness?
Now look at Mary’s tweets again. I think she needs to do some serious self-assessment. Of yeah, and next time, lay off of abused women.
Mary Kassian used the court system to secure meal preparation payments for a period of twelve years; yet, she posed in rappelling gear, urging us to “go higher with God”. What is wrong with this picture? Remember, she stages all this stuff no matter what she says. For those attending future conferences featuring Mary Kassian, it would behoove you to remember that a judge once found her ‘not particularly credible’.
Below is the Kassian v. Roy court document. Thanks to Jerome for bringing this to our attention!
Kassian v. Roy, 2008 ABQB 80 (link)
2008-02-06
Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta
Citation: Kassian v. Roy, 2008 ABQB 80
Date: 20080206
Docket: 0403 20696
Registry: Edmonton
Between:
Brent Kassian, Mary Kassian, Clark Kassian, Jonathan Kassian, an infant by his next friend, Mary Kassian, and Matthew Kassian
Plaintiffs
– and –
Paul Roy
Defendant
_______________________________________________________
Reasons for Judgment
of the
Honourable Madam Justice L. Darlene Acton
_______________________________________________________
[1] Mrs. Mary Kassian is a Christian author and motivational speaker. On December 24th, 2002, she was a passenger in a motor vehicle accident [the “Accident”]. She sues for damages resulting from the Accident. Fault has been admitted by the driver of the other vehicle, the Defendant Mr. Paul Roy. The Court is asked to determine:
(1) the extent of the injuries Mrs. Kassian suffered attributable to the Accident, and
(2) the damages that flow from those injuries.
I. Mary Kassian
[2] At the time of the Accident, Mrs. Mary Kassian was 42 years of age. She is married to Brent Kassian. Brent and Mary Kassian have three children, who at the time of the Accident were 18, 16, and 14 years of age.
[3] She formally trained as an occupational therapist. She had worked as a full-time occupational therapist at Glenrose Rehabilitation Hospital until 1984, then part time until 1992.
[4] Her husband, a physiotherapist, runs the Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, the family owned business. Mrs. Kassian had consulted part time at the Centre until 1998, but continues to be involved in various administrative roles.
[5] In 1997, Mrs. Kassian commenced a long-distance PhD program in Systematic Theology at the University of South Africa. She has not completed her dissertation or oral examination to date. She has also taught a number of short-duration courses at a Baptist seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.
[6] Her professional focus has shifted away from her first career in occupational therapy. In 1990 she published a book entitled “Women, Creation, and the Fall,” that was followed in 1992 by “The Feminist Gospel.” Her next publication was “In My Father’s House: Women Relating to God as Father,” released in 1999 by LifeWay Church Resources. To organize her writing, lecturing, public speaking, and teaching activities, in 2000 she established “Kassian Communications.”
[7] Her first major publishing success was the 2001 video-based curriculum “Conversation Peace,” again published by LifeWay. Partially on the basis of this publication, she was invited to 13 speaking engagements in 2001 and earned $13,860.00 in honoraria, followed by 18 public speaking engagements in 2002, with associated income of $22,136.00. At the time of her Accident she had almost completed another video-based curriculum entitled “Vertically Inclined.”
[8] Mrs. Kassian had been involved in two motor vehicle accidents when she was 18, but experienced no long term impairment or disability as a consequence.
[9] Her medical history indicates that she had reported neck pain in August 1998. She had fallen down some stairs in 1999, and described to the attending physician that she had a sore back at that point. She attended the Healthy Balance Massage Therapy on 13 occasions after the fall until November 2002. These massages are described as having been for neck, shoulder, and thoracic stiffness that had resulted from working with a computer.
II. The Accident
[10] Mrs. Kassian was involved in this motor vehicle Accident on December 24th, 2002. She was sitting in the front passenger seat of the motor vehicle, wearing her seat belt, when
the Defendant’s vehicle suddenly turned left in front of the vehicle in which she was riding. The vehicles collided, and Mrs. Kassian, while turned to warn her children of the impending collision, was thrown forward, hit her head and was then thrown back into the seat, hitting the headrest. While the vehicle was equipped with air bags, the air bags did not deploy. She complained to her husband of pain in her neck and down her back, and she was in tears.
[11] When the police attended, Mrs. Kassian declined any assistance from an ambulance and called her brother who attended at the scene and took her home.
[12] The other occupants of the car (husband Brent Kassian, sons Clark Kassian, Jonathan Kassian and Matthew Kassian) suffered comparatively minor injuries, and their claims against Mr. Roy were settled prior to this matter being heard by the Court.
III. Medical and Therapeutic Treatment
[13] Since her Accident, Mrs. Kassian has attended a number of health professionals in relation to the injuries that allegedly originate from the Accident. These health professionals have provided written opinions, testified in court concerning their observation of Mrs. Kassian’s condition, and their notes were entered as exhibits. I will review Mrs. Kassian’s post-Accident therapy, and the opinions of the various medical and therapy professionals who have treated and/or examined Ms. Kassian, summarized below:
1) Dr. Paul Adams, general practitioner: December 26, 2002 to December 23, 2004;
2) Dr. Paul Major, temporomandibular dysfunction specialist: May 21, 2003 to September 29, 2004;
3) Dr. Guy Lavoie, orthopaedic surgeon: May 29, 2007;
4) Dr. A. H. McKenzie, orthopaedic surgeon: May 9, 2007;
5) Mr. Gordon Ariza, physiotherapist: January 3, 2003 to May 28, 2004;
6) Mr. Grant Fedoruk, physiotherapist: March 22, 2005 to September 28, 2007; and
7) Ms. Lorian Kennedy, occupational therapist: April 23 and 25, 2007.
A. Dr. Paul Adams
[14] Two days after the Accident, Mrs. Kassian attended at the Capilano Medi-Centre on December 26th, 2002, and saw Dr. P. Adams, a General Practitioner. At that time she was complaining of sharp, stabbing pain in her neck area. Dr. Adams identified that her neck mobility was reduced and there was para-cervical tenderness as well as tenderness at the cervical-thoracic spine junction.
[15] On December 26, 2002, Mrs. Kassian complained to Dr. Adams of frontal headaches as well as a headache on the top of the skull which had been continuous since the Accident. She also complained of mid-back pain, and Dr. Adams identified para-thoracic tenderness. Mrs. Kassian also complained to Dr. Adams that she was having discomfort in her lower
back, worse on the left side than the right, and he identified tenderness over the para-lumbar region, with decreased hip flexion.
[16] Dr. Adams also identified bilateral stiffness over the temporomandibular joints [“TMJ”], and noted a complaint that Mrs. Kassian was experiencing numbness and tingling over both hands, which he determined indicated some connection to C7-T1 dermastomal distribution.
[17] Mrs. Kassian had a business trip scheduled to North Carolina from December 27th to December 30th, and was concerned about the lengthy plane trip. Accordingly, Dr. Adams gave her a prescription for a muscle relaxant, Flexeril (10 mg. up to three times daily), and also provided her with a prescription for Tylenol 3. He advised her to apply ice to the tender spots. When she went to see Dr. Adams on December 26, 2002, she was already taking an anti-inflammatory medication, Motrin. He noted her emotional distress.
[18] Dr. Adams ordered x-rays of the cervical and thoracic spine on that day and he reports that the x-rays showed normal thoracic spine alignment with normal vertebral body heights with no para-spinal soft tissue swelling. The x-rays demonstrated mild degenerative spondylosis with mild disc space narrowing at T12-L1. The cervical x-rays showed slight straightening of the cervical lordosis with limitation of the flexion and extension of the cervical spine, which reflected para-spinal muscle spasm. There was no acute abnormality seen.
[19] Dr. Adams next saw Mrs. Kassian about one month later on January 24th, 2003, at which time she was still complaining of continuous headaches, considerable pain between her shoulder blades, and tenderness over the cervical-thoracic junction. TMJ pain was present bilaterally, although more painful on the right than the left. There was lower back pain and discomfort with tenderness over the lumbar and para-lumbar area. Hip flexion was reduced. He found discomfort over the neck area with decreased neck mobility at the end of the range of motion. Mrs. Kassian advised him that she was having difficulty sleeping because she could not find a comfortable position, and he described her as still being stressed. In his report he describes her as being unable to sit in front of the computer for any length of time.
[20] At the January 24, 2003 visit, Dr. Adams prescribed another strong anti-inflammatory, Voltaren-SR, 75 mg. twice daily. She was still using the Flexeril as well as the Tylenol 3. At that time Dr. Adams sent Mrs. Kassian for massage therapy as well as physiotherapy for evaluation and treatment. He prescribed an orthopaedic chair for her to help her sit at the computer, and prescribed a Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulator [“TENS”] machine to help her with her muscular pain.
[21] Dr. Adams did not see Mrs. Kassian again until September 18th, 2003, at which time she was complaining of a significant amount of pain in the temporomandibular joint area. He does not note that Dr. Paul Major (see below) was treating the TMJ problem and had been doing so since May 21, 2003. Dr. Adams describes her as having difficulty with opening her mouth widely or chewing moderately hard food. He describes a continuous headache and neck stiffness, with decreased neck mobility. On examination, he found para-cervical
tenderness and tenderness between the shoulder blades. He comments that there was special tenderness over the left shoulder blade. He notes that she had pain over the mid and lower back area, and that the para-thoracic and para-lumbar tenderness was present on examination. Again, Mrs. Kassian was unable to sit for a reasonable period of time because of pain. She was very stressed and felt tired, especially in the evening. She was having difficulty with exercise. She was attending physiotherapy as well as massage therapy. Dr. Adams again prescribed Voltaren-SR, 75 mg. twice daily as an anti-inflammatory.
[22] Dr. Adams did not see Mrs. Kassian again until more than one year later. When Dr. Adams saw her for the fourth and last time on December 23rd, 2004, she was still suffering from pain between the shoulder blades as well as in her mid-back, although Mrs. Kassian told him that her back was feeling better than it had been before. She had neck discomfort over the cervical and para-cervical areas, with some restriction of neck mobility at the end of the range of motion. Dr. Adams comments on this visit that she is now using a mouth splint to help her temporomandibular joint problem. Dr. Adams noted in December of 2004 that her lower back was improving well, but headaches were now occurring intermittently. She was attending massage therapy and receiving inter-muscular stimulation to help stimulate the muscles and decrease the pain.
[23] In Dr. Adams’ view, Mrs. Kassian was unable to work from December 24th, 2002 to January 12th, 2003 as a direct result of the motor vehicle Accident. After that, she would have been able to return to light duty, then gradually to full duty. He anticipated a complete recovery of the muscular and ligament injury, but suggested that if she had not improved within six months to one year, she should consult with an orthopaedic specialist.
B. Dr. Paul Major
[24] On May 21st, 2003, Mrs. Kassian attended upon Dr. Paul Major, a specialist in temporomandibular dysfunction, who examined her, and concluded that she presented with bilateral temporomandibular joint degenerative joint disease and probable advanced bilateral temporomandibular joint internal derangement. He noted that she had moderately severe myalgia of the right masticatory musculature and mild right temporomandibular joint capsulitis. He ordered x-rays which were done by Dr. Hatcher, who identified that Mrs. Kassian likely had a longstanding but stable bilateral temporomandibular joint internal derangement and degenerative joint disease. He prescribed a splint and glucosamine sulfate to treat the observed disorder. Mrs. Kassian attended several additional appointments with Dr. Major during 2004, the last being September 29, 2004, and reported an improved condition.
[25] Dr. Major prepared a report in July 2005 concerning Mrs. Kassian, and stated that she would not have required the treatment that he prescribed, that is to say, the splint, had she not been involved in the motor vehicle Accident. Dr. Major’s report indicates that Mrs. Kassian will not have a long-term impairment of jaw function because of the Accident; that she will achieve the same level of temporomandibular joint function and stability that she had prior to the motor vehicle Accident.
C. Expert Medical Witnesses at Trial
[26] After her December 2004 appointment with Dr. Adams, Mrs. Kassian saw no other physicians until she was sent in the spring of 2007 for assessments by orthopaedic specialists Drs. Guy Lavoie and A.H. McKenzie by defence counsel and her own lawyer, respectively.
I. Dr. Guy Lavoie
[27] Dr. Lavoie interviewed and observed Mrs. Kassian on May 29, 2007. He noted her movements were generally normal, and that she reported that her chief issues were headaches, and back pain in her scapular region. An associated tenderness was identified for the reported scapular region pain. Dr. Lavoie recommends muscle-strengthening and stretching, and recommends Mrs. Kassian wean herself off her present treatment regime, in particular massage.
[28] At trial, Dr. Lavoie testified that she needs to ignore the pain and get on with her life as, in his opinion, she is going to have pain in her rhomboid muscle, off and on, for the rest of her life, along with the neck stiffness which is going to come and go as well.
[29] Dr. Lavoie had a SPECT scan done of the spine to determine whether there was any boney inflammation to explain the pain that Mrs. Kassian was complaining of, and testified that the SPECT scan would “light up like a Christmas tree” if there was any boney inflammation. The SPECT scan proved negative. The Plaintiff’s expert, Dr. McKenzie, did not requisition that test and had not reviewed the SPECT scan done by Dr. Lavoie.
ii. Dr. A. H. McKenzie
[30] At Mrs. Kassian’s lawyer’s request, Dr. McKenzie interviewed and observed Mrs. Kassian on May 9, 2007. His report indicates that he observed a variety of limitations in Mrs. Kassian’s body motions, and his review of x-rays taken on January 2003 (immediately post-Accident) and in 2007 indicated that certain abnormalities existed in Mrs. Kassian’s spine, particularly an increase in facet arthritis throughout the cervical vertebrae, but particularly on the right side.
[31] On the basis of the January 2003 x-rays, Dr. McKenzie concluded that Mrs. Kassian had facet arthritis that predated the Accident: “The patient had undoubtedly had significant cervicothoracic facet arthritis prior to the Accident in question.” This arthritis had advanced in the intervening four years.
[32] In his written report, Dr. McKenzie is also critical of the post-Accident therapy that had been followed by Mrs. Kassian. Dr. McKenzie said that he would never prescribe massage therapy and he does not think that intramuscular stimulation [“IMS”] is terribly helpful. His evidence was that he thinks it is more likely to cause pain than it is to reduce it. In his report, Dr. McKenzie expressly states:
The patient had reported that throughout her treatment period she had been encouraged to carry out extension measures for her neck and low back using ObusForme devices to arch her low back and rolled-up pillows behind her neck, both of which would have interfered with any recovery from facet strain. She also had developed some flexion contractures of the hips that were contributing to pelvic tilting and hyperlordosis of the low back which in turn would create an increased thoracic kyphosis to increase her thoracic symptoms and increased cervical lordosis which would add to any cervical pain and headache.
This lady could probably experience some relief of symptoms by a program of spinal mobilizing, core-strengthening and postural correction, emphasising lumbosacral flexion to reduce lumbar lordosis and thoracic kyphosis and hopefully produce tertiary reduction in cervical lordosis. She would probably still require use of anti-inflammatory medication. [emphasis added]
[33] Dr. McKenzie concludes his report with an assessment that the impairment he observed in Mrs. Kassian’s neck and upper back was long term, and partially due to the Accident. He characterized her upper body impairment at 10 percent, and thoracic impairment at 5 percent. He generally estimated that two-thirds of Mrs. Kassian’s condition was due to pre-existing problems, and one-third caused by the Accident. The therapy he recommended was “exercise and postural regime,” not the stretching and extensions Mrs. Kassian had conducted.
[34] At trial, Dr. McKenzie testified that when you see degenerative changes on x-ray film, these degenerative changes usually develop because of inflammatory problems. He testified that he gathers that Mrs. Kassian was not very active prior to the motor vehicle Accident and so there is no reason for her to develop the spurs that he saw on the x-rays he had taken, other than the Accident itself. This, of course, was not Mrs. Kassian’s evidence. Her evidence is that she had been and remains a very active person, so, of course, if the factual foundation is not there, the conclusion is not reliable.
D. Other Health-Care and Therapy Practitioners
[35] A number of other persons participated in Mrs. Kassian’s post-Accident therapy, and provided written and/or oral testimony.
I. Gordon Ariza
[36] Mr. Gordon Ariza is a physiotherapist with additional training in acupuncture, employed at the Nor-Med Orthopaedic and Sports Rehabilitation Centre. He first assessed Mrs. Kassian on January 3, 2003, very shortly after the Accident, and conducted treatments on Mrs. Kassian through to May 2004. Treatments included techniques such as heat, acupuncture, ultrasound, TENS, massage, exercise, and postural re-education. He noted that the splint prescribed by Dr. Major had dramatically improved Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ condition.
[37] In total, Mr. Ariza gave her 28 treatments, and his report notes that she had responded well to treatment and simply required ongoing postural correction and stretching exercises, along with a home exercise program for thoracic mobility and scapular stabilization. He noted that the splint had dramatically improved Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ condition, and concluded that “The nature of her jobs requires writing for long periods of time. She will require ongoing postural correction and stretching exercises.” [emphasis added].
[38] Indeed, Mr. Ariza’s conclusions dovetail nicely with those of the two orthopaedic surgeons who testified in this trial. The remarkable point is that Mr. Ariza came to this conclusion when he discharged Mrs. Kassian in May 2004.
ii. Grant Fedoruk
[39] Mr. Grant Fedoruk is a physiotherapist employed at the Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, and has provided Mrs. Kassian’s IMS treatments from March 22, 2005 through to the present. Mr. Fedoruk’s treatment records were entered into evidence, but he did not testify at trial.
F. Other Therapy
[40] Other than that, Mrs. Kassian’s treatment for her complaints has consisted of physiotherapy, acupuncture, massage therapy and intramuscular stimulation. Physiotherapy was provided by Nor-Med Orthopaedic & Sport Rehabilitation Centre, Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, and by Mrs. Kassian’s husband, Brent. Massage therapy was provided by Healthy Balance Massage Therapy throughout the period after her injury and to the present, and by Nor-Med Orthopaedic & Sport Rehabilitation Centre following the Accident and until March 20, 2003.
[41] From February 2003 through to the present day, Mrs. Kassian, on her own initiative, embarked on a massage therapy program with Healthy Balance Massage Therapy. In fact, Mrs. Kassian was actually continuing periodic massage treatments started prior to her being injured in the Accident and that treatment had addressed pre-existing upper back and neck stiffness. Interestingly, this means that during the period that she was being treated at Mr. Ariza’s clinic, she was receiving massage therapy from two different sources. As noted, after leaving Mr. Ariza’s clinic, Mrs. Kassian, continued the massage therapy program with Healthy Balance Massage Therapy, and also started intramuscular stimulation treatment with Grant Fedorak at the Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, taking 11 such treatments, concluding those in December 2005. Brent Kassian provided additional and ongoing physiotherapy, though no records were apparently made of his observations.
G. Occupational Therapist – Lorian Kennedy
[42] In addition to the medical and health industry experts who provided evidence concerning Mrs. Kassian’s status, Ms. Lorian Kennedy, an occupational therapist, provided an evaluation of Mrs. Kassian’s physical status and occupational performance in April 2007. Her observations were summarized in a written report provided to the Court.
[43] The report was based on an interview and physical examination. Mrs. Kennedy states that Mrs. Kassian reports lower endurance and energy following the Accident, as well as emotional difficulties, and issues adjusting to her “new normal.” She “mourns” the loss of her old persona.
[44] Concerning Mrs. Kassian’s abilities to sit and stand, Ms. Kennedy states that Mrs. Kassian reports that she can walk for 1.5 hours, that she has reduced ability to sit on hard chairs, bleachers, or benches. Prolonged standing (of undefined duration) is painful. Mrs. Kassian complains that she is unable to drive for more than three hours and that sitting in an aircraft for over 3.5 hours is uncomfortable. Mrs. Kassian reports that with adjustments to her office and sitting arrangements, she is able to work at a computer 5 to 6 hours per day.
[45] Reported neck-related difficulties include the need for a high-backed chair with head and neck support, an inability to hold a telephone with her neck, and a preference for digital media as these do not require that she look down for extended periods.
[46] Mrs. Kassian reports that her husband now prepares the household meals, a task that she had previously completed. She tends to avoid ironing, vacuuming, and washing floors and showers. She has difficulty shopping in winter due to problems moving carts through snow, and has decreased her yard activities including spring and fall cleanups and weeding. She had previously engaged in home decorating, but now no longer paints the house or engages in renovations such as changing crown moulding, or re-wiring electrical systems.
[47] Ms. Kennedy testified that the Plaintiff is capable of doing her housework. It simply causes her discomfort and it takes her longer.
[48] Mrs. Kassian also reported to Ms. Kennedy of decreased recreational and sporting activities, such as biking, roller blading, water skiing, swimming, downhill skiing, and recreational wickerwork. Rather than socialization or engaging in sporting events, she instead does little during her evenings. Mrs. Kassian also reported difficulty sleeping, particularly in finding a comfortable resting position.
[49] Ms. Kennedy performed a large variety of physical and occupational tests. Limitations were noted with neck motions, however these approached norms aside from left and right lateral flexion. Shoulder motions were generally normal. Dexterity tests were completed in average to above average times, though with reports of discomfort while looking downward. Ability to conduct light office work was unimpeded. Mobility and gait while standing, including walking on stairs, was normal. Overhead activities were slowed and Mrs. Kassian was observed as tending to keep her head level rather than looking upwards. Carrying and lifting involved pain at 25 to 30 pound and 10 to 15 pound amounts, respectively.
[50] She presented as physically fit, no muscle wasting, with strong grip strength, and a good range of movements. Her complaints were with pain at the ends of her range of movement.
[51] Mrs. Kassian generally reported headache pain, jaw, neck, and upper back pain. Ms. Kennedy particularly noted that Mrs. Kassian appeared to have difficulty when she had to look downward. Given her lifting levels, Ms. Kennedy recommended that only light work is preferred.
[52] Ms. Kennedy concludes that, given Mrs. Kassian’s reported athletic activities, she must have previously had the capacity for a “medium” level of physical activity. I note here that this particular conclusion in problematic in light of Mrs. Kassian’s evidence. Ms. Kennedy emphasizes that the most significant area of dysfunction and discomfort involved neck position, either bent or turned.
[53] I note of particular interest that Ms. Kennedy’s written conclusions are that Mrs. Kassian reports difficulties with sitting and standing, however no observations made during her functional analysis confirm these issues. Her body functions are generally unimpeded other than when her head is held looking either up or down.
[54] Ms. Kennedy recommends a number of therapies and ameliorative steps:
• weekly massage;
• Advil for pain moderation;
• TENS machine use;
• biweekly IMS treatments;
• biweekly physiotherapy;
• replacement twin beds to allow for independent sleep by Mrs. Kassian and her husband; and
• Mrs. Kassian travel in business rather than economy class.
IV. The Plaintiff’s Testimony and Evidence
[55] Mrs. Kassian testified before the Court concerning her life before the Accident, the Accident itself and its effect on her personal and professional life. I have difficulty fully accepting Mrs. Kassian’s testimony. My specific concerns will be detailed more fully below.
A. Reported Injuries, Pain, and Dysfunction
[56] As a brief summary of the physical consequences of the Accident , Mrs. Kassian claims that from the date of the Accident to the present, she experiences:
• jaw pain and discomfort, particularly when she fails to use her splint;
• upper back pain and stiffness, particularly on the left side around her shoulder blade;
• lower back pain that becomes particularly difficult when she sits or stands for extended periods;
• neck discomfort when looking downwards; and
• daily headaches.
[57] One point upon which Mrs. Kassian was quite adamant about was what an active person she had been – involved in sporting activities, skiing, hiking, along with all of the other activities she was involved in professionally.
B. Professional Activities
[58] Professionally, Mrs. Kassian testified that the Accident has had a dramatic effect on her ability to work.
I. Publications
[59] In 2001, Mrs. Kassian published a curriculum material package entitled “Conversation Peace,” which included a workbook and seven videos for workshops, along with an accompanying leader kit. In 2002 she was working on a second, similar curriculum project entitled “Vertically Inclined.” This curriculum material was completed in 2003, following an alleged publication delay of three months. Under cross-examination, Mrs. Kassian acknowledged that “Vertically Inclined” did not come out of the starting gate in the same way as “Conversation Peace.” She testified that it was holding strong in the same way that “Conversation Peace” was holding strong in terms of its ongoing royalties.
[60] The Plaintiff has testified that the key to her success was that she had a great deal of creative energy, and that this is what set her apart from other unsuccessful writers. Her creative spark and energy allowed her to identify new and inspirational ideas that provide the core of her publications. These ideas were crucial to her professional success, and her ability to generate and publish inspirational Christian non-fiction.
[61] She testified that since the Accident, she has been in continuous pain and discomfort, and this condition has interfered with her ability to work, concentrate, and be productive and creative. She reported that headaches are a particular issue. She believes she is not as creative since the Accident, and that her writing takes longer. Mrs. Kassian testified that she has struggled to maintain both the creativity and quality of her work, as both have been adversely affected by her injuries.
[62] She has attempted to take steps to minimize the impact of her injuries on her work, such as changing her office arrangements, purchasing a second computer monitor and a new computer desk and chair, and switching from printed to electronic resources. Nevertheless, Mrs. Kassian reported her ability to work has decreased: she only can work up to 5 to 6 hours a day on a computer, and cannot comfortably use lap-top computers on aircraft because of the discomfort she experiences while looking downward. Her ability to read and research is similarly affected.
[63] She emphasized that she has not created a new publication, particularly a video curriculum, since the Accident. She alleged that she has missed deadlines for four publications, including “Vertically Inclined.”
[64] She also testified that she had to hire contract writers to assist in preparation of her latest publications. In total, Mrs. Kassian testified she paid these writers $5,515.00, and further that these writers had demanded and received a part of her royalty payments, between $26,000.00 and $27,000.00 in total. Mrs. Kassian testified that she had never required assistance prior to the Accident. Worse, she claims that the product of these writers was unsatisfactory.
[65] On cross-examination, Mrs. Kassian acknowledged that prior to the Accident she had employed contract writers who engaged in analogous work and that she incurred similar costs for this assistance.
ii. Speaking and Lecturing Engagements
[66] Mrs. Kassian testified that she cancelled four speaking engagements which had been scheduled for 2003, while another was postponed to the following year. This decision was a result of the discomfort she experienced while sitting for prolonged periods in aircraft and cars, her frequent and severe headaches, and difficulty standing for extended times. She described herself as being “exhausted” or “drained” after these trips, and required days to recoup. She reported receiving $6,431.00 in honoraria for 2003.
[67] She attended a reduced number of events in 2004 and 2005, and earned $6,211.00 and $5,679.00, respectively. In 2006, she attended 14 speaking engagements, and earned $6,597.00.
iii. Other income
[68] Mrs. Kassian obtained significant income in 2005 and 2006 from direct sales of her publications ($10,402.00 and $12,084.00, respectively). There are minimal direct sales reported in 2004 ($1,886.00), and none prior to that date. Mrs. Kassian has a personal website, but testified that she does not pay much attention to it. These sales either had occurred at events and conferences, or via her website and its E-commerce functionality. She has not advanced a damage claim for lost direct sales.
C. Other Non-Professional Activities and Housekeeping
[69] On the stand, Mrs. Kassian testified that her injuries had resulted in a loss of enjoyment and ability to contribute to the household which matches what she disclosed to Ms. Kennedy, as summarized above. The chief difference that I noted was mention at trial of steam cleaning of carpets. This activity is one that she had engaged in prior to the Accident, but which now was precluded due to the discomfort she experienced while engaged in that activity.
D. Problematic and Inconsistent Testimony
[70] As I have previously noted, I have certain difficulties with Mrs. Kassian’s testimony.
[71] While Mrs. Kassian’s evidence on her direct examination was crisp and straightforward, on cross-examination, her memory seemed to be vague. Under cross-examination, she was evasive in answering straightforward and simple questions. For example, she could not recall how long it was that she went to the exercise class prescribed by physiotherapist Gordon Ariza, under the supervision of Julie Patan. Nor could she recall the details of the treatment she received at Nor-Med or that she was treated after complaints of lifting boxes and standing on her feet all weekend on February 4th, 2003. Nor that she was feeling much better and had noticeable improvement as documented in those records in 2003. In fact, it is recorded in Mr. Ariza’s July notes that she reported taking part in mountain rappelling for a video shoot, but she did not recall this under cross-examination. That incident deserves further commentary.
[72] Her testimony was inconsistent as to the discomfort that resulted from her injuries. At her Examination for Discovery in 2006, she testified that her worst problem was the pain between her shoulder blades, and, similarly, that she does not get headaches if she wears her TMJ splint. That, of course, is different from her trial testimony of ongoing headaches and associated suffering, and her problems with her lower back while sitting, standing and travelling. At the Examination for Discovery, she testified that she had resumed ironing, and at trial, she claims that she has not been doing that.
[73] She claims to have had headaches and lower back pain through to this very day, but this is not what she is reported to have indicated to her caregivers, Dr. Adam and Dr. Major, and Mr. Ariza. Why this difference? On cross-examination, she was unable to recall or explain the very different reports of her evident recovery noted by these persons, and her alleged ongoing physical ailments.
[74] These are not the only inconsistencies between her testimony at trial and the testimony at her Examination for Discovery. In her Examination for Discovery, she advised that the maximum number of speaking engagements that she would undertake in a year was done in 2002 as she was away from home too much and she found the travel to be just more than she wanted to do. However, at trial, she backtracked on that, saying it was because her children were at home then and now in 2007 she would travel more because the children are grown.
[75] In July 2003, during the period where she testified she had yet to recover from her post-Accident injuries, Mrs. Kassian was preparing video and photographs of herself in a range of mountain climbing activities, all part of the video curriculum for her “Vertically Inclined” publication. When asked in cross-examination about these video materials and photographs prepared for “Vertically Inclined” in the summer of 2003, she identified the photographs of herself on page 154 of the workbook and the article from her website which talks about filming the videos where she describes herself as exhausted from a full day of filming, rappelling down the rock and dangling in the air while she gets the batteries replaced for her equipment, taking the crew whitewater rafting and “living for this stuff” as being “fabricated” for the purposes of selling the book. When asked in cross-examination, she admitted that she was not doing those things and that what was written and described in “Vertically Inclined” was not true. The photo from the shoot for the website, she testified, was “staged” in Nashville.
[76] Either she went rappelling as she is noted to have told her physiotherapist Mr. Ariza or she was not telling him the truth. Or she was not rappelling and let her target audience believe she was, so she was not telling them the truth. Or, she is not being truthful in court.
[77] I watched Mrs. Kassian during the course of this trial after she had given her evidence, sitting in various places in the courtroom, on the floor, leaning up against the wall, looking quite despondent. And then I noticed on Thursday afternoon, for the first and only time, that she was sitting upright in a chair, with her head lowered, taking notes during the course of the testimony of the expert chartered accountant Mr. Popik. Mrs. Kassian had testified previously that looking downward was a chief cause of her physical discomfort. This sudden change in her presentation was a surprise.
[78] Mrs. Kassian complains of having problems sitting, but in the courtroom she was provided with an antique oak armchair to sit on in the witness box, which did not come up past the mid-back. During the course of her evidence she would periodically stand and periodically sit. Her evidence was that she could not sit for long periods of time because of pain in her lower back. There does not appear to be any explanation for her ongoing low back complaints. Her thoracic and cervical spine complaints have been confirmed by both of the orthopaedic specialists who testified, but her inability to sit in a chair which does not compromise either her neck or her thoracic spine is a bit of a mystery.
[79] During three out of the four days she was in the courtroom, I did not see the purportedly smiling, charming, and confident person that counsel told me I would see. Rather, Mrs. Kassian appeared sad and despondent. She was required to leave Edmonton on the next day to give one of her motivational seminars. Presumably she would present herself as a smiling, charming and confident person at such a seminar.
[80] There were enough inconsistencies in Mrs. Kassian’s evidence to raise concerns about the veracity and credibility of her testimony, especially when combined with the admission that she is prepared to fabricate the appearance of a different reality in order to promote the sale of a product. This does bring her credibility into some serious question, particularly when those fabrications go to the very nature of the injuries and dysfunction she claims exists to the present day.
[81] Given these conclusions, I must treat Mrs. Kassian’s testimony with caution. I do not find her to be a particularly credible witness. I also recognize a significant risk that the evidence she provides may be fabricated, or exaggerated. As such, I look with particular care for evidence of corroboration and consistency, as well as a physical foundation for the injuries, dysfunction, and pain that she claims to experience. That analysis follows.
V. Findings of Fact on Mrs. Kassian’s Medical Condition and Injuries
[82] In the matter at hand, the Court is confronted with a situation where the testimony and analyses of the various medical and health experts, and testimony of Mrs. Kassian do not entirely coincide. The Court is then left with the difficult challenge of determining as best it can what injuries exist, which injuries may be attributed to the Accident, and which injuries
are a result of other causes. For clarity, I will conduct this analysis by reported disorder, affected body part or region, and over time. This is not to say that the individual injuries are somehow separate and distinct; clearly their effect on Mrs. Kassian must be viewed as a whole. Rather, this dissection is to assist in tracking Mrs. Kassian’s injuries, her recovery, and other contributing factors.
A. Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction
[83] I broadly accept the testimony and expert report of Dr. Major concerning Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ condition, treatment, and recovery. I note that none of the other experts have disagreed with Dr. Major’s conclusions, nor the therapy that Dr. Major had prescribed. I am satisfied that the motor vehicle Accident of December 24th, 2002 caused the temporomandibular joint dysfunction which Dr. Major says was not a permanent dysfunction. This dysfunction aggravated a pre-existing though undiagnosed derangement in Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ. In that sense, Mrs. Kassian’s pre-Accident TMJ condition is a classic “thin skull.” The tortfeasor must take the injured party as she is. I therefore conclude that the Defendant is 100 percent liable for any damages that result from Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ dysfunction.
[84] I accept Mrs. Kassian’s testimony that following the Accident, she experienced discomfort associated with her jaw, and experienced difficulty opening her mouth and chewing foods. This testimony is corroborated by the observations of Drs. Adams and Major.
[85] Throughout the period immediately after the Accident, Mrs. Kassian reported severe daily headaches associated with the frontal region of her head, with less frequent occipital headaches. Drs. Adams and Major, and Mr. Ariza report that following Mrs. Kassian’s use of the splint that was prescribed by Dr. Major, Mrs. Kassian reported that her headaches and other jaw related pain subsided.
[86] Drs. Adams, Major, and Mr. Ariza all report the stabilization of Mrs. Kassian’s jaw and subsidence of her headaches. The relevant dates of their observations differ: Adams, December 2004; Major, September 2004; and Ariza, May 2004, respectively. I choose to conclude on the basis of Mr. Ariza’s report of May 2004 that by that date, the splint therapy had effectively treated Mrs. Kassian’s TMJ disorder, and associated pain, dysfunction, and discomfort.
[87] This conclusion directly contradicts certain allegedly ongoing symptoms and discomfort. At trial, Mrs. Kassian has testified that her headaches continue unabated to this day.
[88] Mrs. Kassian’s testimony at trial and during Examination for Discovery on this point is inconsistent.
[89] In 2006, during Examination for Discovery, she testified that she did not have headaches as long as she was wearing her temporomandibular splint, and in 2006 she testified that her most significant problem was the pain between her shoulder blades. At trial, she
complained that her most significant problem was the constant headaches that she contended with on a daily basis. There is no medical evidence to support the development of these now daily headaches that she testified she was not having in 2006.
[90] Given the lack of medical evidence to support existence of these allegedly ongoing and constant headaches and her apparently inconsistent testimony, I am suspicious that Mrs. Kassian is being less than forthright concerning these alleged headaches. This conclusion is fortified by the other inconsistencies in Mrs. Kassian’s testimony, as discussed previously. I therefore conclude that on this point, Mrs. Kassian’s testimony at trial is to be given very little weight. I find that the Plaintiff has failed to prove beyond a balance of probabilities that the Plaintiff experiences headaches on a nearly daily basis after May 2004. Further, I conclude that any headaches that she may have experienced after May 2004 must have had some cause other than the injuries she suffered as a consequence of the Accident.
B. Lower Back Pain and Discomfort While Sitting.
[91] Mrs. Kassian reports experiencing lower back pain from the Accident onward through to the present day. She testifies that she experienced discomfort while sitting to operate a computer, and while travelling on aircraft. At the trial itself, Mrs. Kassian sat on the floor and would lean up against the wall of the courtroom. In the courtroom, Mrs. Kassian was provided with an antique oak armchair to sit on in the witness box, which did not come up past the mid-back. During the course of her evidence she would periodically stand and periodically sit. Her evidence was that she could not sit for long periods of time because of pain in her low back.
[92] Dr. Adam’s notes, expert report, and testimony indicates that Mrs. Kassian experienced lower back pain and difficulty sitting in the period immediately following the Accident. Dr. Adams identified associated lower back muscle tenderness during this period. Mrs. Kassian’s condition improved, and as of December 2004, Dr. Adams reported that her lower back “was improving well.”
[93] Mr. Ariza also reported on Mrs. Kassian’s lower back discomfort and difficulty sitting, with this discomfort being associated with long periods of sitting or airline travel, and occurred as late as March 2004. Mr. Ariza testified that as his final examination on May 2004, Mrs. Kassian’s lower back (lumbar) range of motions were functional. In 2007, neither Drs. Lavoie or McKenzie identified any ongoing anomalies with Mrs. Kassians lower back.
[94] There does not appear to be any explanation for her ongoing low back complaints, unlike her complains in her thoracic and cervical spine that have been confirmed by both of the orthopaedic specialists who testified.
[95] I therefore conclude on the basis of Mr. Ariza’s May 2004 observations, that the lower back injuries and discomfort reported by Mrs. Kassian had largely subsided, presumably on the basis of the various therapies and exercises that had been conducted to that point. Similar to Mrs. Kassian’s alleged ongoing headaches, in the absence of medical evidence to support
her reported issues, I conclude that the Plaintiff has failed to establish beyond a balance of probabilities that she continues to experience lower back pains.
[96] Concerning the matter of Mrs. Kassian’s alleged discomfort while sitting and standing, I also note that the medical reports of Mrs. Kassian’s state do not match those I had observed while Mrs. Kassian was present in the court. Ms. Kennedy’s report indicates Mrs. Kassian can sit at her computer, with stretch breaks, for 6 hours. She becomes uncomfortable in an aircraft seat after 3.5 hours. Dr. Lavoie reports Mrs. Kassian informed him she can sit for 1 to 2 hours without a break. Dr. McKenzie does not appear to offer any commentary on Mrs. Kassian’s ability to sit and stand. Ms. Kennedy’s observations of Mrs. Kassian did not detect any difficulty while walking, sitting, or climbing stairs, but instead issues arose when Mrs. Kassian looked either up or down.
[97] I further note that apparently Mrs. Kassian has returned to her public speaking activities. I think it is fair that I assume that when conducting seminars and as a motivational speaker, that Mrs. Kassian necessarily either sits or stands for extended periods.
[98] Accordingly, I conclude Mrs. Kassian’s testimony at trial is to be given very little weight. I find that the Plaintiff has failed to prove beyond a balance of probabilities that the Plaintiff experiences ongoing lower back pain and discomfort while sitting after May 2004.
C. Neck and Upper Back
[99] Mrs. Kassian reports that she experiences upper back and neck discomfort from the time of the Accident through to the present day. She describes, in particular, an area on the left side of her shoulder, near her scapula, which is “like a knot or fist.” Her pre-Accident massage therapy records indicate that Mrs. Kassian also appears to have had a pre-existing issue with stiffness and pain in these regions. In the absence of other evidence, the severity of these symptoms cannot be assessed. Perhaps the best statement is that regardless of their severity, these dysfunctions do not appear to have affected Mrs. Kassian’s work and home life to the degree she claims they do and, as will be discussed below, the course of treatment chosen caused more problems than it solved according to the plaintiff’s own expert.
I. Accident through to May 2004
[100] Discomfort in upper back and neck is reported by Dr. Adams and Mr. Azira from the period immediately after her injury. In their pre-trial physical examinations, Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie confirm findings of muscular tenderness in that area. These experts commented on the state of Mrs. Kassian’s musculature and skeletal structure in that area. In particular, Dr. McKenzie’s review of Mrs. Kassian’s 2002 and 2007 x-rays concluded that she had pre-existing facet arthritis in this area, and that the Accident had aggravated that condition. His assessment is that two-thirds of the facet arthritis pre-dates Mrs. Kassian’s injuries, and that one-third was a consequence of the Accident. Counsel for the Plaintiff has argued the December 2002 x-rays cannot provide confirmation that Mrs. Kassian’s facet arthritis preceded the Accident, as the x-rays were obtained after the Accident. I reject that argument. Arthritis does not appear over two days.
[101] I am certainly prepared to find that Mrs. Kassian had ongoing problems for which she required treatment for her neck and trapezius area from the date of the Accident until the end of May 2004. This is the unchallenged evidence of Dr. Adams and Mr. Ariza.
[102] Accordingly, I find as fact that the Accident had caused aggravation of muscular discomfort and a pre-existing facet arthritis condition. This too is a thin-skull type situation where the injured person has a particular and pre-existing vulnerability to injury. Though two-thirds of the facet arthritis pre-dated Mrs. Kassian’s injuries during the Accident, from the time of the Accident until May 2004, Mrs. Kassian’s upper back and neck injuries were a consequence of the Defendant’s negligence.
ii. Post-May 2004 to Present
[103] These injuries remain to the present day, as was explained by Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie. What is less certain is the cause of these ongoing injuries post-May 2004. On May 2004, Mrs. Kassian discharged herself from Mr. Ariza’s care. What follows considerably complicates the matter at hand.
[104] The authorities are clear on the appropriate therapy that Mrs. Kassian should have sought: postural correction and exercise. The two orthopaedic surgeons who testified both agreed that, while it is clear that Mrs. Kassian has pain and problems in both her neck and in her thoracic region, neither massage therapy nor intramuscular stimulation is appropriate treatment for her condition. Mrs. Kassian had already received that very advice from Mr. Ariza in May 2004.
[105] There certainly were changes in the x-ray films from the time those were initially taken after the Accident to the time that both Dr. Lavoie and Dr. McKenzie saw Mrs. Kassian, and, Dr. Lavoie having done the extra test, provides, in my view, some additional information that this degeneration is not from any boney inflammation and is, rather, a soft tissue complaint that both physicians agree is best treated by maintaining mobility, strengthening the muscles, doing exercises for the shoulder girdle, and, as Dr. McKenzie noted, concentrating on maintaining posture alignment to keep pressure off the facet joints.
[106] In light of the evidence of Mrs. Kassian’s own experts, I am satisfied that the treatment that Mrs. Kassian elected to seek out after her discharge from Mr. Ariza’s clinic in the summer of 2004 has caused additional harm rather than improvement according to Mrs. Kassian’s own expert orthopaedic evidence. Had Mrs. Kassian done as Dr. Adams would have suggested (had she attended upon Dr. Adams and obtained recommendations from an orthopaedic specialist when the matter had not resolved in 2004), she could have avoided this additional damage by following the advice of these physicians rather than engaging on a course of treatment that, according to Dr. McKenzie, was for her both inappropriate and caused “chronic postural strains.”
[107] I note that in coming to this conclusion, I have rejected a significant component of the rehabilitation scheme that is recommended by Ms. Kennedy (IMS treatment, massage).
Where the therapies recommended by Ms. Kennedy do not match those of the orthopaedic experts, I prefer the latter.
[108] According to Dr. Lavoie, Mrs. Kassian will now experience a degree of intermittent but permanent rhomboid muscle dysfunction and neck stiffness, and I accept that fact. Dr. McKenzie echos that Mrs. Kassian’s condition is now permanent.
[109] What is not clear is whether the aggravated facet arthritis and upper back and neck discomfort exhibited in 2007 by Mrs. Kassian is a consequence of the Accident, the post-May 2004 treatment regime adopted by Mrs. Kassian, or both. I accept that the current condition is permanent. The medical experts disagree as to the degree and extent of Mrs. Kassian’s permanent clinical impairment.
[110] Both orthopaedic specialists testified that Mrs. Kassian is going to have pain into the future from her problems and each attributes a percentage of permanent partial impairment for the pain she experiences: Dr. McKenzie ascribing 5 percent and Dr. Lavoie ascribing 3 percent to these pain issues. In light of my observations of Mrs. Kassian, and the apparent exaggeration and inconsistency of her testimony, I prefer the 3 percent figure provided by Dr. Lavoie in his written report.
[111] Regardless, I do find as fact that Mrs. Kassian’s inappropriate plan of treatment has either prevented recovery from her neck and scapular injuries, or aggravated those injuries beyond the level that caused by the Accident. In the absence of medical evidence such as x-rays from the mid to late 2004, the Court is left with the difficult challenge of quantifying the effect of Mrs. Kassian’s unfortunate and inappropriate choice of therapy. In light of Dr. McKenzie’s conclusion that two-thirds of the relevant dysfunction had a pre-existing cause, only one-third then, at most, may either be a result of the Accident and/or Mrs. Kassian’s inappropriate choice of therapy.
[112] In light of Dr. Adam’s and Mr. Ariza’s observations, I conclude that at least some of Mrs. Kassian’s upper back and neck injuries had still existed in May 2004, though these were on the way to recovery, though short of that mark. Thus, her current condition cannot be entirely a result of her inappropriate therapy. Mrs. Kassian had spent 15 months (to May 2004) on a treatment regime that proved effective. In the three years that followed (until May 2007), she engaged in therapy that the orthopaedic medical experts have indicated is ineffective, and even aggravates her condition. From the evidence presented to the Court, since attending Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie she has not engaged in IMS, but has had massage sessions on May 30, June 13, June 29, July 11, August 10, September 5, September 26 and October 1, 2007. On a simply time dependent analysis, Mrs. Kassian has spent far more time engaged in inappropriate than appropriate therapy, and worse, continues that pattern through to this day in the face of expert medical advice to the contrary. If aggravation of her injuries is time dependant, then the majority of her current thoracic and cervical dysfunction, and the associated pain is a consequence of her extremely unfortunate choice of therapies, and the aggravation of her pre-existing facet arthritis.
[113] I thus conclude that of her current and future thoracic and cervical dysfunction, two-thirds (66.7 percent) is a consequence of pre-existing facet arthritis and poor posture, one-ninth (11.1 percent) is a result of the Accident, while two-ninths (22.2 percent) is a result of Mrs. Kassian’s post-May 2004 therapy regime.
D. Mitigation
[114] I have found that Mrs. Kassian has prolonged and aggravated the effect of the injuries that she had suffered as a consequence of the Accident via her failure to consult the appropriate medical experts, and having engaged in an inappropriate treatment regime. Logically, this fact should reduce the damages that she would be awarded, and again, from the point at which she failed to take the appropriate treatment steps.
[115] Analogous scenarios have been considered by the courts, and are considered a failure to mitigate the injuries experienced, rather than a ‘novus actus’, or contributory negligence.
[116] Janiak v. Ippolito, 1985 62 (SCC), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 146, 16 D.L.R. (4th) 1 set the approach to instances where an injured party had failed to mitigate their injuries. Here, an injured worker chose to take no action when the worker might have obtained a treatment that was estimated to have a 70 percent chance of proving complete relief from the consequences of an injury. Accordingly, the court reduced the damages awarded by 70 percent.
[117] The first element of a mitigation analysis was a determination that the injured party had objectively unreasonably chosen a regime other than the recommended treatment (at para. 7). The onus to prove unreasonability rests on the defence (at para. 32). This is a finding of fact, and like all findings of fact, properly made by the trial judge (at para. 7). Any innate unreasonableness that might qualify as a “psychological thin skull” may only be considered if it predates the date of injury (at para. 23). If more than one alternative treatment is recommended, and one is followed, the option chosen cannot be unreasonable (at para. 29). In assessing the reasonableness of a choice of medical treatment, the trier of fact will also take into consideration the degree of risk to the Plaintiff from the therapy, the gravity of the scheme of treatment adopted, and the potential benefits that may be result from the various options (at para. 31).
[118] A patient’s choice to not take recommended medical tests may be an unreasonable choice that warrants a reduction in damages due to a failure to mitigate: Engel v. Salyn; Engel v. Kamppelle Holdings Ltd., 1993 152 (SCC), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 306 at para. 26, 99 D.L.R. (4th) 401.
[119] In Kozak v. Funk 1997 9801 (SK CA), (1997), 158 Sask. R. 283, [1998] 5 W.W.R. 232 (Sask. C.A.), the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal considered a situation where a man had been injured but had chosen to reject the prescribed treatment regimes and had not attended a recommended specialist (at para. 15). At trial, the judge had found as a fact that the injured party to be 25 percent responsible for the injuries he had experienced due to a failure to mitigate. At appeal, non-pecuniary damage awards were reduced by that 25 percent amount (at para. 43).
[120] In Byron v. Larson, 2004 ABCA 398 , 2004 ABCA 398, 357 A.R. 201, the Court restated the rationale and rule for mitigation of injuries at paras. 15-16:
15 The general proposition underlying the principle of mitigation is that a defendant cannot be held liable for damages which the plaintiff could have reasonably avoided: Janiak v. Ippolito, 1985 62 (SCC), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 146. (“Janiak”); Silvaniuk v. Stevens 1999 ABCA 191 , (1999), 244 A.R. 75, 1999 ABCA 191 (“Silvaniuk”). Once a plaintiff establishes the liability of the defendant, damages, and quantum of damages, the burden shifts to the defendant to prove that the plaintiff could and should have mitigated his or her losses: Janiak at 163. To establish mitigation, the defendant must prove on a balance of probabilities that: 1) the plaintiff acted unreasonably; and 2) had the plaintiff acted reasonably, his or her losses would be reduced or eliminated: Janiak at 163-166.
16 Whether a party has been reasonable in refusing to accept medical treatment is a question of fact: Janiak at para. 7; Engel v. Salyn, 1993 152 (SCC), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 306 at 316. The trier of fact must make the determination of reasonableness taking into consideration all of the surrounding circumstances: Silvaniuk at para. 12. Whether a plaintiff’s conduct in respect of his or her injuries was reasonable “includes submitting to reasonable medical treatment and following medical advice when appropriate”: Silvaniak at para. 12.
I note that the Alberta Court of Appeal here has framed the question of a choice to adopt an appropriate scheme for mitigation as a “refusal to accept medical treatment.” That is just another choice of therapy, the choice to choose no therapy at all.
[121] The onus is upon the defendant to prove mitigation would have prevented loss. There must be evidence from which the Court can estimate the efficacy of the treatment that would represent proper mitigation (at para. 33). Mitigation only affects those damages assessed as occurring after the failure to mitigate (at para. 30). To reduce an award of damages, a nexus must exist between the unperformed mitigation and the injury that resulted in the damages (at para. 42).
[122] In the present instance, the testimony of Dr. Adams and Mr. Azira indicates that Mrs. Kassian’s cervical and thoracic condition had stabilized during 2004. This is evidence of the appropriateness of the scheme that Mr. Ariza had recommended and prescribed.
[123] The two orthopaedic surgeons who testified both agreed that, while it is clear that Mrs. Kassian has pain and problems in both her neck and in her thoracic region, neither massage therapy nor intramuscular stimulation is appropriate treatment for her condition. Instead, they highlighted exercise and postural training as the key appropriate therapies, and as I noted previously, this confirmed Mr. Ariza’s analysis and conclusion. I also consider that this consensus between Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie, and Mr. Ariza provides a more than adequate nexus to link the unperformed mitigation and Mrs. Kassian’s prolonged injury.
[124] I have found that Mrs. Kassian’s ongoing issues with her neck and upper back that follow May 2004 are caused and aggravated by the inappropriate scheme of therapy that Mrs. Kassian had followed, and her failure to seek the appropriate expert advice. I conclude that she could have avoided this additional damage by following the advice of these physicians.
[125] The question then is whether Mrs. Kassian’s choice of treatment represents a failure to mitigate. The onus here is then on the defence, though in this particular instance both the defence and Plaintiff expert witnesses agree on the facts that ground this mitigation argument.
[126] As per Janiak v. Ippolito, supra, to establish mitigation, the defendant must prove on a balance of probabilities that: 1) the plaintiff acted unreasonably; and 2) had the plaintiff acted reasonably, his or her losses would be reduced or eliminated.
[127] Here, I note that Mrs. Kassian disregarded the advice of her doctor, Dr. Adams. By her own admission, the scheme of therapy that she had adopted failed to correct her alleged pain and physical limitations. She continued this regime for over two years without ever returning to Dr. Adams, seeking expert advice from an orthopedic specialist, or having consulted with any other medical personnel. As her attempts to recover apparently failed, or at a minimum, plateaued, she did not seek professional medical advice to help in her recovery. Rather, she continued the same regime, which according to Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie only served to aggravate her condition.
[128] I heard no explanation as to why she made this choice. I have not heard of expert medical advice, or any medical advice to support the therapy that occurred from May 2004 through to the present. Failing to seek medical expertise must be seen as unreasonable.
[129] Similarly, I accept that had Mrs. Kassian consulted with a orthopedic specialist, explained her alleged condition and ongoing rehabilitative efforts, that the orthopedic specialist would have provided the same advice provided by both the Defence and Plaintiff expert witnesses Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie, and that had been provided by Mr. Azira in May 2004. She needed to engage in postural training, exercise, and wean herself off of massage. Treatments such as IMS and extensions had only aggravated her condition.
[130] The question then becomes at what point was Mrs. Kassian’s failure to seek and obtain orthopedic medical expertise unreasonable. Dr. Adams testified that he recommended she seek such advice if her condition had not been corrected by the end of 2004. In that case, her failure to mitigate commences at the beginning of 2005 and continues onwards.
[131] The extent of Mrs. Kassian’s contribution to her own injuries is specified above. I therefore reduce damages awarded from January 2005 onward by two-ninths, (22.2 percent).
VI. Damages
[132] Mrs. Kassian alleges five general heads of damages: (1) pain and suffering, (2) loss of business income, (3) special damages, (4) loss of housekeeping capacity, and (5) cost of care. A quantification of business losses, housekeeping, and cost of care was provided by Chartered Accountant and Chartered Business Valuator Mr. Randy G. Popik, who provided an extensive expert report, and testified at trial. On the business income, Mr. Popik has provided six alternative scenarios for the Court’s consideration. I do not see any need to comment further on these six scenarios, or note any preference for any alternative scenario.
[133] I will address each of the five heads of income-related damages separately.
A. Pain and Suffering
[134] On general damages for pain and suffering, I am confronted by contradictory testimony from the Plaintiff and the various medical experts. Additionally, as noted above, I have my own personal observations of the Plaintiff during the trial. Balancing the various testimony and findings of fact is not simple, so I shall provide a detailed explanation of my considerations and conclusions.
[135] Mrs. Kassian was quite adamant about what an active person she had been, involved in sporting activities, skiing, hiking, hobbies such as weaving, along with all of the other activities she was involved in professionally.
[136] She clearly was capable of working as a writer and public speaker prior to the Accident. As has been noted by the experts, these are activities that are not particularly physically demanding.
[137] By all accounts, after the Accident she had an initial period in which she was unable to work, experienced headaches likely a consequence of her TMJ disorder, and experienced neck (cervical), upper back (thoracic) and lower back (lumbar) pain. I have found that during this period, she had marked discomfort, restricted ability to engage in work and recreational activities. This pain and loss of enjoyment was caused by the Accident.
[138] Her condition improved markedly following treatment. By May 2004 Mr. Ariza had concluded that her back injuries only required postural training and some stretching. Drs. Adams and Major and Mr. Ariza note that her headaches had largely subsided, apparently a consequence of her wearing the splint that had been prescribed by Dr. Major.
[139] I have concluded that there is no known medical reason for the headaches Mrs. Kassian alleges continue to this day. I remind that in 2006, she testified she no longer had headaches.
[140] On the testimony of Mrs. Kassian and the medical experts, I have concluded that after May 2004, Mrs. Kassian had, and will likely continue to have, a certain degree of discomfort associated with her cervical and thoracic spine and associated musculature. I find as fact that the proportion of that ongoing dysfunction is a consequence of a pre-existing arthritic condition, and Mrs. Kassian’s adopting an inappropriate and harmful therapeutic regime. I have taken this into consideration in determining an appropriate award. I also take into account the expert opinions of Drs. Lavoie and McKenzie that some degree of ongoing upper back and neck discomfort will probably be present for the remainder of Mrs. Kassian’s life.
[141] In the general damage component of the award I have made, I have considered the loss of enjoyment of life. I have considered the fact that Mrs. Kassian now no longer water skiis, that she no longer goes fishing because she finds it uncomfortable to sit in a boat, that going to the movies is difficult, and she now chooses to sit at the back of the church because she does not want to be a distraction when they go to church. I have considered the fact that she no longer assists with the yard cleanup that she used to enjoy, and that her social activities have now been diminished because of her pain. All of these factors go into the components that make up a general damage award for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life.
[142] Counsel for the Plaintiff has provided me with a number of authorities that the Plaintiff submits are a useful as a comparable guide for an award of general damages for pain and suffering, and loss of enjoyment: Flis v. Chan, 2004 ABQB 853 , 2004 ABQB 853, 136 A.C.W.S. (3d) 474, Hughes v. Gillingham, 1999 ABQB 525 , 1999 ABQB 525, 247 A.R. 201, Harbora v. McIvor (1997), 202 A.R. 99, 70 A.C.W.S. (3d) 751, and Da Silveira v. Carrita, 2005 BCSC 1327 , 2005 BCSC 1327, 142 A.C.W.S. (3d) 434.
[143] I note that Hughes v. Gillingham, supra was appealed (Gillingham Estate v. Hughes, 2002 ABCA 69 , 2002 ABCA 69, 299 A.R. 369) and the contribution to fault between the parties was altered. This does not affect the quantum of the award for general damages. The Court of Appeal confirmed that a trial judge may consider a plaintiff’s inconsistent testimony when finding a lack of credibility (at para. 11).
[144] In my view, the appropriate sum for general damages for pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life for Mrs. Kassian in this case would be the sum of $40,000.00.
B. Loss of Business Income
[145] During the relevant period, Mrs. Kassian has declared and been taxed on a certain amount from the family business, the Capilano Rehabilitation Centre, as part of an “income splitting” scheme to reduce taxes. While declared as her income, all parties agree that this “income” is not related to her business activities and thus is not a subject for review at trial, or a potential source of damages.
[146] During the course of the submissions before me at the trial, much was made of the variations in the exchange rate between the U.S. and Canadian dollar, and the resulting variation in the true value of the royalty payments, for example, in 2003. A comment was made that the Canadian dollar was worth approximately 35 cents less than the American dollar in 2003. It is rather obvious that, in today’s economic market, with the increased value of the Canadian dollar, whatever royalties Mrs. Kassian is receiving this year will be adversely affected by that increased value. Accordingly, in light of the increasing value of the Canadian dollar over these past several years, one cannot truly compare her success as an author via, for example, the royalty figures in Canadian dollars from her Tax Return in 2003, mainly $98,418.00, with her Tax Return in 2006 of $74,803.00.
[147] Obviously, any measure, analysis, and projection of Mrs. Kassian’s “real income” and “business success” ought be based on Canadian dollars. That is the currency that she uses in her daily life and on which she is taxed. She had agreed, via contract, to be paid in US dollars per unit sold. That choice naturally involved the risk that she may receive either greater or lower income, depending on the variations in currency exchange.
[148] On the other hand, to compare apples to apples, when the Court needs to evaluate Mrs. Kassian’s marketplace success, whether she has produced consistent “hits,” “flops,” or a mix of both, then the primary concerns are number of units sold and the costs of those products. Obviously, both variables will likely vary from product to product. In that sense, to measure her success and popularity as an author, one would best turn to the number and value of units sold, as evidenced by the sales figures in U.S. dollars.
[149] Mrs. Kassian’s actual business income is derived from her activities as a writer. Much was made of Mrs. Kassian’s three sources of income that she has as an author. The first source is the royalty income she derives from the sale of her literary works. This is her primary and largest source of her income. Her second source of income is speaking engagements and the money (“honoraria”) she is paid for speaking at conferences and other events. Her third source is private sales of her materials through the Internet or at conferences. Her income from speaking engagements and the private sales through the Internet or at sales conferences is earned typically in the year of the speaking engagement or sale. Royalty income is deferred up to one year as the publisher sells the books, collects the income, deducts the returned books, and accounts for the revenue to the author. The royalty statements were filed as an exhibit in these proceedings at Tab 19 of Exhibit 1.
[150] Mrs. Kassian asserts that injuries incurred during the Accident have impeded her ability to earn business income. I will address each of the three income streams separately.
I. Failure to Publish
[151] The Plaintiff submits that the key to this case is the “gap” in her ability to produce curriculum materials after the accident, and that that “gap” has created a loss of income claim which will be with her forever, according to the economic analysis offered by Mr. Popik.
[152] In brief, Mrs. Kassian alleges that during the “gap” period, her productivity was so reduced that works she might have otherwise have produced were delayed. The net effect, over the entirety of her publishing career, would be that she had “lost” one or more publications. The Plaintiff has explained that had she maintained a steady and continued production of publications, her publication-derived income would also increase. Instead, there has been a period in which she was unable to write, and the entire progression of her publication-based income stream has been delayed during this “gap.”
[153] The Plaintiff submits that this Court must find the existence of that gap as a prerequisite condition for Mr. Popik’s calculation of an ongoing loss of income claim, where the decrease in royalties results from one or more hypothetical publications that never materialized as a consequence of the Accident.
[154] Some commentary on the economic analysis of Mr. Popik is in order. In my view, Mr. Popik’s analysis is quite mechanical. The royalties that he projects would result from Mrs. Kassian’s writing, either with or without injury, follow a smooth linear projection, increasing year after year, perhaps plateauing at a point a decade or so after the accident. The projections have an extended duration, running 20 years beyond the date of the Accident. Mrs. Kassian is expected to maintain her writing throughout this 20-year period. Mr. Popik explains that this extended and smooth incremental increase in royalty income is based on the presumption that “… her income would follow the cumulative pattern of increase that typically accompanies the regular publication of new literary material.”
[155] Then, Mr. Popik’s projections involve two assumptions: (1) that Mrs. Kassian’s publications would appear at regular, predictable intervals, and (2) that the royalties earned by those publications would follow a similarly predictable and generally uniform pattern.
[156] Mr. Popik’s projections consider Mrs. Kassian’s business activities between 1999 and 2006. In 2003, the year after the Accident, Mrs. Kassian’s royalties and writing fees were substantially higher than the preceding year (2002) and the following years (2004, 2005, 2006).
[157] The Court has heard evidence that Mrs. Kassian’s publication-derived income should not be based on the actual amounts she had earned in the year that a publication was released. On that point, I accept the evidence of Ms. Angela Thomas, an author and speaker in the Christian publishing industry. She explained that in this industry, income from a publication is spread out over several years after the date of a publication. Thus, to fully appreciate the economic effects of the accident, the Court should not restrict its consideration of Mrs. Kassian’s income to the year of the Accident (2002) and the year that followed (2003), but instead should examine her subsequent income in the years “downstream” of the alleged “gap” in production of curriculum materials.
[158] Much was made of the fact that the royalties received in 2003 were from books that had been produced prior to the motor vehicle accident and the decline in royalties after that is attributable to the tortfeasor as Mrs. Kassian had not published more curriculum materials of the calibre of “Conversation Peace.” The explanation for this is because of her pain and suffering from the accident, and that is, in essence, the argument that founds the loss of income claim.
[159] The reality, however, is different. After the motor vehicle accident, Mrs. Kassian was receiving royalties from eleven publications whereas prior to the motor vehicle accident she was receiving royalties from four publications.
[160] The reality is that Mrs. Kassian did not come up with another “hit” book such as “Conversation Peace,” and it is submitted that it is this “gap” that is the fault of the Defendant.
[161] The Plaintiff’s submission is that the Court should find as a fact that had Mrs. Kassian not been injured, she would have generated additional publications after the date of the
Accident, and that these additional publications would have been commercial successes comparable to that of “Conversation Peace.” Herein is the crux of the matter. Is production of the kind of materials that Mrs. Kassian authored a relatively routine, mechanical, and predictable process, or one that cannot be predicted with any accuracy?
[162] Mrs. Kassian’s evidence was that for production of the works that were in progress, two were delayed three months, and two were delayed seven months. One of these delayed publications was a video curriculum that she had largely completed before the accident, “Vertically Inclined.” However, in argument, the submission was made that since the Plaintiff has not produced a new curriculum material that was conceived and commenced after the Accident, this five-year “gap” in which she has not generated a new curriculum material publication is a consequence of her having lost her creative spark. The argument is that she lost her creative spark because of the injuries she sustained in the accident. As a result of this inability to create, she has thus lost income which her expert report calculates and quantified as between $800,000.00 and just over $1 million over the course of the Plaintiff’s expected future life expectancy.
[163] The only evidence before the Court that supports that proposition is the Plaintiff’s evidence. There was no evidence called of the nine other women authors in her field as to their productivity and its consistency; there was no evidence called by her publisher, LifeWay, as to their experience on the publication rates of such materials by other authors. Either kind of evidence might still not have been of any assistance to the Court when assessing the productivity of an individual author, but at a minimum, that additional trade related evidence would at least provide a speculative basis for the Court to hypothesize whether or not this particular Plaintiff would, indeed, produce another work in the time frame subsequent to publication of “Vertically Inclined” in the spring of 2003.
[164] Mrs. Kassian’s pre-Accident publishing record does not appear to be particularly consistent. According to her curriculum vitae, she had published a book in 1990 (“Women, Creation, & the Fall”), a second text in 1992 (“The Feminist Gospel: The Movement to Unite Feminism with the Church”), then no further non-collaborative publications occurred until 1999 (“In My Father’s House: Women Relating to God as Father”), followed then in 2001 by the “Conversation Peace” video study collection.
[165] It is the Plaintiff’s own testimony that her work is creative, imaginative, and original, and not some formulistic writing of reports or simple mechanical writing. She is described by her counsel as an “elite” member of her community, and by Ms. Thomas as having “… attained a significant level of visibility and recognition in her career as an author in the Christian publication industry.” Sales of her works depend on their ability to inspire and affect others, and thus novelty is a crucial and necessary component of that capacity to inspire. Each of her publications required a seed idea around which the publication itself develops. Her “creative spark” provides those very seeds.
[166] In essence, the Plaintiff is asking the Court to find that her inability to generate an idea which resulted in a curriculum product is a compensable loss caused by the Defendant and is
an ongoing future loss of income. This proposition is that the Accident and injuries have caused Mrs. Kassian to “lose” one or more publications.
[167] There is necessarily a second variable beyond the question of whether, without the Accident, Mrs. Kassian may have produced additional books and curriculum materials. Simply, not every publication generates the same sales and resulting revenues. To award damages, the Court then must not only conclude whether or not a publication has been lost within the “gap,” but also must consider what that particular lost hypothetical publication would be worth.
[168] Based on the Plaintiff’s submissions, prior to making any award of damages under this head, the Court must find that, were it not for Mrs. Kassian’s injuries, at least one additional publication would have been produced within the “gap” period. Once that necessary first prerequisite step is passed, and I conclude at least one publication would have been generated, I must then consider the degree of income that would follow from that publication or publications.
ii. Legal Analyses: Loss of Capacity and Loss of a Chance
[169] It seems to me that this analysis may follow one of two paths. First, one can address Mrs. Kassian’s failure to publish as a “loss of capacity”; her injuries had reduced her ability to work, to some degree, and then that loss of capacity led to at least one publication not being written. This was the position argued by the Plaintiff, who indicated that the critical question would be whether I find, from the evidence, that a publication was lost within the “gap.” I believe that a second kind of legal analysis would be equally suitable, if not more appropriate, to prove Mrs. Kassian’s alleged economic loss from a publication lost within the gap. That would be that Mrs. Kassian had “lost a chance” to publish an additional text. The analysis that follows will consider both schemes.
[170] The law on loss of capacity is set out in Athey v. Leonati, 1996 183 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 458, 140 D.L.R. (4th) 235 and Andrews v. Grand & Toy, 1978 1 (SCC), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 229, 83 D.L.R. (3d) 452. The first step is to determine whether the alleged loss is a “real and substantial possibility, and not mere speculation”: Athey v. Leonati, supra, at 242, Kelly v. Lundgard, 2001 ABCA 185 , 2001 ABCA 185 at paras. 27, 267, 286 A.R. 1.
[171] For something to be a “real and substantial possibility” and not mere speculation, it must be, first, (a) based on evidence; (b) and it must be evidence of fact – not speculation by a witness.
[172] Once loss has been established as a real and substantial possibility, the Court must determine the value of that loss. Calculation of the loss is based on evidence, and the Plaintiff is entitled only to pecuniary losses actually proven: Ratych v. Bloomer, 1990 97 (SCC), [1990] 1 S.C.R. 940 at 963, 69 D.L.R. (4th) 25. That value may then be discounted based on an assessment of chance: Schrump et al. v. Koot et al. (1977), 18 O.R. (2d) 337 at 340, 82 D.L.R. (3d) 553 (Ont. C.A.).
[173] The alternative approach is that the Court consider Mrs. Kassian’s allegedly lost publication as a “loss of a chance” to publish a book. “Loss of a chance” was first considered by the Supreme Court of Canada in Laferrière v. Lawson, 1991 87 (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 541, 78 D.L.R. (4th) 609, then further commented upon in Athey v. Leonati, supra. Here, Justice Major observes at para. 27:
Hypothetical events (such as how the plaintiff’s life would have proceeded without the tortious injury) or future events need not be proven on a balance of probabilities. Instead, they are simply given weight according to their relative likelihood: . . . A future or hypothetical possibility will be taken into consideration as long as it is a real and substantial possibility and not mere speculation: . . .
Thus, to serve as a basis for an award, a lost chance also must be a “real and substantial possibility,” the same minimum threshold for a loss of capacity.
[174] Once a lost chance is established as a real and substantial possibility, the value of that chance must be assigned. A useful review of the “loss of chance” doctrine is found in PMM Assurance & Services Inc. v. Michaud, 2005 NBCA 66 , 2005 NBCA 66, 256 D.L.R. (4th) 435. Here, the Court at para. 28 summarized the manner in which a lost chance should be valued:
Thus, the assessment of the current value of the lost chance at the day of the trial is based on possibility. This method is now settled in Canadian case law and it is only logical that it be applied. It is essentially a rule of proportionate compensation: the more contingent or hypothetical the chance, that is to say, the lower the possibility that the event will occur, the lower also the value of the chance that the plaintiff has had taken from him or her.
[175] Thus, to make an award on the basis that Mrs. Kassian had lost a chance to produce an additional publication, I must conclude that there was a real and substantial possibility of an additional publication, determine the probability of that chance, and its value had the chance been realized.
[176] Last, I note that in Canadian tort law the burden of proof for the existence and quantum of damages generally rests on the Plaintiff. This point is clearly restated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Janiak v. Ippolito, 1985 62 (SCC), [1985] 1 S.C.R. 146, 16 D.L.R. (4th) 1 at para. 32:
32. While a plaintiff has the burden of proving both the fact that he has suffered damage and the quantum of that damage, the burden of proof moves to the defendant if he alleges that the plaintiff could have and should have mitigated his loss. That this is the law in Canada has been clearly stated by this Court in Red Deer College v. Michaels, 1975 15 (SCC), [1976] 2 S.C.R. 324, and more recently reaffirmed by Estey J. in the Asemara Oil case, supra. In Red Deer Laskin C.J. said, at p. 331:
If it is the defendant’s position that the plaintiff could reasonably have avoided some part of the loss claimed, it is for the defendant to carry the burden of that issue, subject to the defendant being content to allow the matter to be disposed of on the trial judge’s assessment of the plaintiff’s evidence on avoidable consequences.
Thus, the Plaintiff has the onus to prove the existence and quantum of damages. While the onus then shifts to the Defendant to prove a failure to mitigate, here, as I have noted above, both sides expert witnesses have demonstrated to my satisfaction that Mrs. Kassian’s inappropriate choice of treatment and failure to seek proper medical attention represents a failure to mitigate the injuries that she had suffered.
iii. The Plaintiff’s Argument – An Assured Career Interrupted
[177] The argument and analysis that has been advanced by the Plaintiff is not one of chance, but rather one of certainty. As discussed above, the Plaintiff has not established an industry standard for the rate of publications in this genre. The author’s own publication history does not establish any conclusive pattern. Nevertheless, the Plaintiff advances Mr. Popik’s projections and their inexorable, mathematical progress.
[178] The Plaintiff’s counsel, in argument, for loss of income stresses the Alberta decision in Foo-Fat v. Ahmed, [1997] A.J. No. 976 (QL), 208 A.R. 218 (Alta. Q.B.) as a similar and comparable case for this Court’s consideration to help assess Mrs. Kassian’s loss.
[179] Ms. Foo-Fat was a talented violin and viola player who started to play the violin at age 3, and at 12 years of age was injured in a motor vehicle accident in which she suffered injury to her lumbar spine. The injury was identified by her physician, whom she saw regularly, and treated with physiotherapy and analgesics. However, because of her back pain, she was unable to practice as intensely as she had intended and the Court found that she had been delayed by two years from entering the concert stage and being paid as a professional violinist would be paid.
[180] In the Foo-Fat case, the Court heard evidence from the plaintiff’s viola teacher, a former principal violist with the Edmonton Symphony Orchestra and former conductor of the Calgary Youth Orchestra. The Court heard evidence from the plaintiff’s instructor at the Julliard School of Music. The Court heard evidence from a performing artist’s manager with over ten years experience in the field, and from the then-present executive director of the Calgary Philharmonic Orchestra. In the Foo-Fat case, the Court had ample evidence to show that Ms. Foo-Fat had proved, on a balance of probabilities, that she would indeed have suffered this loss.
[181] In Mrs. Kassian’s case, I have Mrs. Kassian’s own evidence, her publication record to date, and the testimony of her colleague, Ms. Thomas, whose evidence was that there were at least ten women who wrote similar works in this area. I did not hear from Mrs. Kassian’s publisher nor other authors. I have not been provided information concerning the publication
frequency of those other ten authors, though I cannot imagine that information would not be public knowledge.
[182] A significant and distinguishing difference between the Foo-Fat case and the case involving Mrs. Kassian is the fact that Mrs. Kassian is not a performer. She is a creator. If Ms. Foo-Fat was a composer rather than a performer, the case might have been quite differently decided. Counsel for Mrs. Kassian admits that the issue before this Court is that for Mrs. Kassian, the reality is that the motor vehicle accident has resulted in her having a “gap.” This “gap” is the time frame in which she would have produced another work but for the accident. The Plaintiff does not appear to consider any possibility that, even uninjured, Mrs. Kassian’s productivity would have remained essentially unchanged. From Mr. Popik’s analyses, were it not Mr. Roy’s negligence, the allegedly lost work (or works) were assured.
iv. The Probability of a Lost Publication
[183] I disagree. The Plaintiff has certainly failed to prove that the injuries she experienced in the accident have undoubtedly resulted in her failing to produce one or more publications and/or curriculum materials. However, that degree of proof is not necessary, the Plaintiff need only first demonstrate that the alleged loss is a real and substantial possibility and not mere speculation. If that prerequisite minimum has been met, the Court should assign an actual probability for that missing publication. What, then, is the evidence to support that proposition?
[184] Mrs. Kassian’s personal publishing record is no more than a foundation built on sand. Between 1992 and 1999, she published nothing at all. No evidence was advanced to support the proposition that authors of Christian motivational literature typically publish at regular, predictable intervals for decades at a time. The sole evidence available to the Court is the publication record of Ms. Angela Thomas presented in her curriculum vitae, but this record extends over less than a decade, and would appear to include a range of media and what seem to be reprints of previous works (ie., “A Beautiful Offering,” 2004, hardcover, and “A Beautiful Offering: Returning Gods Love with Your Life,” 2006, softcover). As I noted above, an author’s publications are generally a matter of public record, and had the Plaintiff sought to establish the typical situation for this industry, I see no reason that information could not have been provided.
[185] Instead, it is the testimony of the Plaintiff that she was unable to produce further works because her injuries had affected her creative spark that provided her inspirational concepts. Her works were far more than mere mechanical, formulistic writing. I think I only state the obvious when I observe that creative thinking and writing is, for most, an uneven affair. The phrase “writer’s block” is commonly used for good reason. To say creative writing can be churned out by a particular author, methodically, in a mathematically precise manner, is indeed bold and requires proof. I conclude that, for Mrs. Kassian, the facts presented do not support that conclusion.
[186] For the Court to make that leap, with no evidence that there was a work that has been lost or delayed because of the accident, is asking the Court to go down the road of speculation.
[187] I should note that this distinction is based on the facts of the case at hand and does not represent a general principle of law. With the proper facts, I see no reason why a person who is involved in creative endeavours (ie., an author, a composer or an inventor) could not successfully advance a strong claim for damages on either the basis of a “loss of capacity” or a “loss of chance.” That creative person would necessarily have to prove that loss was a real and substantial probability, and more than speculative. Mrs. Kassian is an author of comparatively unproven vintage.
[188] And thus, my contrast of Mrs. Kassian with Ms. Foo-Fat, and my comment that Ms. Foo-Fat was not a composer, she was a performer. Mrs. Kassian is more comparable to a composer than a performer in her production of written materials. She is comparable to a performer in her speaking engagements. I will deal with those separately.
[189] In my view, and on the facts in the case before this Court, to find that but for the Accident, the alleged “gap” would have been filled by an additional publication by the Plaintiff is to engage in significant crystal ball gazing. The Plaintiff has not established that there is a reasonable and substantial possibility that Mrs. Kassian would have published an additional text or curriculum material.
[190] In my view, the Plaintiff’s claims are unsupportable in law and requires that the Court engage in conjectures that are wrong-headed in the proper calculation of any future loss of income, loss of capacity, or loss of chance claim.
[191] I could end my analysis at this point; however, I shall continue to the matter of valuation of the loss capacity or chance, and the actuarial analysis provided by Mr. Popik, as both these matters reveal further and substantial defects in the Plaintiff’s claims.
v. The Value of the Lost Publication
[192] A second issue for the Court is the worth of that lost, hypothetical publication. Can the Court draw any conclusions as to the royalties that would result from Mrs. Kassian’s lost publication?
[193] The Plaintiff has not advanced statistical information concerning the royalties typically earned by Christian motivational publications, or publications specifically from LifeWay press. Even if those had been provided, their probative value would necessarily be limited. These are not facts of Mrs. Kassian’s publication record.
[194] Mrs. Kassian’s own royalties and writing fees are inconsistent, publication to publication. She testified her 2001 “Conversation Peace” package was “a hit,” but was followed by a less successful “Vertically Inclined.” The Plaintiff did not establish what particular income might be expected to accompany any publication by Mrs. Kassian.
[195] In the absence of evidence, the Court is left with a conundrum. How to value a chance without a substantial evidentiary foundation? Would Mrs. Kassian’s lost book be a hit, or destined for the remainder bin? I cannot say. The Court is only left with questions and conjecture. I am mindful of the admonition of Drapeau, C.J.A. in Abu-Bakare v. Vincent, 2003 NBCA 42 , 2003 NBCA 42 at para. 58, 259 N.B.R. (2d) 66:
The common law – certainly in its modern state – seeks to reflect reason. It rightly finds arbitrariness repugnant. Of course, trial judges routinely – and quite properly – make judgment calls to identify which future scenario would most likely have unfolded but for the accident, and which will most likely play itself out in the aftermath of the trial. There is, however, an important difference between a logical choice of scenarios and quantum based on identified data (degree of risk, baseline income, duration of loss, etc.) and the picking of a totally arbitrary global sum out of thin air. I would add that if a trial judge is unable to articulate any rational foundation for his or her assessment of future pecuniary loss, the problem is likely sourced in the claimant’s failure to provide essential evidence. [emphasis added]
[196] Here, the onus to prove the value of damages is on the Plaintiff: Janiak v. Ippolito, supra. That requirement has not been met. On that basis, I would also find as fact that the Court is unable to assign any reasonable value to Mrs. Kassian’s allegedly lost publication(s).
[197] With that, I turn to Mr. Popik’s expert actuarial report and its projections of Mrs. Kassian’s publishing income, and given my findings of fact, the applicability of those analyses to the matter at hand.
vi. An Unproven Mathematical Progression
[198] As noted previously, Mr. Popik’s six projections are based on two assumptions; were it not for the accident, Mrs. Kassian would have continued to publish works at a generally consistent pace, and that Mrs. Kassian’s published works would result in consistent, constant returns. As discussed above, neither assumption is proven, nor meets the lower preliminary standard of having a substantial and reasonable possibility.
[199] Of course, for any of the six alternatives that this expert provides to apply, the Court must find, on the evidence, that indeed there was a substantial and reasonable possibility that the Accident had led to an actual loss of the creative spark and an associated “gap”during which Mrs. Kassian’s was unable to produce one or more publications. Those missing publications must have sales that would generate comparable royalties.
[200] Here, the Court has only the assertions of the Plaintiff that are contrary to her publication record. There is no evidence at all as to what income would be generated by any publications that may have been produced during the “gap.”
[201] In my view, earlier production of another curriculum work is mere speculation on the evidence that I have before me in this trial. Accordingly, the analysis provided by the chartered accountant and chartered business valuator on this loss of income claim is of no assistance to the Court.
[202] Even if I am incorrect on that point, the Popik estimates are based on other assumptions that I must consider highly questionable. All six projections base Mrs. Kassian’s publication income from a baseline year of 2003, the year that she published her “big hit,” the “Conversation Peace” video curriculum. From that point onward, in every projection, her income only grows. Curiously, that means that these projections have adopted a baseline income that rejects and ignores the known and factual, though less impressive, sales figures of Mrs. Kassian’s next publication, “Vertically Inclined.” I note that the Plaintiff has indicated that the completion date of “Vertically Inclined” was alleged delayed by a total of three months. No argument was made that the three-month delay would substantially affect the royalties earned by “Vertically Inclined” and justify use of the 2003 income as the point from which Mrs. Kassian’s income is projected to grow.
[203] Instead, Mrs. Kassian testified that “Vertically Inclined” did not do as well as “Conservative Peace,” and she attributes that to the accident, testifying, for example, that the graphics on the cover are very juvenile. She claims that this is because she did not reject the graphics when they were sent to her for approval because of the pain she was suffering from the accident. I find this to be rather ingenuous. A simple “yes” or “no” could have been easily made to the graphic artist’s work. To blame the juvenile presentation of this curriculum work on the Accident is a stretch for me in the circumstances of her activities and the comments especially recorded by Mr. Ariza, her physiotherapist, during his assessment and progress reports of her treatments during 2003.
[204] Further, I saw the cover design of Mrs. Kassian’s “hit” publication, “Conversation Peace,” published 2001, and the allegedly juvenile “Vertically Inclined,” published 2003. Both covers incorporate stylized “cartoon” characters, bright colours, and title text with very asymmetric design and fonts. Personally, I have little ability to distinguish either one as being a more “juvenile presentation.” Side by side, these book covers appear far more alike than they are different.
[205] The choice to use the “Conversation Peace” rather than the “Vertically Inclined” sales as a baseline for the following statistical analysis can only have the effect of exaggerating the progress and development of Mrs. Kassian’s writing fee and royalty incomes. I would go so far as to say that the choice of the 2003 publication income for the projection baseline is actively misleading, deceptive, and contrary to the facts available to Mr. Popik. On that ground alone, I would reject the statistical and actuarial value of these projections.
[206] What is worse is that all six of the scenarios presented by Mr. Popik project continued and stable growth in Mrs. Kassian’s publication income. The foundation that Mr. Popik used for this presumption is Ms. Angela Thomas’s personal opinion that “if an author continues to regularly produce literary works, the author’s income will increase year after year.” Unless Christian publishing is radically different from the remainder of the publishing world, and I
received no evidence to support that point, this conclusion defies the reality of the marketplace. Some books are “hits,” while others have poorer sales. Mrs. Kassian’s own experience indicates just that, and Mr. Popik had that very information in hand; his report indicates he had the same LifeWay royalty receipts and statements that were placed in evidence before the Court. The steady and incremental growth in publishing income projected by Mr. Popik defies the reality of Mrs. Kassian’s own experience. The Plaintiff has characterized these income projections as conservative. I disagree. I have little choice but to conclude that these figures are little more than statistical pipedreams based on anecdotal evidence and wishful thinking.
[207] Further, Mr. Popik’s projections fail to take into account known and now historic changes to the relative values of the Canadian and US currency. The six projections assume that income will steadily increase as an author publishes year after year. When one is being paid in a foreign currency, there is a further variable – the real value per sale may vary significantly, and that is a risk voluntarily taken by the author, via contract. Here, that contractual obligation cut a third off the ‘real value’ of Mrs. Kassian’s writing, and yet Mr. Popik’s analysis not only fails to account for possible variations in currency exchange on Mrs. Kassian’s projected theoretical income in the years beyond 2007, he does not even apply those known shifts to her hypothetical ‘uninjured’ income he had projected for 2003-2007. I view this omission as an extremely serious and quite inexplicable error that substantially undermines, if not completely invalidating Mr. Popik’s estimates.
[208] As such, I entirely reject Mr. Popik’s projections on Mrs. Kassian’s lost writing and royalty income.
vii. Conclusion – Loss of Publication Income
[209] The Plaintiff states that if I am to award damages for a loss of publication royalty and writing fee income, I must first find that there was a reasonable and substantial chance that an additional publication was lost due to Mrs. Kassian’s inability to create during the “gap” period. On the basis of the evidence available, I do not find that there was a reasonable and substantial chance; the evidence before me only allows me to guess. That is not the proper role of the Court. Similarly, I have neither a basis to assign a probability that a book would have been created, nor to value the book itself. Any figures I might provide would only be plucked “out of thin air.”
[210] On that basis, I find Mrs. Kassian has not proven damages are due for lost writing fees and publication royalties that result from injuries experienced as a result of the Accident.
viii. Speaking Engagement Honoraria
[211] A second and major source of Mrs. Kassian’s income was derived from her attending various conferences and other events, making public speeches and engaging in various other activities such as workshops. For these activities, she was paid honoraria of varying amounts. I accept that the quantum of these honoraria would vary depending on the size, duration, and location of these speaking engagements.
[212] She has testified that as a consequence of the injuries suffered during the Accident she has been less able to participate in these activities. Specifically, she reports that she has difficulty sitting and remaining stationary in the typical airliner passenger seat, and now requires that she travel in business rather than coach class. She also comments that speaking engagements and workshops are particularly draining in light of the time she must spend on her feet, and that she encounters pain and discomfort as a consequence.
[213] She claims that during 2003 these injuries affected her ability to attend and participate in these kinds of activities. She completed six speaking engagements, cancelled three and postponed one, for five months, until the following year. The three cancelled speaking engagements had a total associated return of $7,000.00. She was to be paid $4,000.00 for the postponed engagement. The Plaintiff claims that her ability to attend and engage in public speaking activities remains impeded by the injuries that resulted from the Accident.
[214] Earlier I had noted that certain financial information before the Court involved U.S. rather than Canadian funds, and that for proper analysis and clarity, financial data should be converted to Canadian funds. I note that of the three cancelled speaking engagements, one clearly took place in the United States (the August 15-16, 2003 event in Pensacola, FL), while a second occurred in Canada (Fall 2003 event in Grande Prairie). It is unclear whether the honoraria indicated for the American event was paid in U.S. or Canadian currency. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I am presuming that the Pensacola engagement and the event of uncertain location honoraria were paid in Canadian funds; however, I invite counsel to clarify that point if my proposition is incorrect.
[215] Inconsistencies exist in Mrs. Kassian’s testimony concerning her public speaking engagements. In her Examination for Discovery, she advised that the maximum number of speaking engagements that she would undertake in a year was done in 2002 as she was away from home too much and she found the travel to be just more than she wanted to do. However, at trial, she backtracked on that, saying it was because her children were at home then and now she would travel more because the children are grown.
[216] Here again, I apply the tests in Andrews v. Grand & Toy and Athey v. Leonati. I conclude that given the testimony of the medical and health personnel who treated Mrs. Kassian during 2003, I accept that the injuries that she received during the Accident had affected her ability to accept and participate in the speaking engagements she was offered in 2003. All in all, she lost $7,000.00 as a result of the cancelled speaking engagements (as, of course, she was paid for the postponed one which was conducted in February 2004).
[217] The Plaintiff submits that but for the injuries she suffered in the accident, she would undertake speaking engagements, at least to the level she was doing in 2002. In 2002, she had 18 speaking engagements which generated her $22,136.00 in speaking fees. However, in 2006 she had 14 speaking engagements which only generated her the sum of $6,597.00. Accordingly, it is difficult to equate the number of speaking engagements with the income from those speaking engagements since the number of engagements and the amount received from those engagements is obviously highly variable.
[218] For the purpose of this action, then, in my view, it is appropriate to take the loss from the cancelled or refused speaking engagements in 2003 and project that to 2004 and 2005 where she did eight speaking engagements in each year. For the purposes of calculation, the appropriate loss of income from her speaking engagements is determined on a past loss of income basis. In my view, it seems reasonable to award the $7,000.00 times 3 for the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. In 2006, while her income was not that great, as I pointed out, she had 14 speaking engagements. It is thus difficult to comment on the value of the monies attached to those speaking engagements as related to the number of those engagements, and it is obvious that by 2006 she is almost back on track from where she was in 2003.
[219] I thus conclude as a finding of fact that by 2006, Mrs. Kassian’s ability to attend and participate in speaking engagements was no longer impaired by injuries associated with the Accident. I therefore make no award of damages for loss of speaking engagements that occurred after that point.
[220] I have previously concluded that by failing to follow the advice of Dr. Adams and her engagement in inappropriate therapy for her pain exacerbated rather than mitigated her discomfort. I had determined that after January, 2005, two-ninths (22.2 percent) of Mrs. Kassian’s ongoing neck and upper back problems were a result of a pre-existing condition now aggravated by inappropriate treatment. As a consequence, I reduce the award of damages for lost speaking engagements during 2005 by two-ninths. Mrs. Kassian is awarded damages as follows: 2003, $7,000.00; 2004, $7,000.00; and 2005, $5,444.44. The total award is then $19,444.44.
ix. Direct Sales
[221] Mrs. Kassian’s income includes a certain amount for direct sales of materials either in person while attending events, or via her web page. It is my understanding that she did not engage in direct sales until 2004, and only from 2005 onward has substantial income been obtained via direct sales.
[222] The Plaintiff has alleged that Mrs. Kassian’s website (www.marykassian.com) and its associated “E-commerce” online sales component were originally scheduled for the end of 2003, but were only completed over a year later. I have not heard evidence to prove that this delay was a consequence of the injuries Mrs. Kassian sustained in the Accident.
[223] I do not believe that the Plaintiff has sought damages for a loss of direct sales, which is appropriate considering that this stream of income appears to have commenced after the Plaintiff had recovered from her accident-related injuries. Accordingly, I award no damages for a loss of direct sales.
C. Special Damages
[224] The Plaintiff has advanced a number of claims for special damages. I allow certain of these claims. Mr. Popik’s charts do not appear to have provided alternatives for the Court to simply allow cost of future care of the items that I have identified below, and accordingly, his Schedule 11 is not of any assistance in identifying a capitalized award for this figure. Presumably, he could be contacted to provide that information in light of my factual findings.
I. Business Class Airfare
[225] One special damage claim sought by Mrs. Kassian in this action is the difference between economy class fare and business class fare because of her difficulty sitting for long periods of time in airline seats. Mrs. Lori-Ann Kennedy states that the extra room and better seating would be helpful in minimizing Mrs. Kassian’s travel-associated pain, and recommended that she use business class to make travelling less painful and stressful.
[226] The alleged problem appears to be her sitting for long periods of time. Even in business class, she will still have to sit for extended periods. Certainly, in economy class, with an aisle seat she can get up and walk around and stand as needed during the flight. In my view, this is not an appropriate cost to pass on to the Defendant in this circumstance. Again, I point out that the problem appears to be in the mid-back and neck and not in the lumbar spine, and, accordingly, the postural issues as identified by Dr. McKenzie, if properly addressed, might rectify these extended sitting issues. As previously noted, Mrs. Kassian’s injuries do not appear to be significant enough to be causing the kind of symptomology she demonstrates as arising from the complaints of low back pain.
ii. Back Rest, TENS Machine, and Pain Medication
[227] Ms. Kennedy reports Mrs. Kassian’s purchase and use of an ObusForme high back rest, which high back rest apparently assists her with her neck and mid-back pain. The Defendant has agreed to pay the cost of this ObusForme high back rest, which is $96, and will have to be replaced every eight years. In addition, Mrs. Kassian uses a TENS machine Maxima II which costs $500 every six years. Mrs. Kassian’s orthopaedic surgeon, and Dr. Lavoie, the second orthopaedic surgeon, recommend that she not have any therapy except exercise and the occasional Advil to deal with her pain. Accordingly, I would allow the Advil, as identified by Mrs. Kennedy, at $29 per year.
iii. Beds
[228] Mrs. Kennedy recommended two twin mattresses and box spring sets in order to provide Mrs. Kassian more comfort when she is sleeping. Accordingly, per Mrs. Kennedy’s recommendation that this be purchased once only to assist Mrs. Kassian in sleeping better with her upper back and neck problems, the sum of $3,044 would be allowed on cost of future care as well.
iv. Contract Writers
[229] Mrs. Kassian has submitted that during 2003, and as a consequence of her being unable to meet her deadlines due to her injuries, Mrs. Kassian had to hire contract writers to assist her in preparation of her various publications. The Plaintiff explained that as part of the arrangement, the contract writers received a share of Mrs. Kassian’s royalties. The Plaintiff
thus claims for the cost of paying the contract writers ($5,515.00) and the royalties lost to the writers (estimated at $26,000.00 to $27,000.00).
[230] Mrs. Kassian claims the contract writers were required to assist her after the accident; however, in both 2001 and 2002 it is obvious that she paid salaries, wages and benefits to someone, in a similar amount. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that money paid to others was not out of the ordinary, or a consequence of injuries suffered as a result of the Accident. The royalties paid to these writers come from minor publications and, the sales of those publications are minimal, as demonstrated in the royalty payments in Tab 19, and, accordingly, do not demonstrate the kind of loss that the Plaintiff submits exists. I therefore reject this claim.
v. Out-of-Pocket Expenses
[231] It is my understanding that the parties have agreed to a sum of $10,592.21 to cover Mrs. Kassian’s out-of-pocket expenses that resulted from the Accident. I see no reason to alter that outcome.
D. Loss of Housekeeping Capacity
[232] In light of her very busy professional activities, prior to the Accident Mrs. Kassian had a housekeeper attend once a week to do the housekeeping chores for their busy household. She was paying this housekeeper $50 per visit. This housekeeper retired and Mrs. Kassian was able to find a new housekeeper. However, the new housekeeper charged $85 per visit to do, in essence, the same amount of work, over the same duration. Mrs. Kennedy indicated that the $85 amount was more in line with the going rate for housekeeping assistance in those years, and the evidence is that Ms. Kassian reduced her use of the housekeeper to once every two weeks when she switched housekeepers.
[233] Accordingly, she is now paying less for housekeeping assistance ($85 per 2 weeks) than she was paying prior to the motor vehicle accident ($100 per 2 weeks). The alleged increased cleaning costs after the motor vehicle accident will not be allowed as Ms. Kennedy has testified that the increased cost is simply the appropriate rate for a housekeeper in the current market. Mrs. Kassian was getting a very good rate prior to her longtime housekeeper retiring, and the increase in cost per visit is actually a shift in the housekeeping costs to match the marketplace level rather than Ms. Kassian requiring additional housekeeping services as a consequence of her accident.
[234] However, prior to the motor vehicle accident, it is Mrs. Kassian’s testimony that she personally did several components of housekeeping. For example, she made the majority of the meals, she did the laundry and ironing, and she steam cleaned the carpets. Prior to the accident, she would do any interior painting that had to be done around the home. Since the accident, and for the first time, she had to hire a contractor to come in and paint because with her neck and upper back pain, this was simply not something that she was now able to do.
[235] She also claims for the cost of the 2003 and 2004 yard cleanup. Her testimony is that the yard cleanup was something that her husband and sons participated in, and that she assisted when a part of the cleanup was a two-person job. That claim will not be allowed in the circumstances. However, the steam cleaning, painting, and the laundry and ironing from 2003 and 2004 will be allowed.
[236] In terms of cost of future housekeeping, the evidence is that Mr. Kassian now makes the meals five out of seven days. Prior to the accident, meal preparation was done by Mrs. Kassian. Mrs. Kassian did not testify as to how long it takes him to prepare the meals, but if one assumes that it takes him about an hour a day to do that, and we take the figure from Mrs. Kennedy’s housekeeping support services record of $26.10 per hour, by my calculations, that comes to the sum of $6,786.00 per year. If one assumes that Mrs. Kassian is going to retire at age 62 (per the Popik projections) at which time she should have more opportunity to take back her meal preparation activities.
[237] Housekeeping work not done prior to trial is a pecuniary loss. It needs to be calculated by direct analogy of a pre-trial loss of earnings claim. This reflects the concept that the damage award is for the admittedly valuable housekeeping service that the Plaintiff provided prior to the accident but could not provide after the accident. Accordingly, the pre-trial loss of housekeeping work, that is to say, the cooking of the meals, should be calculated in the same manner as for the other housekeeping expenses:
• for 2003-2004, $6,786.00/year: the full cost of the approved damages; and
• for 2005 and onward, $5,278.00/year: seven-ninths of the full cost of the approved damages.
I. Meal preparation work that cannot be done in the future is also a form of pecuniary loss. Ms. Kennedy’s evidence is that Mrs. Kassian is capable of doing the housekeeping work but that it is simply difficult for her. However, in my view, it seems reasonable, with her neck and upper back pain problems, that Mr. Kassian take over the making of the meals. This is a task that she performed prior to the accident and that he has taken over out of necessity since the accident. Accordingly, in my view, she will probably not resume making meals after the trial, and this, too, is part of the pecuniary damage claim, even though it is replaced by Mr. Kassian. I accept Mr. Kassian’s evidence on this point. In light of my findings concerning Mrs. Kassian’s failure to mitigate, I will award Mrs. Kassian seven-ninths of the cost of Mr. Kassian’s meal preparation, that is, $5,278.00 per year until Mrs. Kassian is 62 years of age.
II. The parties are free to have these losses calculated and capitalized as they see fit under the circumstances of the experts available in this trial.
VII. Conclusion
III. On the basis of the preceding analysis, I make the following awards.
IV. For pain and suffering, I award the Plaintiff a total sum of $40,000.00.
V. On the alleged losses from her business activities, I reject the Plaintiff’s claim for damages that follow from her activities as an author. I conclude that Mrs. Kassian’s 2003-2005 income from public speaking was reduced by the injuries suffered in the Accident, and that she should be awarded the following amounts: 2003, $7,000.00; 2004, $7,000.00; and 2005, $5,444.44.
VI. The business class airfare, TENS machine, contract writer, housekeeper, and yard cleanup special damages claims are rejected. I allow the claim for an ongoing provision of ObusForme back rests and Advil prescriptions, as specified above. I also allow a one-time special damages awards for twin beds, at $3,044.00, and confirm the out-of-pocket damages sum of $10,592.21 agreed upon by the parties.
VII. On loss of housekeeping, Mrs. Kassian is awarded special damages for her inability to prepare meals as follows: for 2003, $6,786.00; for 2004, $6,786.00; and for 2005 until 2022, $5,278.00/year. I further award the Plaintiff the value of Mrs. Kassian’s loss of housekeeping capacity for steam cleaning, painting, laundry and ironing. These awards should be adjusted as follows: full cost of the lost capacity for 2003 and 2004, and seven-ninths of the full cost of the lost capacity for 2005 onward. I invite the Plaintiffs to submit a valuation of those housekeeping activities for the Court’s consideration and approval if the parties are unable to agree on the calculations.
VIII. The Plaintiff shall receive interest on the above amounts pursuant to the Judgment Interest Act (R.S.A. 2000, c. J-1), where applicable, and from the dates as indicated above.
IX. If the parties are unable to agree, they may speak to me about costs within 30 days of the date of these Reasons.
Heard on the 29th day of October, 2007.
Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 5th day of February, 2008.
______________________________
L. Darlene Acton
J.C.Q.B.A.
Appearances:
Robert L. Duke, Q.C.
And Michael Pucylo
(Miller Thomson LLP)
for the Plaintiffs
David R. Syme, Q.C.
(Cleall Barristers & Solicitors)
for the Defendant
Please tell me I have the coveted top spot? *fingers crossed*
Now to read the post.
@ Daisy:
You broke my streak!
Holy wow! Embarrassed for her…
What I found interesting about this was not the usual trying to make more of whiplash that Mary Kassian and her attorneys engaged in. My attention was directed to how she tried to prove that her career in churning out curricula for women had been interrupted, and the driver of the other car ought to compensate her for the books she hadn’t written. The Hon. Madam Justice L. Darlene Acton wasn’t buying Kassian’s argument on this, pointing out that Kassian’s publishing history was rather erratic and Kassian could not prove that she would have published more curricula had she not had the accident. (And, frankly, to be perfectly blunt, Kassian’s publishing history is NOT academic quality, but that goes to SBTS’ judgment in hiring her as a professor of some sort).
I’ll let others comment on Justice Acton’s withering comment about Kassian’s credibility. I’d be embarrassed to have that published in a court opinion.
Poor Mary! I'll betcha she can't even rinse the soap bubbles off the glasses! Shovel snow, yeah! Soap bubbles, no. Poor Brent deserves financial restitution for having to rinse the glasses while Mary shovels snow! Really?
Mary Kassian is beyond failing to be a credible witness in court. She is failing to be a credible witness for Jesus, and miserably so!
Stan wrote:
I’m sorry. Only a little bit. 🙂
I claim no expertise other than a 40 year associate to a bunch of forensic engineers who work in product liability. Back injuries appear to be the hardest type of injury to either prove or disprove. I have been told of a few of such cases where the plaintiff appeared in court sporting a neck brace and the defendants counsel later brought in video of the plaintiff engaging in sports.
In this case, if it were in the US and the jury was provided video of Ms Kassian in climbers regalia hanging on the side of a mountain, I’d guess she would have received zip. At least that was the outcome of the few cases I’m aware of where the supposed victim jumped the gun and “miraculously recovered” before the jury rendered its verdict.
I’ve posted a new update on the open discussion thread. Thank you.
http://thewartburgwatch.com/open-discussion-page/comment-page-10/#comment-266047
Jeannette Altes wrote:
That’s great news. I’m continuing to pray for you and your situation. We have a great group of folks here at The Wartburg Watch.
Nancy2 wrote:
Ya know Nancy, I think Mary (“Cashing-In”) Kassian could have tossed the dishes in some sort of net behind her white water raft and tossed in some biodegradable dish detergent and still met her Comp obligations without demanding that the opponent in the whiplash cash cough up the cash.
Velour wrote:
Thank you so much for the prayers. They help. 🙂
And yes, this group is truly wonderful and the Deebs are amazing – thank you so much for allowing me to continue posting updates!
Why couldn’t the *Cashing-In* (aka Kassian) Family asked their church family to cook for them since Mr. Cashing-In was “helpless” to cook for the family? Just let the church family know that the Cashing-In (Kassian Family) will needs meals for the next 8 YEARS and a sign-up will be going around weekly.
Oh yes, new parents get a couple of months of meals. But the Cashing-In Family will need 8 YEARS of meals for the Mrs.’ whiplash.
Nancy2 wrote:
From the post:
SBTS might re-think who is in charge of confirming the credibility of their teaching staff, when circumstances reveal concerns about faculty integrity. Has this strong neo-Cal/’complementarianism’ focus at SBTS tainted the very nest out of which some young pastors emerged? Perhaps it is time for the seminary’s honorable ethical and moral faculty members to put light on whether or not certain faculty within the seminal nest itself may have contributed to the less-than honorable stealth practices of the young it is sending out into the Church.
Integrity takes vigilance and will sometimes require honorable people to stand and act for right to be done.
“during times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes revolutionary”
(George Orwell)
The judge was very generous, in my opinion. I would have said, “Seriously? Suck it up, Buttercup. If you can’t stand to peel potatoes, sit down. Drag a stool over to the stove to perch on if you can’t stand long enough to make the gravy. Stand a while, sit a while. Repeat. Now get back in your own kitchen and stir your own pots instead of stirring the pots in my courtroom.” Yup. That’s what Judge Tree would have said.
Well, her credibility was shot by proclaiming herself an expert in Women’s Studies; the rest is the icing on the cake.
As for those injuries, tell me about it. I have or have had all of those problems due to accidents, and cannot believe her gall in this lawsuit. So many people have car or other accidents, develop these and/or similar issues… and they don’t go to court over them. Yes, pain is miserable, and chronic pain is horrendous, but most of the population over X age is dealing with one or more forms of chronic pain.
Welcome to the real world, lady.
@ Tree:
That’s common sense advice that was more than likely given to her by the PTs she worked with. It’s also an easy modification to make. No special equipment required, just a bit of ingenuity.
The mind boggles.
You know, for some reason, I have issues with Christian leaders who sue.
When I was sued by my pastor, many, many people told me I should counter sue. I probably could have. It was a frivolous lawsuit and the judge dismissed it. The lawsuit stole 4 months of my life and consumed my thoughts every waking hour. However, this eye-for-an-eye mentality does not compute with the teachings of Jesus. There’s a song we used to sing: “they will know we are Christians by our love.”
She did not show the love of Christ by suing.
I remember my husband telling me about a woman at his company in New Jersey who was fast-tracked up the corporate level, and caused a great deal of misery and harm to those she had stepped on as she rose to power. Well, turned out that among those she injured, was someone who had her credentials investigated.
The investigation revealed that the woman in question who claimed to have studied ‘pre-med’ at a university, had instead taken a year’s course at a beauty school in a small town, and had not even completed it.
The company finally got rid of the lady, who with her boyfriend (a married comptroller with five children) were both fired on the same day.
Now Christian seminaries are NOT ‘corporate’ entities apart from the Body of Christ, no. So if the shenanigans of falsely claiming credibility by any members of a seminary’s faculty raise eyebrows and cause scandal to the Body of Christ, some response (at least to investigate) seems reasonable.
Christiane wrote:
My ex-pastor got his Ph.D. at some (online?) Bible College. Does anyone know about this place? Its ranking?
Bible Seminary in Independence, Missouri.
I guess Mary “Cashing-In” Kassian wanted her meals “Comp[ed]”. I couldn’t resist…
Here is some more advice for Mary:
“Instead of asking, ‘Why didn’t God protect me?’ (from the accident and pain), ask ‘What did God protect me from?’ ”
Mary, dear, “you should ‘count it all joy’, according to James, that you have encountered pain. There is great joy in pain when you know the purpose. God has a plan!”
Mary should find these words immensely comforting. They are quotes from a Bible study titled In My Father’s House, according to an online fan I discovered. Since the study was written by Mary Kassian, it should be very familiar to her. Unless she is having memory problems and doesn’t recall. Or some hired assistant penned them for her. In either case, Rejoice, Mary! God has a plan for your suffering!
And I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that God’s plan wasn’t for her to make bank on it.
This kind of pettiness really bothers me, it bothers me even more, when I do it, like get angry or want “justice” over some small “slight”. This article helped reveal some pettiness in my own heart I have been carrying around a bit. One of the hardest sections of scripture is 1 cor 13 where it tells me love keeps no account of wrongs suffered. Which does not mean be a doormat for Jesus but it also doest mean one because a perpetually wronged person. I dont know how to word it better.
I think of the folks I have worked with so many decades now, what started out to be a summer job has consumed my entire life. I have shared this before maybe again. I have had one “mystical” experience in my entire religious life it was extremely profound it was on the “ward” of a convalescent hospital in 1982 and a deep quiet overwhelming more than audible interior locution and it was just two words it said. “Help them”. Did not qualify who to help, where, how or any other specifics. I can say I have not deviated from what I use to see as my calling, though much of that has been slaughtered at the altar of the evangelical corporation. When I first shared my “experience” with my faith family I was reminded that that is way to catholic, self-deceived, charismatic (satanic)/ (demons), self, emotional, ….. that list goes on for several pages. But like a bull terrier I held on to that “experience” and it has been faithful to me deep down. I always have this sense of deep spiritual satisfaction when I just help, it is so awe inspiring. I mean I dutifully rip myself to shreds afterward when the rhetorical tape starts to play but that tape is getting so much shorter these days. I think that is a victory for me and through God.
There is something to be said about taking the high road and the quiet road. The peace of the Lord be with all of you.
so, let’s break a few things down:
-headship: blow away the flowery language, what’s left is that her husband is responsible for her
-she lied and deceived in her testimony
-she tried to trick the court in order to get money
-she lied and deceived the people who pay her for her books
-she tried to trick her audience so they would pay her more money (books, which lead to speaking gigs, and the conference circuit)
-Brent is the responsible party as her ‘head’. By their own beliefs, Brent is guilty of the sin of failing in his role of headship. He is responsible for the consequences of her actions. As the responsible party, he is also guilty of lying and deceiving for money.
-If Mary says, “No, these were my decisions”, then she is not only guilty of the sin of lying and deceiving to make money (fraud?), but also of operating outside the headship of her husband.
Either way, their complementarian beliefs logically compound the number of sins they have committed.
They have profited from complementarianism. Now that they have been caught and ensnared by it, it seems logical to me that there should now be some liabilities.
i don’t think they thought things through very carefully (going all the way back to the signing of the Danvers’ Statement)
@ Tree:
Now you've got me going… Don't Waste Your Suffering (from a car accident).
Clearly, Mary Kassian didn't waste this opportunity to sue…
Maybe she included the meal preparation issue in the court case so that a man could tell her husband he should cook – she certainly, as a good complimentarian wife, could never do so …..
elastigirl wrote:
I was thinking the same thing!
I was surprised to learn about this court matter that indicates serious dishonesty on Mary’s part. I probably shouldn’t have been. I wonder how many others besides me have been dishonestly reviewed by her. I expected negative reviews of Black and White Bible, Black and Blue Wife, primarily because I put forth mutuality in marriage. But Mary, more than others came across to me as dishonest. For example she says:
The fact that Ruth egregiously covered up the sexual abuse of a minor, as well as the fact that abuse tends to escalate when it is covered up, are topics that likely warrant some discussion.
Maybe I’m being picky here, but I did not cover up my husband’s sexual abuse of Deana. I say very clearly that I did not go to authorities and report him (for which I will always feel terrible guilt), but I took no action did to cover-up.
The words she uses are dishonest: the definition of egregious: “extraordinary in some bad way; glaring; flagrant, outrageous, notorious, shocking;” the definition of cover-up: “concerted effort to keep an illegal or unethical act or situation from being made public.”
She goes on:
Furthermore, those who question the validity of her conclusion put themselves in the precarious position of being accused of questioning the validity of her experience, of being unsympathetic, of victim-blaming/shaming, or of condoning abuse.
Well didn’t she just do some victim-blaming/shaming herself by accusing me of egregiously covering up?
At the end of her review she says:
In her book, Ruth throws down the gauntlet and asks the question, “Can we come together as a Christian community and recognize that the doctrine of male headship has sometimes been used as a cover to perpetrate violence against women?” Hmm. The wording is somewhat leading. It implies that the doctrine of male headship is the primary “cover.”. . .
Excuse me. Did I say “primary cover?” No. She quotes me as saying: “Male headship has sometimes been used as a cover.” She’s being dishonest to say “primary,” although in this case, unlike the instance mentioned above, her dishonesty is easily detected. So here she didn’t even attempt to egregiously cover-up her dishonesty.
What an imaginative person Mary Kassian is!
I’m going to borrow a page from her playbook and hire a contract writer to help me compose comments here at The Wartburg Watch. Then I’m going to claim I’m an award winning comment author. Since people from various countries read the blog, I’m going to add that my comments have “international influence” to my CV.
Additionally, having read the entire court document included here, I’m going to claim I studied law.
That should be enough to land me a job at SBTS, right?
Plus, I watched a few of Mary’s videos on YouTube and I can understand why she filed this law suit in hopes of material gain. She’s incredibly BORING. I had to force myself to listen to her for more than five minutes at a time. The only thing noteworthy about her is her sense of self-importance and her fondness for jewelry and fashion.
Also, you’d think her degree educational degree in occupational therapy would have informed the care she prescribed for herself, but according to the lawsuit, she botched that up!
Poor Mary. Just another dime-a-dozen phoney Christian with an ineffectual gospel and a fabricated faith.
@ Daisy:
Ha! All you night owls..
Can I just say that I hate this title: Finding Your Heart’s True Home.
Bleck.
These people have no shame.
She is offered a seminary professorship for which she apparently has zero formal or other qualification (probably as a “thank you” for helping keep other women in line as co-author of the “Danvers statement”), and she accepts instead of declining the offer, fully knowing she doesn’t have the required qualifications.
OTOH, the fact that the seminary offers her this position speaks volumes about their regard for womens’ studies: “We know it’s a joke, but we have to offer it to keep the preacher boys’ girlfriends occupied. So Mary might just as well have a teaching position. She’ll come in useful next time we need a token woman to sign something.”
And trying to make as much money as possible out of what looks like a run-of-the-mill car collision and even having the other party pay for having her husband prepare her meals – that’s beyond the pale. Do all comp men charge money for the household work they have to do, for instance when their wife is bedridden with a cold? Who do they charge it to?
Since she seems to be a lot better since at least 2012 – snow shovelling is hard work -, wouldn’t it be honest to at least give back the money her husband gets for food preparation – $5,278.00 per year multiplied by 9 years from 2012-2020 inclusive, that makes $47,502.00 of ill-gotten gain for the whole period. Ill-gotten not because illegal, but definitely at least unfair.
Ruth Tucker wrote:
A picture definitely emerges of a dishonest person when reading the judges decision, and it doesn’t surprise me that her review of your book struck you as dishonest.
A review of Mary Kassian’s works are in order, and I’d say it deserves 0% fresh on rottentomatoes.com!
Mary Kassian is what the Russians would call a “useful fool and silly enthusiast” to the CBMW/Neo-Cal crowd. Her stretching of the truth regarding her education and outright dishonesty regarding the accident do not surprise me in the least, sad to say.
Even shoveling just a few inches of snow off the driveway is physically rigorous work that should be beyond the ability of someone who can’t fix meals.
That photo of Kassian by the climbing wall is so staged that it made me puke. It’s perfectly lit, she looks like she’s just had a makeover, her skin is clean and smooth, her nails are manicured, her jacket is spotless, even the rope (which isn’t long enough for anything serious) looks brand new. This isn’t someone who goes up and down mountains! No surprise that she admitted her exploits were fabricated.
Welcome to North American Christianity, a huge industry built on celebrities who lie to enrich themselves at the expense of the little people. I bet Amos or Jesus would have a lot to say about this.
But above all, the thing that grieves me most is the shame it brings onto our faith. What impression did the judge get of Christians from this case?
Tree wrote:
She ought to be used to that. After all, that’s pretty much the advice that Mary Kasshing-In gave to Ruth Tucker.
Let’s see… The final version of the Danvers Statement was hammered out in a clandestine meeting in late 1987. Since Mary Kassian was born in 1960 (as best as I can determine), she was a young 27 year old (married with 2 kids – ages 1 and 3) at the time. How did she get into the inner circle with so little life experience?
The Calvinista crowd must have thought this occupational therapist had a really special gift (which I still can’t figure out).
Paula Rice wrote:
That was sort of a weird note. I wonder what she did that the judge thought messed her up more.
NJ wrote:
OK – I’m gonna say it…
Shoveling snow belongs on Grudem’s list of 83 things a man is qualified to do. 😉
Definitely NOT wimmens work! Especially a fragile female like Mary Kassian.
Gus wrote:
I found it amazing to learn she has no formal degree in anything she is teaching.
Are the standards at this seminary usually so laxed, or do they just not care about ‘women’s studies’ at all. And Women’s Studies so like a liberal arts degree that a lot of people make fun of, so it’s strange to find out this is something taught at seminary.
One of the major problems with celebrity Christianity seems to be that it can all be lived in tweets, books, and speaking engagements. You don’t know what the real lives of these people are, or if they even do anything they talk about.
It doesn’t make any of these things necessarily bad, but I think a pastor you know and can see walk through love should be valued above the celebrity. Unfortunately, a lot of those pastor’s ideas come from the celebrities 🙁
@ Bill M:
I’m surprised Kassian was claiming all these injuries on being hit from behind while in a car.
About 20 – 23 years ago, my mother was driving me somewhere.
A lady hit us from behind. My head snapped forward and backwards and slammed into the car seat. My neck was terribly sore and stiff over the next 4 or 5 days. And that was it. I recovered.
I didn’t need a huge settlement, to be spoon fed by a butler, or wheeled around in a wheelchair. I was able to make sandwiches for myself.
Ian wrote:
I’m not surprised a photo shoot for a cover was staged. What was surprising was that she went on and on about rafting and climbing on the website apparently but lied about it either their or in court.
You know, I’ve long wondered why she always does that coquettish head-tilt thing in her videos. Now I know.
@ Daisy:
Yay!!!!
Deb wrote:
She was a token. So they could say they had girls on the panel. That’s all it was.
@ Stan:
🙂 Keeps you humble!
Mercy’s Mama wrote:
I was not happy at the way she treated Ruth Tucker. It was time for people to see the Mary Kassian behind the scenes.
I’ll just refer people back to this post I made on the last thread on complementarianism, if anyone wants to read it:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2016/07/02/reformed-complementarianism-and-abuse-aimee-byrd-and-wendy-alsup-get-it-mary-kassian-does-not/comment-page-3/#comment-265804
It strikes me how fake complementarianism is.
Complementarians market complementarianism the way companies market and advertise toothpaste, the way Kassian was trying to project herself as a mountain climber or spelunker or whatever, to sell a book.
I also noted in that post from the last thread how complementarians have two different marketing schemes going on, which makes it all the more phony:
Complementarians sell a “Girl Power” form of complementarianism in some of their blog posts, to appeal to feminists or the naive.
However, to appeal to their base (the already- converted who aren’t really on board with equality for girls and women), they publish posts contradicting the claims they make about complementarianism in the “Girl Power” type posts.
mirele wrote:
This a great comment. In fact, there was so much I didn't know how to begin to cover it. Deb is going to look at more on Friday.
I am stunned by what this post reveals about M. Kassian’s educational credentials. This does not sound like the background of a “distinguished professor” at a seminary. Could it be that the comp guys at SBTS have a lower view of women as theologians because some of those closest to them are actually underqualified? Or have they hired and elevated someone underqualified because they would be intimidated by a woman with stellar academic achievements?
Nancy2 wrote:
You made me laugh this morning. I needed this.
@ Bill M:
Good comment.
dee wrote:
She came off as a very mean person.
Sergius Martin-George wrote:
Great comment SMG!
Deb wrote:
Shoveling snow requires some healthy muscles, well-exercised, and a good cardio system. I kind of got it that the neo-Cal crowd worships Piper who wouldn’t approve of the kind of strength needed by a woman to shovel the white stuff. Well, Mary is Canadian and ‘winter makes strong’ as the Finnish people say, so I’d say, she’s probably up on her shoveling techniques since childhood. I’m curious as to what muscles she used to shovel snow that she could not employ pushing buttons on a food processor or stirring a fry-up.
Some part of male patriarchy done neo-Cal style seems to exaggerate ‘maleness’ at the expense of women’s natural strength . . .
someone could have a little fun today telling Piper and his adoring followers that the strongest muscle found in the human species is a uterus during labor.
caroline wrote:
Ding.Ding.Ding.
Which seminary tossed out the language professor?
@ Daisy:
It's a marketing ploy called Bait and Switch.
Fact: SBTS lists Mary Kassian, along with others, as “Distinguished Faculty”
http://www.sbts.edu/academics/faculty/
Fact: SBTS faculty handbook does not define “Distinguished Faculty”
http://inside.sbts.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/faculty-manual-2012-2013.pdf
Fact: SBTS use of the title “Distinguished Professor” is inconsistent with standard definitions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_ranks_in_the_United_States#Professorship
Observation: SBTS is being disingenuous in applying the title “Distinguished Professor” for someone who lacks the academic background and credentials for a tenure track.
Note: I couldn’t find any evidence as to what program, degree, school, etc. that Mary Kassian actually teaches in. If she teaches in the School of Theology, they have a problem since according to the SBTS faculty handbook, any member of the School of Theology faculty must meet the requirements to be a church pastor:
“Due to the School of Theology faculty’s unique role in
the training of pastors and preachers for all of the
various schools of the seminary, each member of the
School of Theology faculty will be qualified to serve as
pastor of a local Southern Baptist congregation,
regardless of academic specialty or ordination status.
This means that each member of the School of Theology faculty must
meet all of the biblical qualifications for the office of pastor.”
Conclusion: Representing Mary Kassian as a “Distinguished Professor” seriously calls into question the academic integrity of both the institution and the individual.
Lea wrote:
Title inflation is not limited to seminaries. My wife works at the local two year college. There are instructors running around asking to be referred to as “Professor”.
@ Sergius Martin-George:
Whiplash with $$$$ coming in head tilt?
@ FW Rez:
*Distinguished* professor, please!
@ Lea:
Yep! That is why this post was written. You don’t get away with abusing the abused on this blog!
Tree wrote:
This is one more instance where complementarianism assumes that everyone is married and has a spouse to depend upon.
If Kassian were single, she’d not have a husband to peel potatoes for her.
She’d have to figure out some other way to get her potatoes peeled or do without, if she could not do it herself and had no spouse.
Hello, complementarians? Over half the U.S. population is SINGLE now, not married.
“For the first time, there are more single American adults than married ones, and here’s where they live” (2014)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/09/15/for-the-first-time-there-are-more-single-american-adults-than-married-ones-and-heres-where-they-live/
@ Velour:
ROFL.
Julie Anne Smith wrote:
Amen
Jeff S wrote:
It is cult of personality and we find it on many scales but it is especially egregious in Christendom. People really believe they ‘know’ the stage persona person. It is most unhealthy.
Christiane wrote:
Sound like something that Kassian would have liked to study.
Lea wrote:
It might have been some alternative stuff. That usually hurts in such law suits.
FW Rez wrote:
As far as I can tell, in practice all this means is ‘not a girl’. There are a fair number of degree lacking individuals pastoring churches. So what actually are the qual’s for this job, I wonder?
Christiane wrote:
Not to get too, too off topic here, but a lot of companies do that on purpose – they will promote the aggressive, incompetent mean people, because promoting them and getting them out of a department is easier than firing them.
I was bullied a lot at one job I had years ago, and I became somewhat of an expert on the topic of bullies in the workplace. (I was trying to figure out what to do about the mean boss I had and read lots and lots of books about the subject.)
Deb wrote:
My guess is she knew somebody or perhaps had family ties.
@ Tree:
It seems to me that Mary Kassian has first world problems – claiming she can’t look down while reading, cannot make herself a sandwich – but she dismissed Ruth Tucker’s personal experience of having been abused by a husband who believe in complementarian male headship.
I guess if the worst thing you’ve ever endured in your life is getting a big, cash settlement from a judge and having someone pay your husband to pay to make spaghetti for you, I guess you won’t have empathy, or be able to relate to, a woman whose husband is beating her daily and telling her it is his right because he’s the male head in the marriage.
caroline wrote:
It’s hard to control the little woman if she intimidates you.
Mary is looking not only to be “not a particularly credible witness”, but she also looks to be not nearly as distinguished and intelligent as she/they claim.
It is also looking like the comp men aren’t after intelligent women at all. It looks like they want little puppets. And they want their hands in control of those marionette strings.
Deb, I can remember when patriocentrists (Vision Forum, etc.) taught that chores should be assigned along gender lines. Washing dishes, changing diapers, laundry…that’s for the daughters. Anything to do with vehicle maintenance, mowing the lawn, fixing the toilet, etc. should be given to the sons. It was like some tasks are inherently masculine, and vice versa.
FW Rez wrote:
When I taught in college, I always told my students on the first day that if anyone called me ‘Professor’ I’d dock ’em one full letter grade. 🙂
I am semi-handicapped and have been in a wheelchair for 4 yrs now and counting, plus part time before that for several yrs. Yet, I still manage to do part of the cooking. My husband and I share. I get it started, and if I can’t finish it, he takes over. I do this being in a wheelchair. You can stir a lot of things on the stove, fry stuff, put things in the oven and use a crockpot and microwave, etc. from being in my position. Plus we share laundry duties. I can manage to stand up for a minute or so to set the dials on the washer and dryer. Mary sounds so totally helpless. What a fake. Suck it up sweetheart. Wheel a few miles in my wheels, live a few days in a body wracked with pain from Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, and see how you manage. I have no time for people like this. It makes me sick. Considering how many people out in the world that are truly disabled, goes beyond what she ever feels.
Lydia wrote:
Would be good to find out more about how she got into that Danvers ‘in group’. There’s a story there, I’m thinking.
At the end of her review of my book, Mary writes: “I’ll fly anywhere in North America at my own expense to meet you. We’ll hash out a Ruth and Mary personal statement. I suspect we’ll really like each other . . . we’ll sip frothy cups of cappuccino. . . .” What if I had offered her the invite and Mary had spilled some frothy cups of cappuccino on her lap? Or, God forbid, I spilled it on her lap? Would there be another law suit filed?
In the summer 1996, I was innocently driving along a street in Grand Rapids, when a woman suddenly backed out of a driveway and smashed my car so badly I couldn’t get out the driver-side door. She was very apologetic; police arrived, assessed the situation, and gave her a ticket. I said I was fine, got back in my car through the passenger side, drove very slowly 2 miles amid clanking to my shop, opened the shop, called my insurance agent, and went on my way. The next day I could hardly get out of bed I was so stiff and sore, especially my neck, so I called back to have the police report changed telling them I thought I had a serious whiplash and I wanted it in the record. For at least two weeks I was so sore and stiff that I was unable to do any repelling down walls, not even snow shoveling, no big meal preparation, and no ironing. Would you believe the pains subsided and life went on with no further contact with the police or the lady who smashed into me—-and surely no law suit? Insurance took care of the vehicle which turned out to be totaled. So amid my hectic schedule I had to go out and buy another vehicle, which was the worst part of the ordeal.
Mary says “I suspect we’ll really like each other.” You be the judge.
Ruth Tucker wrote:
I see you’re saying she mis-quoted you, and I get that.
As for me, I’m happy to say that in my view, complementarian male headship is often used as a cover for abuse, or is a primary cover. I’ve seen a lot of stories by Christian ladies online who say their abusive spouse used complementarian male headship as an excuse or justification to abuse them in the first place.
I read a book by a Christian woman counselor who said in her 15, 20 or more years of seeing patients, only the abusive, self professing Christian husbands would cite “wives submit!!” type Bible passages at her during counseling sessions to rationalize or excuse their abusive or controlling behaviors towards their wives.
That doctor said in normal marriage, with non-abusive male spouses, she never had a non-abusive Christian husband try to “one up” his wife and get his way, or excuse his poor behavior, by quoting “Wife submit” stuff at her or the wife.
I think Kassian should read this page:
Control: The Reason The Gospel Coalition and CBMW Cannot Actually Condemn Spousal Abuse
http://fiddlrts.blogspot.com/2016/01/control-reason-gospel-coalition-and.html
It just proves, once again, that if you’re living under a legalistic, rules based Christianity (comp in a nutshell), you absolutely CANNOT live an authentic life. You have to lie all the time. You have to be a hypocrite. It’s total bondage. I’m almost tempted to rewrite Mary’s review of Ruth’s book, except make it about Mary’s car accident. Sounds like a project 🙂
caroline wrote:
Seminary wives do not need a qualified professor to be indoctrinated. The only thing necessary to be a pastor’s wife in YRR-land is to know the talking points and be able to report back to HQ if a woman in the church is sinning through questioning, as Driscoll put it.
roebuck wrote:
What did you want to be called?
Christiane wrote:
Inquiring minds want to know!
Paula Rice wrote:
I was at her blog yesterday, and she has several posts about fashion, where she gives women advice on how to dress.
“DOS AND DON’TS FOR YOUR NEXT WARDROBE CRISIS”
http://girlsgonewise.com/dos-and-donts-for-your-next-wardrobe-crisis/
She oddly manages (in that blog post) to link a messy closet to how or what a person believes about God, with several Bible verses quoted to try to make her point. It’s one of my minor pet peeves when Christians over-spiritualize stuff like that.
Gram3 wrote:
I missed that one! Heavens.
Daisy wrote:
I would think a normal husband would know that ‘submit wife’ was likely to get a very poor response.
@ Lea:
I went to bed shortly after making those posts, so don’t feel too jealous. 🙂 I used to stay up ’til the wee hours of the morning, but I’ve been trying to go to bed earlier.
Lea wrote:
That would be Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. Paige Patterson fired Sheri Klouda, in short order after the became seminary president.
Wade Burleson wrote several posts on this heinous action by Patterson.
Daisy wrote:
From the article: “until God takes me home and clothes me with the imperishable, I need to pay attention to what I wear. I need to make the effort to put on some make-up and dress in something better than sweats every day.”
I did not realize god hated sweatpants and expected me to wear makeup! The things I am learning…
Deb wrote:
Ah, thanks.
@ Burwell:
Burwell, I don’t know if you’re still on this thread or not, but I left you a post on the last thread with a book suggestion I thought you might find helpful:
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2016/07/04/mark-driscoll-says-god-provided-our-church-family-a-home/#comment-266038
I have a couple of thoughts..
1.
NJ wrote:
I agree. I’ve had to shovel snow off my drive way a few times the last few years. My back and legs were terribly sore afterwards (for hours), and it was physically draining.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
Excellent point.
I have a couple of thoughts..
1. In terms of Ms. Kassian, it looks like we have another Mark Driscoll on our hands with respect to personality/behavior. As any one checked her books for plagiarism?
2. With respect to SBTS, there is some major credibility issues here. At my large state university, the following is the definition of: Distinguished University Professors
The Distinguished University Professor title is awarded permanently to no more than three exceptional faculty per year. The title recognizes accomplishments in research, scholarly or creative work, teaching, and service that are both distinguished and distinctive. The Office of Academic Affairs awards honored faculty a $30,000 one-time cash award to support their academic work. Honorees are expected to continue a regular program of teaching, research, scholarly or creative work, and service.
I might add, that if any of my colleagues at other world class institutions get such a title, it is a big deal… and they earned it in their academic specialty. Further, it would then mean something to me in my professional respect of that individual. Does this individual meet any of these criteria? What does this say of SBTS. I, for one, have lost most of my respect for SBTS
Here is the latest with Community Evangelical Free in Elverson, Pennsylvania:
1. David Powlison of CCEF does a fundraiser…should people give to CCEF in light of how they treated an alleged domestic abuse and rape victim?
2. Overview of the congregation meeting on June 13, 2016
3. Brock Estes who Steve said was the most “repentance man he has seen in 30 years of ministry” proudly displays his gun collection on Facebook
https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2016/07/07/community-evangelical-free-church-update-should-christians-respond-to-david-powlisons-fundraising-campaign-in-light-of-how-ccef-treated-an-alleged-domestic-abuse-victim-plus-a-congregation-meeting/
Daisy wrote:
Sounds like Carolyn Mahaney’s spotless kitchen countertops. Mary Kassian and Carolyn Mahaney operate in the same circles…
http://resources.thegospelcoalition.org/events/2012
And they have also contributed to the same books.
https://www.scribd.com/book/259171409/Becoming-God-s-True-Woman
https://www.crossway.org/books/biblical-womanhood-in-the-home-tpb/
Birds of a feather…
Guys if I could ask…there is a Go Fund Me for the domestic abuse victim in the Community Evangelical Free story. Can you guys help make the goal and make a statement against CCEF and David Powlison?
We’re trying to raise money for a domestic abuse causes in Elverson, Morgantown area of Pennsylvania. We’re trying to go for $5,000 it would be neat if we could aim at $10K and divert money away from CCEF. Let’s support a worthy cause.
Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:
Typically one also has to meet the requirements of a “Full” Professor to be considered “Distinguished”. Hard to do when you live in a different country.
Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:
I am assuming that this was intentional and not accidentally posted before finishing your train of thought… 😉
Deb wrote:
No, my stupid computer decided to “post” it!!
@ Jeffrey Chalmers:
OK, give it another shot. 🙂
okrapod wrote:
I wanted to be called by my first name, or Mr. last name if people wanted to be more formal.
dee wrote:
Thank you, thank you *taking a bow* 🙂
Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:
Ha, great typo, I was thinking, I have a couple of perfectly good justifications for Kassian..
1.
Paula Rice wrote:
Laughing out loud! You are on fire!
Sarah K wrote:
Go for it. Post it here. (Send it to Nate Sparks on twitter or to his blog. He’s a good man and reviewed Ruth Tucker’s book.)
Christiane wrote:
Complementarians also often expect and ask women to downplay their talents and natural mental and physical strengths.
Or, they just assume women are dumber or weaker than men – or maybe it’s some combination of both.
I’ve read that word “ezer,” used by God to describe women in Genesis, means “suitable helper,” and that word used to describe the woman is also used to describe God Himself in other portions of the Bible, even in the parts where it says God defended or fought on behalf of Israel.
I take it that one of God’s original intents for male-female relations (not just for marriage, but for friendship) is that the man was supposed to be Bat Man, say, and the women was supposed to be Wonder Woman.
Men and women were to fight together and help each other (true complementarity).
However, complementarians insist that man is Bat Man but woman is either Sweet Polly Purebread, Snow White, or some other passive, helpless victim in perpetual need of rescuing – or else, in some cases, comps insist women should play Robin to Bat Man (be the side kick, but never the star).
God intended women to be a Wonder Woman figure, to help men out in life, to make the load easier to bear.
But complementarians expect men to do all the heavy lifting and fighting alone, which I would imagine gets stressful and weary.
Julie Anne Smith wrote:
My father was largely bankrupted by a lawsuit late in his life. While starting from a small grievance the plaintiff expanded his “opportunity” and used the legal system to extort money out of a good man.
On the other hand there was one case thirty years ago that has stayed with me. A woman was killed because of a defective product leaving behind her husband and some small children while the institution behind it showed much dishonesty. As is often the case, part way into the trial the man was offered a settlement, well below his claim and well below his need. He took the offer anyway telling his counsel, “I don’t want the money, I just want them to know they killed my wife”.
There are times a lawsuit is justified but often they seem to be occasions for opportunists, Kassian’s case appears to this man in the benches as the opportunist variety.
One of the things that bothers me the most about Mary Kassions review that most victims/survivors made bad decisions and did stupid things they now regret. It is one reason it is so scary to speak up: shame. They know their lives will be put under a magnifying glass. They went along with things and even believed things that seem ridiculous in hindsight.
Mary Kassian takes the opportunity to stick the knife in when a survivor tells her story and links it to faulty teaching on authority/submission.
I am a bit surprised she even reviewed the book. It comes off as an opportunity to keep her name out there as a player in comp industrial complex that is not so industrial these days.
If you want your name out there to be admired as distinguished and such, be prepared.
Deb wrote:
Absolutely. Complementarians will churn out the occasional blog post saying how they support women’s equality and say it’s Ok for them to work outside the home-
But on the same site, you can usually find numerous other blog posts (aimed at their true fan base) saying how awful it is that some women work outside the home (rather than marry, have kids, and stay at home baking muffins all day).
They really do change their message depending upon whom it is they feel is reading / listening.
Someone at CBE wrote something along these lines (they promise women equality but then, once the women are in the club, start springing all the rules on them, like women cannot preach or lead men etc):
The Bait & Switch of Complementarians
http://www.cbeinternational.org/blogs/bait-switch-complementarians
caroline wrote:
I’ll go with Door Number 2, Monty! 😉
I only skimmed, but the not being able to cook but being able to do other things makes sense to me. I’ve had on-going back, neck and shoulder issues for ten years. After years of PT, messages, chiro, etc. there are things that I still cannot do comfortably no matter what – chop things, iron, sort papers, etc. I can wash dishes for a time and then have to stop. Anything that involves looking down and utilizing my hands/arms causes problems. I have no problem working at my computer for hours and can do most normal housework. But the other stuff I have to avoid and my husband does most of it.
She couldn’t possibly have a legitimate post grad degree in anything and teach it at Southern. To get that degree she would have had to be a Grad Assistant and teach “men” at some point on her educational journey. This would automatically disqualify her at Southern. Unless of course she went to women only Submission Univ. staffed by women only. But where did these women get their education? I am just confused on how SBTS vets their lady “profs”.
@ Doc:
That is an excellent question. The lawsuit described them as short term courses. Not even sure credits were awarded. Does SACS approve?
We are talking about an academic institution that was going to award credits to the unaccredited sgm pastors college students.
Lydia wrote:
Yes. Everyone has made stupid and foolish decisions, but that does not diminish the abuse or shift the responsibility for the abuse. Once the victim is inside the abusive relationship, they often become disoriented in a multitude of ways. That is one reason abusers get away with it for so long.
As for why D.P. Kassian reviewed Ruth’s book, I think she made that plain when she said she could comment on whether “the doctrine of male headship” is responsible for Ruth’s abuse “because she is a woman.” The Female Subordinationists need for victims of their System to be silenced, but they are clever enough to know that the silencing/dismissal needs to come from a female. That is D.P. Kassian’s role and Courtney Reissing’s role and GraceAnna Peacock’s role and Jodi Ware’s role and all the other females who are part of the Female Subordinationist elite.
@ dee:
I’ve just been up at weird hours lately working on an intense professional license application. But do you think being in a Redemption™ Group would help me be more humble?
For a real comment, all I can say is that Kassian seems remarkably pugnacious for a submissive Biblical™ woman.
Sarah K wrote:
I think you hit the nail on the head right there.
I believe that ideology has the power to make liars of us all.
A person invested in ideology will come to a fork in the road where the beliefs don’t line up with reality. At that point they must choose whether to act “as if” the beliefs they are espousing are true OR live a genuine life. Some of us grapple with cognitive dissonance for awhile before we come to our senses. Many choose to live “as if.” They keep pushing the party line even though it doesn’t actually work in their own experience. This causes a person to develop two selves: the display self and the real self. I think it is very common in the Christian world. And yet God calls us to live without guile.
If God is really God, he does not fear our authenticity. He does not need to depend on our guile to advance his kingdom. If God is real, we too are free to be real.
I think it will be painful for Mary Kassian to see these things about herself revealed in print. I can only imagine how deeply it will hurt. I hope, though, that it will cause her to examine herself in light of authenticity and compassion. I hope it will be a turning point to better things.
@ Bill M:
I have seen both, too. The lawyers win. But I can tell you up against these charlatans who use and ruin people in the Name of God about the only way to get facts is through discovery. I say get the meanest junkyard dog lawyer you can find.
They have no shame or they would not be doing what they do. And the matters are not “trivial”. And they hide behind the laws that benefit churches.
Most mega churches have several lawsuits going at a time. Most never go anywhere near a court. Most of them have legal counsel on retainer. It is almost impossible to sue a church and win.
The key is to focus on an individual. What they want to avoid is discovery and negative media. Their brand is their income.
siteseer wrote:
May I quote you on Twitter?
Lydia wrote:
Pretty much everyone who was not born as a wise, experienced adult has done so! Sometimes we luck out and our stupid decisions work out ok in the end but other times we are not so fortunate. Honesty calls us to be compassionate!
@ ishy:
Certainly, I’m glad I said something of use! 🙂
Lydia wrote:
Yes. I remember vividly feeling like I didn’t have the “right” to say anything because of things I did that were wrong. I *still* struggle with that and wish I could have been more “above reproach”.
Like many evangelical voices, Kassian’s ignorance of this stuff is understandable. Her insistence on speaking with assumed authority despite that ignorance is not.
Ruth Tucker wrote:
LOL. Between her treatment of you, from what I’ve seen of her lawsuit, and what I’ve seen on her blog, I think she and I might mix more like oil and water. 🙂
Sarah K wrote:
You mean the sort of thing Ellie does here:
Oh no her site is gone!
There used to be a site called “Translations by Ellie” where she would take Christian writing and translate it to say what the author was really getting at, sort of like you proposing to re-write Kassian’s review of Ms. Tucker’s book.
I was going to give you the link, but it looks like that site is gone now. 🙁
Here’s an archived version of her About page:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160308040524/http://translationsbyellie.com/
Such a shame her site is gone. I see there is a “Translations by Ellie” Facebook group, but I’m not sure if that’s the same lady or not.
siteseer wrote:
I decorated it. https://twitter.com/ishylynn3/status/751097230883446784
Daisy wrote:
Wow. For men who abuse their wives, the patriarchy neo-Cal version of ‘complementarianism’ is actually ‘an occasion of sin’.
‘An occasion of sin’ in my Church is ANYTHING that leads a person into sin or encourages sin OR provides an opportunity for sin to occur. And if someone is repentant and seeks God’s forgiveness for his/her weakness, there is the expectation that they WILL AVOID these ‘near occasions of sin’.
Looks like for guys with certain emotional problems, practicing ‘complementarianism’ is a temptation to commit sin.
Like for others who have paedophile tendencies, being around young children is a temptation to sin.
Certain ways of living just are not for everyone.
@ Sallie Borrink:
I hear you.
brian wrote:
Are, you saying that you believe it is petty when a self avowed Christian role model and seminarian goes to court and is considered a poor witness under oath?]
I think ones truthfulness and transparency should be of concern when one is testifying in a court of law. Lying is a poor witness to all those who know that she is a Christian. Her faith and Christian publications, conference, etc. were well spelled out in her suit agains the driver.
I believe it is truthfulness when you don’t think anyone will find out about it which defines the depth of one’s character.
Lea wrote:
yep and she sues people.
Christiane wrote:
Bingo!
Jeff S wrote:
I felt that way, too. I learned to own it. I thought I was smart and worldly. All my corporate experience did not prepare me for the deception, cognitive dissonance, hypocrisy and evil I witnessed by those in ministry in the Name of Christ. I was so naive. Its as if my brain could not process it for a while. It could not be what it very much was. There were no blogs at the time. I felt like an alien.
I tell folks now: trust your gut.
Here is another way to look at Mary Kassian….she’s lower than pond scum!
Harley wrote:
Harley wrote:
Thank you. I did not know about your disability. What a strong person you are!!!!
Lydia wrote:
I think this is one of the things that struck me so much about her comments. Such a mean spirit it takes to blame women for being abused, why, because they chose wrong? Because they didn’t leave immediately? This last one is especially troublesome, as so many churches actively try to persuade them not to leave!
I’m guessing Mary has never been suckered by a good liar who claimed to care only to have the rug pulled out, but she should at least have compassion. She clearly doesn’t.
@ Ruth Tucker:
Whoa-well said, Ruth. I too was hit in an accident when I was 20. My car was demolished and I had a sore neck and back for several weeks. The insurance paid the claim on the car and i refused any claims for medical help whatsoever. I can pay for my own Advil.
Sarah K wrote:
Let us know when you do so! 🙂
The labor, the chore, the distress….all from not being able to operate a microwave. LOL!!! Yet one can shovel snow, do a number of things and all is well.
My father was a neurosurgeon and treated back, and spinal injuries. Some of the people from time to time came in and tried to get him to approve disability when there was no evidence for the claims. What Mary Kassian did I would suggest is akin to fraud. And what angers me is that for those who are on disability, for those who need it. It adversely affects them because it leaves some people questioning them.
Daisy wrote:
If a neat closet is a prerequisite to believing in God, then, I am totally unregenerate nd have no hope of entering the kingdom of God.
Perfect closets are way down on my list. Instead I try to support others as opposed to supporting lawsuits to get someone to pay for my steam cleaning.
Sallie Borrink wrote:
If Mary Kassian was so disabled from her whiplash injury that she couldn’t cook, then why was she traveling, giving seminars, motivational speeches, rock climbing, white water rafting and shoveling snow????
@ Jeffrey Chalmers:
Snort!
@ Jeffrey Chalmers:
This is a great comment.
@ brian:
If only all professing Christians were door mats –the bad ones wouldn’t be sticking knives in their backs because they would be doormats, too. :o)
Lydia wrote:
I’m so confused about seminaries now. Are they accredited? Their standards seem to be pretty low. Makes you wonder about all these so called distinguished scholars on ESS and so on and so forth…
Lea wrote:
This is especially important. We have Piper, a respected Dean of CBMW, telling men and women that the wife should take abuse for a season.
This is how they roll. Then blame the victim who dares to tell her story.
Daisy wrote:
TRUE. And all that stress and weariness expresses itself in abuse towards the ‘submissive’ wife when certain men can’t handle all the pressure ALL of the time ….. they break at the point where they take it out on their wives . . . . and that is what is so sad. We think of these men as the monsters, but they are just people with weaknesses trying to live out a lifestyle that requires an unreal ‘mighty male’ performance that is a false caricature of manhood.
IF a marriage really was ‘complementarian’, then it would be FLEXIBLE, with each helping the other at times by being strong when the other is weak. And everyone is weak sometimes.
The neo-Cal way of ‘complementarianism’ is not wholesome for Christian marriages, no.
@ Sallie Borrink:
Can you shovel snow?
Lea wrote:
You read her page far more closely than I. I overlooked that part of it.
Kassian goes on to say this:
The “what’s on the outside matters too” line is a link to another page on her blog entitled “Female Beauty Matters.”
http://girlsgonewise.com/female-beauty-matters/
That page reminds me of a hideous complementarian page (I can’t remember if it was by Kassian or another complementarian lady) who spends the first half of the page telling women and girls not to worry about their physical appearance-
They are told in the first half that what truly matters is that God loves them.
But then the other half of the page body-shames any woman or girl who is reading the page. The rest of the page was also filled with beauty and dieting advice and giving them impression that what you look like really is as important (or more so) than being valued by God.
Kassian quotes Challies (from “Female Beauty Matters” blog post) – as if women need men “man-splaining” even more to us and telling us that we should look attractive for them (we get those messages enough from secular culture as it is):
This is one of 100 problems I have with complementarians.
They try to tell women out of one side of their mouths that their value is in Jesus Christ, but then they also write these condescending articles shaming women for not looking like Barbie Dolls 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
I don’t recall a single verse in the Bible encouraging women to diet, wear make-up, and to look a certain way, and if they don’t they are in the wrong.
The only time or reason a woman’s physical appearance is brought up in the Bible is because the women of the Bible were living in very patriarchal times, when women were only valued for looks or for the capability to have children.
Kassian also says on that page:
The Bible does not say any of that; she just assumes it is so.
There is not a single Bible verse that says men were created to reflect strength (etc), and women created to reflect beauty (etc).
On a closing note. Many women are visually stimulated. I personally prefer men who are gorgeous, in shape, and who have a full head of hair.
I wonder, when will Mary Kassian and other complementarians start writing shaming articles aimed at men, telling them to lay off the beer, dough-nuts, and to start working out?
@ Lea:
SBTS is SACS accredited. Some of the stuff they have pulled kind of freaked me out as I have had some experience with SACS audits and reviews.
How could they possibly award credit for any courses Mary Kassian taught? That is why the term ‘distinguished Professor’ bothers me quite a bit.
I also could not figure out how they were awarding academic credit to the pastor’s college students at sgm which was unaccredited. Some of those pastors college students did not even have bachelor’s degrees.
The SGM PC students were getting perks that even SBC students were not getting.
And of course, Mohler is a brilliant scholar. (Sigh)
Sopwith wrote:
I didn’t take the OP’s remarks about the son to be about the son himself but about his complementarian mother’s parenting style – and how her complementarian beliefs may influence her parenting, or how she views it okay that her son gets hostile during sporting events.
You’ll notice all the critiques so far in this thread have been directed at Kassian – not her son. I haven’t seen a single person pick on her son.
Lydia wrote:
My gut is broken. It likes to trust and follow people who do not deserve it. It likes to find the good in everybody, which is fine, but doing so while ignoring the non-good.
It makes for a noble gut, but a dangerous one 🙁
You have no idea how many times I self-censor in the comments to refrain from offering possible excuses to the behaviors of people being criticized.
“Trust your gut” only works if your gut doesn’t wanna believe the best about everyone.
To be fair, our family got rear-ended a little over a decade ago. Wasn’t very high speed, either, but I suffered permanent nerve damage in my neck and as a result have to deal with numbness and tingling in one of my hands.
So it is possible to have lasting damage. We took the insurance company’s settlement after a year of medical treatment, and sometimes I wish we’d asked for more. (I guess that would have involved turning down the settlement and risking getting nothing, and having to sue for more, but I’m not sure.) I still have to go to the chiropractor every two or three months to get the feeling back in my hand for a time (it resolves the problem temporarily and then gradually worsens as time passes, until I start dropping things and make another appointment).
Jeff S wrote:
Someone who has not been personally abused or observed it up close needs to refrain from judging the situation and its causes and effects. I wonder if D.P. Kassian has the experience necessary to chastise Ruth. I’m guessing not.
@ ishy:
🙂
@ Deb:
Regarding your second link, (book information: ‘Becoming God’s True Woman’)
https://www.scribd.com/book/259171409/Becoming-God-s-True-Woman
which says at the top:
I don’t go by the feminist label myself.
I don’t think “feminism” robbed me of that stuff they mention in that blurb. Gender complementarianism (which I was raised under, by well-meaning Christian parents) robbed me of self confidence, the feeling that God loved me, the notion that it’s OK for me to have boundaries and be assertive… all of which messed up my life for years and years afterwards. I’m still untangling that mess.
And this part of their quote:
My mission and calling is what? To be a submissive doormat to a husband? To be told I must “endure abuse for a season” if I marry an abusive louse? To be marginalized, so long as I am a childless single lady?
Those are the missions that gender complementarians have for me and other women, and a big No Thank You to all that. I was once one of them, and I know what they’re really peddling.
I don’t think secular feminism is a cure-all for every problem women have in the world, but complementarianism is not a solution, either, and it actually seems to create more and new problems for women.
The T4G fan-boize are getting nervous… how much longer must they wait for Pope Mohler to declare that all is well with the distinguished Ms. Krash-ian?
Jeff S wrote:
you can do both: criticize the behavior but not aim your ire at the person …. when I taught in middle-school, I would frequently say privately to a child concerning some problem behavior, ‘you are better than this’ …..
and they were, but they needed to hear it, as much as they needed the correction of the direction they had taken
This approach works for the young who are involved in the process of learning and maturing …. I’m not sure it works in the adult sphere as well, though
It’s interesting…at the very beginning of the court document it is noted that Mary’s spinal difficulties began with a “fall down the steps.”
I’ve worked in Emergency Medicine for over 20 years, both as an RN and as a Paramedic. When we hear “I fell down the steps” as a cause of injury described by an adult woman – it is nearly ALWAYS code for domestic violence.
If this is the case for Mary, it would – sadly – explain a lot. It could provide the backdrop to her angry and unsettling review of Ruth’s book. It could lend credence to why she alone sued whilst everyone else settled…and what she sued over (particularly the household chores). And it could explain why SHE is shoveling snow (and not her husband), despite her injury.
Of course, this does not condone her less-than-truthful and more than deceitful descriptions/practices.
However, if abuse is present – it would be interesting to know how much of all of this is manipulated by her husband, how much is a form of resistance by her (protective choice), and how much she is truly blind to because she’s swallowed the ideology whole.
Ruth’s book may have cast a dim light in a fog she never knew existed. And now, as she wakens she may be despairing. It takes great courage to leave…just like Naghmeh Abedini.
I’ve been there. It’s messy. It’s dark. And incredibly painful.
dee wrote:
When I was 18, my car was t-boned by a truck, driven by a man who was undergoing chemo and passed out at the wheel. (This guy was best buds with the chief of police.). I should have died. The left side of my skull was crushed. I was in a coma for a short period of time. It was 3 months before I could stand at the bathroom sink and brush my teeth without help. I had to delay entering college, among other things.
I have a hole in my skull about the size of a quarter because that portion of bone was so badly damaged tha it could not be put back together – no steel plate: if my body had rejected it, a second surgery to remove it would have np meant certain death. I’m deaf in my left ear – never gotten used to it!
We didn’t sue, although we could have cleaned house on both the guy that hit me and the police dept.! We didn’t care about financial gain. Both I and my family just wanted me to be “normal” again.
…… Still don’t give a hoot about any financial gain. No regrets.
As a sort of follow up to my last post, where I quoted some complementarian book page Deb linked to earlier, a page that was portraying feminism as the enemy.
As I said, I don’t go by the feminist label myself, but I don’t think all of feminism is as horrible as complementarians make it out to be.
So, I agree with this page:
Perhaps Feminism is not the Enemy
http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/perhaps-feminism-not-enemy/
dee wrote:
I honestly have mixed feelings about this stuff. I think it’s good to document just in case. I slipped at work when I was 24/25 and didn’t go to employee health or do workers comp or anything – I was out for almost a week with bad back pain and it took years for it to go away entirely! I wish I had documented it just in case.
Charis wrote:
Wow! I never thought of that!
Lea wrote:
Although it probably would have been hard to convince anyone of it because of my age. My doctor didn’t even give me pain pills and I had to ask for muscle relaxers and then he gave me like 3.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Krashian? !!!!
dee wrote:
Can I just say, I hate the ‘unregenerate/regenerate’ thing.
dee wrote:
Dee,
I think you misjudge the distinguished Ms. Krash-ian’s motives. She was merely lauding her son’s gospelly-centered behavior. She will undoubtedly be publishing a study guide (for women only) on the imprecatory Psalms.
“Arise, Lord!
Deliver me, my God!
Strike all my enemies on the jaw;
break the teeth of the wicked.”
Psalm 3:7
@ refugee:
Would you have sued for the potential of publishing a new book? Would your injuries be consistent with your physical activity in court? Remember, the judge said she had some injury – just not the amount she claimed. Look at the number of comments Kassian made that the judge deemed "non credible."
If she had sued for PT 4x year for 10 years, I bet it would have been provided. But, it did not seem that this is what was going on.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Well, he was just playing a “role”, wasn’t he?
Jeffrey Chalmers wrote:
Whatever it was, it made me laugh.
“Here are my thoughts: 1…..”
Me: Hmm, okay. 🙂
FW Rez wrote:
Hmm….does this mean, if Mary Kassian is listed as a Distinguished Proffessor, that they are saying she meets the biblical qualifications to be a pastor? 🙂
Daisy wrote:
Look, if these want to write dating books, or men are from mars or what have you, they should just do it and leave god out of it because this is all nonsense.
God doesn’t care if you are beautiful, he looks at who you are not what you look like. These people are deeply shallow human beings.
Lydia wrote:
What a mess.
Charis, I fell down several steps about 10 years ago when I was about 6 months pregnant. I’m sure I had a few bruises that quickly cleared up, but I also broke my leg (it was a tib-fib). It’s amazing what can happen on only 3 or 4 stairs. Physical therapy during my third trimester was rather interesting.
Regarding D. V. and bruising, you would have to both fall down and land pretty hard to have severe, extensive marks. If somebody had a medical disorder that results in easy bruising, that might be different.
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
Another potential misspelling could be: KA$H-IN
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
And the ever popular comp excuse: boys will be boys.
As if they are animals and it is not just expected but a thing to be proud of.
dee wrote:
Neat closets as a salvation marker huh? If you have no hope on account of closets in disarray, what does that say about an old reprobate of depraved mind like Muff Potter?
Lydia wrote:
That and everything else you said in your post: I completely agree.
dee wrote:
You are far from being a “kid/child” when you are a member of a Professional Hockey team!!
dee wrote:
No, but I also struggle pushing a shopping cart at the store. I’m not defending her actions. But the body is a weird thing and while it might seem like someone should be able to do the most basic things, they can’t.
Jeff S wrote:
Aw! I feel you, except I overthink everything too and sometimes I have to go from the back reasons to the good reasons and back again.
dee wrote:
I missed that too!
@ Sallie Borrink:
I think the thing that throws me off (and a few others), is that Kassian claims she can’t cook – but she shovels snow. Shoveling snow isn’t an easy task. It’s more arduous than cooking.
Deb wrote:
Ka$$ian.
@ NJ:
Yes, we treat this claim differently in a lady who is pregnant since the center of gravity is significantly shifted.
Obviously, accidents can and do happen. It could have been exterior stairs that were icy. She could have been clumsy in the dark, carrying something down basement steps. The kids may have left something on the stairs. One of her pets may have gotten under foot causing her to lose balance.
It is usually this generic report that we hear. Of course, I’d have to assess the injury to actually see that the nature of the injury doesn’t truly fit the claim. I wasn’t there. So I do not know. And never will.
I just find it interesting.
I’m sad to hear you experienced something so scary and painful during pregnancy. I hope all was okay for you and baby.
Gram3 wrote:
Occasionally complementarian men are happy to dismiss an abused woman’s perspective, especially if she’s doing so in the context of criticizing complementarianism.
Tim Challies was happy to wave Ms. Tucker’s book away as though it were nothing in his review on his site.
But I do agree, the complementarians do seem to like complementarian women to speak up on these topics (if said complementarian woman is in agreement with them*), because they must feel it gives them more credibility or appears less objectionable if a woman tackles these issues.
————-
*If, however a complementarian woman criticizes some aspect of complementarianism, *cough* Aimee Byrd *cough* -then they ignore her.
Daisy wrote:
Right. And like I said, I’m NOT defending her. I find the whole thing beyond appalling. But I can sit for hours at my computer and work while if I went downstairs and tried to chop a few veggies my head would start to swim and my neck would start aching.
Never mind. I should have just kept my mouth shut.
Daisy wrote:
But not in too large a number – there tend to be 2 women for every 20 men. That’s considered enough representation.
Sallie Borrink wrote:
No! Truth is good. Back injuries are weird. Your perspective is useful.
Sallie Borrink wrote:
I agree. The judge did grant her some concessions and she received a good deal of money. I tried to focus on the apparent “not credible” part of the post.
Muff Potter wrote:
Don’t worry- you and me will carry on together!
Lea wrote:
But this is pretty standard practice in dealing with women who have found themselves in abuse situations.
#1 Marriage is for life. Divorce is bad because God hates it. So whatever your problems are, work them out because you can’t leave without greatly displeasing God.
#2 Because divorce is not an option, make sure you make a wise choice because you are stuck with it for life. Oh, and you have to make this choice while still in your teen or early 20s. Or even worse, your parents get to make this choice for you if you are involved with the patriarchy bunch.
#3 What? You (or your parents) made a bad choice? He turned out to be a pedophile, porn-addict, alcoholic, drug addict, rageoholic, bi-polar, sociopath, or whatever else? Well, sorry. Sucks to be you. You made your bed. Now you must lie in it. It’s your own fault that you didn’t have the wisdom of Solomon or the prophetic vision/discernment of Elijah. You must now endure your own prison camp like Corrie ten Boom with no hope of escape except someone’s death (yours or his). Be filled, be comforted, go away, and stop bothering the rest of use with your personal hell. You have only yourself to blame.
@ Nancy2:
That works, too.
@ Jeff S:
I have a kid who would be just like that except what they learned too early in life so I get it. I had a mom like that, too. And it is good to be like that if you have enough built in protections like financial stability and family support systems. It can be life ruination if you don’t.
I totally ignored my gut when it came to ministry people or I would never have entered that world like I did. Now I see it differently. Their business depends on how spiritual they appear, their personal appeal on stage and so on. It becomes learned behavior and their normal. Everything starts to evolve around image management. And that image can be anything from humble pastor to anointed by God, to a dude bro. Or whatever works for them. For Mohler it is his supposed academic brilliance. Driscoll the manly man. Furtick is the bad boy. Mahaney the humble pastor. I could go on and on.i knew a mega pastor Who shtick was the humble soft-spoken pastor . He was anything but behind the curtain.
It is a shtick. And from there the nightmares begin in order to keep up the image charade. And with the image charade comes power and authority . It’s business. Jesus had nothing to do with it
Charis wrote:
Interesting. The fall down the stairs stuck out to me, too.
Yeeps! I tripped and need help getting up!
dee wrote:
I would assume also that the son is probably age 21 or older?
(But then, I don’t know anything about hockey except Canadians like it, it involves ice and a puck and Wayne Gretzky is a famous hockey player.)
@ Mara:
Thanks whoever helped me!
@ Sallie Borrink:
I thought it weird her husband was awarded money to cook family meals. I am trying to figure this out. It was her unpaid job but now his paid job? Do they figure this on how much it would cost to have a cook?
Lea wrote:
Another thing I find galling is the likely motive at play:
Defending complementarian male headship precedes any and all consideration for how that doctrine is, or might be, harming women.
Women’s safety is secondary to The Cause.
When I was younger, I used to have a hard time understanding why Jesus would hammer the Pharisees on promoting defense of doctrine about the feelings, safety and welfare of people as hard as he did – I understand it much better now that I’m older, have been around, and seen some stuff.
Daisy wrote:
Typeo correction:
“About” should read “Above”
@ Velour:
I can’t answer that, but have to say thst whiplash injuries can have severe repercussions, lasting many decades. I’m living with the long term problems caused by one thst i sustained when i was 17.
I think it’s important to separate out the real physical consequences of accidents and acknowledge that they do exist. The lawsuit, with which i vehemently disagree, is a whole other issue.
Am also living with the long term effevtd of being hit by a car when in early childhood. There was no PT back then, nor did i get any after the whiplash jnjury. The field was barely established here at that time. Would have made a big difference
Lydia wrote:
Maybe this is a Canadian thing! (I think it’s weird too, but disability stuff is weird.)
@ dee:
That sounds similar to my experience getting a sore neck after being hit by a lady in a car over 20 years ago. My neck was sore for a few days, but I got better – my mother was in the car with me. Neither one of us sued. We both were able to cook, clean, and do normal activities within a few days.
@ dee:
I have to separate what Sallie is saying, plus my own problems due to whiplash, from Kasdian’s frivolous lawsuit. She might well have had all those problems. I can’t vouch for her, but i know I’m telling the truth, and I’m sure Sallie is, too.
Lydia wrote:
I don’t know what criteria they used. Perhaps his lost wages? What I can tell you is that my husband has lost months and months of billable hours over the past several years since having to take care of me, spend untold hours at medical appointments, and do the vast majority of the work around our home. It’s not as bad now, but my problems have put us years behind financially between our combined lost work time (we’re self-employed) on top of the bills.
Frankly, the whole thing was interesting to read (controversy aside). I had no idea people could get compensation for stuff like that.
Dave (Eagle) wrote:
I’m sorry to harp on this, but it truly boggles my mind…
I’ve had to shovel snow here a few times, and Shoveling Snow is more labor intensive and tiring than punching buttons on a microwave or making a sandwich.
And I’ve had whiplash, too (my mom and I were back ended by a lady years and years ago).
Loosely on the subject, the latest round of results fae the Conservative party leadership election guarantee that the next Prime Minister will be a woman.
Expect the judgement of God to fall on the UK just as it has on Germany. Or something. Maybe. Well… anyway, the Germans missed three penalties in the shootout against Italy, and if that’s not the judgement of God for electing a woman Chancellor, I don’t know what is.
@ Lea:
Yep. Documentation is crucial. I learned thst the hard way.
numo wrote:
Yes. I began to wonder a year or two in if my back was permanently damaged and I had been really stupid not to report it. Thankfully it wasn’t.
@ Sallie Borrink:
Yep. Agreed on both things. Ikwym about the body being weird!
dee wrote:
When I had to move to where I am now (after my mother died), my linen closet was an absolute mess for a good long while. I was too depressed to care.
I did get around to cleaning it up after about five or six years. I don’t know if Kassian would say I’m in Closet Purgatory for it being messy so long, or if all is well because I finally organized it. 🙂
@ Daisy:
My extra closet is a mess. I’ve been meaning to go through and get rid of a bunch of things for months. Now ya’ll are just making me feel guilty 🙂
@ Sallie Borrink:
Not at all! Glad you’re telling us about the real things thst can hapoen, though very sorry you’re experiencing thrm.
I have severe TMJ problems (among other things) as a direct result of whiplas. Have cracked and broken teeth due to TMJ-related bruxing, as well as having incapacitating headaches, neck,problems, revurrent facial muscle spasms. The accident happened in 1974; the consequences started about 15 years afterwards.
@ Sallie Borrink:
I am not convinced they can in America.
@ Sallie Borrink:
Again, i hear you – about compensation, too.
@ Christiane:
My understanding of domestic violence is that the motivation is control over the wife, not that the guy gets so stressed he gets angry, snaps, and hits the wife.
I can see how the complementarian model of marriage, which puts the husband into a perpetual Daddy Figure role, where he does the heavy lifting, can grow weary for a guy. But I’d be careful about ascribing that as a reason or rationale for why men abuse their spouses or girlfriends.
I have a big sister who uses her stress in life as an excuse as to why she verbally abuses me. I finally got to the point in life where I don’t buy it anymore.
I no longer care how tired or angry she is with her job, boyfriend, boss – she is choosing to deal with her daily frustrations by lashing out at me. (I rarely, rarely choose to handle my anger by taking it out on another person.)
Daisy wrote:
That’s not new or original. I heard that teaching decades ago. (A messy closet is a sign of the state of your spiritual life.)
dee wrote:
Sopy, what kind of godly, feminine, *Biblical*, *Christian*, *submissive* wife/mother advocates her son being a thug, is enthralled by him committing assault and battery, and knocking out peoples’ teeth?
And this advances The Gospel…how?
This is trash conduct that even unbelievers wouldn’t defend.
numo wrote:
Thanks, Numo. It’s no fun to have injuries and I will be praying for your health.
I was injured in an accident caused by another and I sustained whiplash, was in acute pain, and had to receive help from family and friends. I also underwent months of physical therapy. So I have experienced this.
But I also couldn’t go out mountain climbing, white water rafting, shovel snow etc. like Mary Kassian who claim that she was too injured to cook for her family.
Jeff S wrote:
While being raised the way I was created a huge batch of problems for me, I have to say there are a FEW fringe benefits.
Like, I had to become an excellent people reader when I was young. I don’t take people at face value. I try to give people I meet a fair shake, but I guess I generally assume up front “this person probably wants to take advantage of me.” -and if they turn out to be a stand-up person, I am pleasantly surprised to being proven wrong.
I guess there are certain advantages to having been raised by a bunch of hyper-critical, negative nancies and debbie downers who are slight misanthropes. 🙂
You do learn not to be so trusting right of the gate – but my mother’s parenting method counter-acted some of this, in that, even if I correctly sized someone up to be a bully or user, she taught me to just allow that person to wipe their feet on my doormat face.
@ Velour:
Pro ice hockey is a brutal sport, but it is adored in the northetn part of the US, as well as throughout Canada. I think you must be from a non-hockey area?
Pro football is equally brutal, fwiw. Both are pretty much combat sports.
@ Velour:
As i said, i totally disagree with her lawsuit.
@ Daisy:
I generally think of myself as fairly cynical, but once someone worms their way past initially defenses apparently I am trusting and try to make everything fit what, even if it doesn’t make sense.
numo wrote:
That’s what I was thinking. I would have included it if only because ‘the kassassin’ is pretty funny.
Jeff S wrote:
“tweets, books, and speaking engagements” And digital pics.
You’re right – we do NOT know these people, yet churchianity pays up to eat their books and videos – and it’s like Dorothy and the Wizard of Oz.
Whenever who they really are actually gets exposed – we’re supposed to ‘pay no attention to that man behind the curtain…’
Or that woman.
I haven’t bought a churchinaity book in a decade (and I used to be a regular at my local churchianity book store), and I have no intention of buying any in the future.
If the pewishioners would stop purchasing these phony-baloney productions, there might be a few less of the demi-god national leaders making names for themselves.
And wouldn’t that be a good thing! 😉
@ Charis:
Those are very good insights.
numo wrote:
I’m from sunny California! So no, I don’t get the whole violence thing. And to me it’s unbecoming a “submissive”, “Christian” wife/mother to advocate it.
numo wrote:
Agreed.
I reread Mary's review again and I'm so disgusted anew, I don't think i can stomach writing a parody. What a load of cr#p (ed.). Simpering, victim-blaming, sickeningly sweet passive-aggressive garbage. Btw, hockey is kind of our national past time, and fighting in hockey is pretty socially acceptable here, as is fighting in lacrosse. I don't have a personal issue with her son as a goon (as enforcers are known) of his team, the lawsuit is way more egregious. We're not a very litigious nation, especially with those types of accidents. Insurance usually takes care of things.
Lea wrote:
When I was in my early 30s, my lower back went out.
I saw a doctor for the back pain, got an MRI, and the doctor gave me two very expensive pain pill medications.
The pain pills didn’t work (I tried them for a few days). I mentioned all this to my mother.
My mother suggested I try cheap-o Ibuprofen for the pain. Within 30, 40 minutes, the Ibuprofen totally killed the back pain – something the bottles of expensive pain pills could not, and did not, do.
Daisy wrote:
Also, if I’m reading the report right (correct me if I’m wrong) she was also reporting to her healthcare providers that her condition was improving during the same period she says in her lawsuit it was not?
If so, she either was not telling the truth to the providers or she was not telling the truth in the lawsuit. (Maybe it was just be another comp byproduct, feeling like you have to give positive feedback to the authority figure…)
Also
Not being able to admit she doesn’t know best / she’s wrong?
Todd Wilhelm wrote:
@ BL:
Totally agree!
Nancy2 wrote:
There is a pop singer who spells her name Ke$ha.
Lea wrote:
That’s quite a common response on the part of the YRR, I find.
Whatever happened to being like a Berean?
Sallie Borrink wrote:
Oh no, that’s OK. I didn’t mean to make anyone feel as though they shouldn’t give their perspective.
Lea wrote:
I’ve read reports on studies done the last several years where men are shown clips from movies or TV shows.
The perception by a lot of men interviewed is that even if there is a tiny percent of women in the scene, the men feel it’s 50% / 50% evenly split – even though there may be only TWO women in a scene with like TWENTY men!
Maybe complementarian men are like, if a comp organization has 98 men but two women, it FEELS to them like it’s 50 / 50.
@ Daisy:
It is good to remember that reasons why things happen are NOT the same as excuses . . .
there is never any excuse for abusing anyone, but there are some factors that can, in certain individuals, favor conditions for abuse to happen
@ Velour:
In pro football too? I abhor violence,but hockry can be fascinating…
Sarah K wrote:
That violence may be socially acceptable as part of the larger culture, but I think we as Christians shouldn’t engage it or permit our children to engage in it because there goes our witness for Jesus Christ.
dee wrote:
And all of her children are adults, not children.
@ Mara:
Your post is a most excellent summary of how many Christians view marriage/ divorce / domestic violence. Especially the ones who are into complementarian male headship, patriarchal beliefs, etc.
Christiane wrote:
I’m not convinced that’s the reason, but it may be a risk factor or something.
@ Mara:
Tha will cost you $52.35
Gram3 wrote:
Been there, had that. That was part & parcel of the shep/disc stuff.
Questioning your leaders was a bright red warning signal that *you were not trusting God!*
Which was the result of your utter lack of faith in God.
Otherwise, you would not be questioning your leaders.
God wants your obedience (to your leaders) no matter what. And if by some odd chance your leaders were slightly incorrect – then God would correct them.
God never corrected them, so they were never wrong.
Therefore when you question your leaders, you are sinning.
See how that works?
numo wrote:
I believe you. However, the point of this suit was for Mary to get all sorts of money for all sorts of things. That is why I said Mary was not a credible witness. I would never say that about you or Sallie.
numo wrote:
Oh I know there’s a fair amount of violence in these sports. And I honestly admire how fast these guys are. And you’re right, they are fascinating sports.
I just think it can really harm our witness for Christ to be violent or let our children be violent in these sports. I haven’t read anything (maybe it’s out there) about how Christians deal with these dilemmas.
In “Chariots of Fire” Eric Liddell (Scotsman, Christian, missionary) refused to compete in an Olympic race on a Sunday. He won another Olympic race that he competed in on another day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Liddell
@ dee:
Put it on my tab.
And I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.
It looks to me that Mary Kassian is not qualified in Systematic Theology. Her qualifications only say “D.Th. (Candidate)” and she describes herself as having “studied systematic theology”. Given that she started a distance learning course in 1997 it would be reasonable to assume that her studies would have been completed by now, 19 years later. Her charity Alabaster Flask Ministries was dissolved a couple of months ago.
https://www.ic.gc.ca/app/scr/cc/CorporationsCanada/fdrlCrpDtls.html?corpId=3668312
dee wrote:
Rather, if a teacher’s high-point of instruction is the revelation that one’s spirituality is equivalent to the condition of one’s closet – then that teacher has no hope of teaching others about the kingdom of God.
Trite.
That’s what that type of teaching is – trite.
Talk about your ‘first-world’ teachings – some people don’t even HAVE closets – does that mean their spirituality is null?
Sheesh.
Mara wrote:
Food! Everything is food! 🙂
Christiane wrote:
I was reading in Lundy Bancroft’s book on Domestic Violence it’s fairly common for abusive husbands to claim they abuse their wives because they were having a rotten day at their job, or their wife burned their toast.
What Bancroft gets at in his book is that this is bunk. These men abuse because they are entitled and choose to abuse, not because they were triggered by someone else.
He also demonstrates in his book (he cites examples and interviews) that these men know exactly what they are doing when they abuse: they deliberately choose just how hard they hit their wives. The men don’t fly off the handle and become unaware of what they are doing.
With one abuser, for example, Bancroft asked the guy why he stopped at punching his wife in her stomach, why not go all the way and stomp her skull in as she was lying on the floor? The guy said because he knew that might kill her. The point is, the husband knew how much force he wanted to apply and what lines of physical abuse he would not cross.
Still yet another guy stopped hitting his wife when he heard the police knocking on his front door. Again ,this belies the abuser’s usual claim that they are out of control and cannot help it when they are enraged and don’t know what they’re doing.
Patricia Evans said much the same thing in her book about verbally abusive relationships – the abuser isn’t really triggered by a bad day at work or getting flipped off in traffic.
The abuse motivation is a combination of entitlement mentality and a choice the abuser is making in how to handle his or her anger.
Velour wrote:
I also think something else going on here, maybe why the OP mentioned it at all, is because this gets right back to how gender complementarians take exaggerated, cultural gender stereotypes and read them back into the Bible, and they advise other Christians to believe this stuff and emulate it.
I guess American / Canadian culture has this notion that being a “real man” means beating people up.
So, Kassian thinks it’s great that her adult, hockey playing son beats up hockey players.
This is like Mark Driscoll holding up Cage Fighters up as being role models for Christian men to follow.
Driscoll also says Jesus is not a wimpy guy in a dress, but a tough guy, Karate expert who has a tattoo on his leg.
None of this is particularly supported in the Bible – complementarians take their cultural understanding of “manhood” and claim they see it in the Bible and tell men to copy it.
It’s interesting to note that this year’s edition of the SBTS academic catalogue (which can be easily found on their website) lists her as being a “Candidate” for the DTheol from the University of South Africa, indicating she still hasn’t finished the doctoral program. As the only other degree she possesses is an undergrad, she’s not qualified to be teaching any subject at the post-secondary level.
BL wrote:
But what about Jesus’ words in Matthew 15:18:
-Joking. Actual verse reads:
Sometimes I feel I run in a parallel universe to this blog. I’ve never heard of this woman or the dude who allegedly just got fired.
siteseer wrote:
I just felt the need to repeat this because it rings so true with our experience. Our younger kids are so bitter against Churchianity and call all christians hypocrites. When they do, I try to gently remind them that everyone acts hypocritically at one time or another. It doesn’t make it right, of course. It just means we’re human.
@ dee:
I agree with you about her inane, frivolous lawsuit. We are an incredibly litigious country, and Canada isn’t, which makes it all the more striking.
Daisy wrote:
It’s gone? Oh, I’m sorry to hear that. Her “translations” were a great help in clarifying the cognitive dissonance when we came out of our former “church”.
@ Velour:
Yes, but i think that’s a matter of individual choice, not something that can be ruled on.
@ dee:
Also, i doubt that either Sallie or I would start lawsuits, but that’s a whole ‘nother discussion.
@ Sarah K:
I hear you on fighting in hovkey, but i hate that aspect of it. I guess I’d rather be on a curling team. 🙂
Jack wrote:
Consider yourself blessed!
@ BL:
That’s from the movie with Robin Williams.
Did it also exist in the early cartoons?
numo wrote:
Agreed.
Jack wrote:
I had never heard of a lot of these people until I started reading this blog. Now I notice the names on stuff shared on facebook sometimes!
dee wrote:
And I don’t know why I trip so much.
Must be some sort of inflammation.
Daisy wrote:
That’s a really keen observation, Daisy.
Mara wrote:
But-but-but… women CAN’T be like Solomon! We CAN’T decide wisely, because of Eve and Jezebel! So, Catch-22!
And thus the self-perpetuating industry of criticizing women lives on.
Mara wrote:
Just in the movie. I watched many a Popeye cartoon (probably all of them multiple times) in my youth. I never would have thought someone could take the Popeye cartoon and turn it into a musical – and that I would actually enjoy it. 🙂
I cracked up laughing when I saw your post. That song wormed its way into my family’s head, and we occasionally sing it out to each other when one of us figures that a hamburger would fit the bill for our next meal.
We’re weird that way.
@ FW Rez:
She’s a celebrity trophy (and puppet). She does whatever her masters say she should do. The phoniness of complementarian evangelicalism inherent in her unqualified title. Just like the diploma mill titles…….
Debra Meyerson: How Companies Can Boost Gender Equity by Louise Lee
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/debra-meyerson-how-companies-can-boost-gender-equity
“A study of oil rigs shows that a different approach to male-dominated environments can change corporate culture.”
refugee wrote:
That only applied to the Bereans in the first century. Only the things which restrict women and puff up church authorities are universally binding.
Oh this is too funny. Over at Julie Anne’s Spiritual Sounding Board they have a Comp article up by Kathi (co-writer over there) and a Comp Bingo Card!
https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/
BL wrote:
But the food discussions after 500 comments get really good!
Mara wrote:
Reading Mary’s blog makes my Irritable Personality Syndrome flare up something awful. Need at least a half-gallon of cherrygarciachunkymonkey to calm down.
Mary K coining the term complementarian is right up there with Al Gore inventing the Internet.
This page says that sexism in Saudi Arabia is motivated by financial reasons, not strictly morals. Hmm.
I’ve sometimes wondered if another motive behind the complementarians of Christian gender complementarianism is also due to some kind of financial reasoning, of men not wanting to compete with women for clergy positions, and so on?
Here’s why Saudi Arabia is loosening its restrictions on women
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/06/27/heres-why-saudi-arabia-is-loosening-its-restrictions-on-women/
I also noticed in that article, like in complementarianism, that some of the sexist rules in Saudi Arabia have unintended consequences or place additional burdens on people:
Gram3 wrote:
HA!!! Selective literalism and its selective temporal applications. I know it well. I was a Calvary Chapel teachee for nearly two decades.
Julie Anne Smith wrote:
I agree with you, but with some stipulations. Nobody should bring frivolous suits, and I think this applies doubly to Christian leaders if they want to claim to live to a higher standard. The Kassian case strikes me as frivolous, and she did try to play the Christian writer card in court.
However, Christians are sometimes told that it’s un-Christian to take another party to court for any reason, ever, especially if the other party is also Christian. This advice is given to the weak as well as the strong: to women who are trying to divorce abusers, and to big church institutions that are rightly trying to protect themselves. I know you’re not referring to those situations, but I wanted to point this out for readers who have been told that they need to settle everything privately, because that’s “Christian.”
@ SeminaryChamp:
She’s been a candidate since 1997 which means 19 years.
Joe wrote:
LOL 🙂
“Brian Williams Was There”
http://www.cultofmac.com/311556/10-hilarious-memes-prove-brian-williams-cant-escape-internet/
Revisionist History on the Term “Complementarian”
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2015/03/02/revisionist-history-on-the-term-complementarian/
Are there any positive role models in Christianity? Are there people who have right doctrine and really love other people–people who wouldn’t dream of taking advantage for financial gain or fame or some sort of pleasure (like sex)?
Gram3 wrote:
Which can be formed into a delicious Sacred Cow Sundae (Gram3’s TM).
Velour wrote:
Thanks for that, Velour! The video is not to be missed.
Lig says, “DON’T PANIC! DON’T PANIC!” because the next generation does not see complementarity the same way. The only thing I agreed with him about is maintaining fidelity to the Bible.
I guess that means it is officially time to panic at CBMW. And that was before the latest civil war about ESS.
Muff Potter wrote:
…with a generous side of special pleading.
I read this entire blog post. It was very long, pretty intellectual reading.
The gist seems to be some woman scholar (who is quoted and summarized through out) disputes the notion that Greek, Roman, and/or ancient Israel were patriarchal.
She seems to think that scholars of the 19th century were too limited in their focus, or misread ancient cultures, and that scholars of the 20th cent. just uncritically rode on their coat tails.
After Patriarchy, Part 2: The Story of a Model
https://lydiacenter.org/2016/07/07/after-patriarchy-part-2-the-story-of-a-model/
Irene wrote:
Yup! All of them are here on TWW! 😉
numo wrote:
Well, in the interest of full disclosure… I would have no problem taking someone to court if it was appropriate. We have them for a reason.
Velour wrote:
Or what about just going out to eat? What, are the Kassian’s income below poverty line? Of course the evidence points to greed – making money wrongfully by false claims. Man, how can she shovel snow but not cook meals? In my universe, that bird just don’t fly.
@ dee:
I was actually talking about adding up all the things she cant do because of this accident, like the cooking etc. I cant wrap my head about this. I have about 40% or less of my hand movement I use to have due to work related injuries so I understand that one needs to list things that one cant do because of an injury or series of injuries. I had to make all sorts of lists but most of it included levels of pain not being able to close my hands write much hold onto keys type stuff. She seemed to have covered ever single possible scenario and a few that may not have been accurate. That is what I was looking at.
Darlene wrote:
Amen.
And that dog don’t hunt.
Christiane wrote:
I’m sorry to be so blunt, but Mary “Ca&hing-In” Ka$$ian is just trash. No wonder she hauled after Ruth Tucker and made a vile attack on her when Mary’s own boy is a future batterer with Mama’s support.
On a funny note about hockey, years ago I remember having a conversation with a friend who was a WHL captain and really good player (WHL is a younger league that a lot of players get drafted into NHL from) I posited a theory to him one night that I think that often men are so drawn to team sports because it gives them a chance to be affectionate (butt smacks, hugs etc) and encouraging (lots of high fives and encouragement for doing well in sport) with other men without being labeled girly or gay for it. He was like, “yah, that sounds about right” So whenever I watch a hockey game and every tough guy is hugging their teammatesafter every goal, I think, we all just want to be loved
numo wrote:
As someone who has studied *real* women’s studies, I find Kassian’s posture revolting. As well, SBTS has become a joke. it isn’t just Kassian – Mohler has made it clear that a person doesn’t need credentials to teach at Southern, just so long as they pimp the party line. I really feel bad for women like Kassian who apparently can’t tell how they are being used.
I feel sorry for Mary if she is abused. This wouldn’t be hard to prove for such a public figure because people do talk.
I also feel it would behoove her according to Matthew 18 to come clean. Appearances indicate she was after a windfall in legal case. Problem with this is she appears to be no better than other opportunists known as looters. Looters very seldom feel shame for their actions. I have a friend who lost much due the actions of looters during a natural disaster.
Whether I loot or lie to get a windfall or lie about my qualifications as a distinguished professor or lie in a book about that attempt at a windfall lawsuit, I would breakdown if I fear God and don’t publically repent.
Someone made the comment that Mary Kassians behavior is best forgiven and forgotten. I understand that a cause of the Reformation was corrupt clergy and seminaries and churches. Isn’t this an honorable part of the Reformation. Are you stating we should have never had the Reformation because we should forgive and forget corruption? Just asking?
If a messy closet means that my spiritual life is a mess, then I guess it’s 3 times a mess. I have 3 closets that I wouldn’t like to show anyone. But being disabled, I can’t do things like I want to. I don’t always hang up my clothes that I wear a lot either. I can only imagine what Miss Mary, the Queen of Clean Closets would say about that. Plus my daughter, Christy, also suffers from Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome. Just ask her how she suffers, how she gets on with life. Messy closets, that the least of our worries. Just surviving from day st how we get by. I’m living on high powered pain pills now because my left foot refuses to get out of horrendous pain. My doctor and I are working on what to do next. I would be so lucky to only suffer what Mary does. I’d gladly trade places.
‘
@ Sallie Borrink:
Well, yes. I meant that i doubt either of us would do what Kassian did.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
About actual women’s studies: exactly! I bet she hss no idea of what’s involved.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
You’re right about those guys using people, too.
numo wrote:
I’m an avid hockey fan, but have a BIG problem when a fight breaks out on the ice. I seem to be the only one who objects to that physical aspect of the game and even the league owners and team coaches see it as “part of the game.” They even hire several players based on the number of penalty minutes he has.
I find it strange that women’s hockey doesn’t have such “motivations” in their games and it doesn’t detract one iota from the goal (pun intended) of the game.
Velour wrote:
I assume you’re speaking of Faith Bible College. Judge for yourself: https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x87c0fd4048ebdedf:0x887c95f621436655!2m5!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e115!4s/maps/place/%2522faith%2Bbible%2Bcollege%2522%2Bindependence/@39.0902444,-94.4157834,3a,75y,270.93h,90t/data%3D*213m4*211e1*213m2*211sdyvHbGG7ZCcnjWJQ6Hd7ig*212e0*214m2*213m1*211s0x0:0x887c95f621436655!5s%22faith+bible+college%22+independence+-+Google+Search&imagekey=!1e2!2sdyvHbGG7ZCcnjWJQ6Hd7ig&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjo2dacxeLNAhVNySYKHfCvB4EQpx8IejAL
A substantial percentage of self-proclaimed Christian leaders and pastors obtained their educations from diploma mills; I’ve done a bit of informal research into this (for example, discovered that an evangelist who spoke at a former church has a diploma mill degree, a former (and extremely abusive) pastor of some close friends had three fake degrees, and that a former pastor of my wife’s now runs a diploma mill out of Brandon, Florida). There’s an unrelenting demand for such institutions in christendom that award up to PhDs on the basis of no legitimate coursework whatsoever, least of all bona fide doctoral research, probably because there are a large number of unethical, conscienceless people in Christian leadership as well as a large number of benighted, trusting non-Bereans among their followers.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
This is pretty sad that institution that in past produced such great scholars as A T Robertson has lowered its standards. SBTS used to have the reputation of being the most academically rigorous Southern Baptist Seminary.
numo wrote:
btw, I’m in Florida and we’re big hockey fans down here as well although we can’t compare to the Canadians. 🙂
Law Prof wrote:
Every single degree Jerry Falwell has is an honorary degree, but of course his lists of credits never says that!
@ Victorious:
I hate that and think it should be penalized.
Law Prof wrote:
Thanks, LawProf, for doing some research. I previously found that as well.
It seems like the diploma mill where my ex-NeoCalvinist pastor got his “Ph.d.” (cough) from is run by this man:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/zalmer-nichols-72033a2b
And said diploma mill apparently has awarded Ph.D.’s to the entire family that runs their operations:
http://faithcollege.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/2016-2017-Catalog.pdf
And it’s $299 to get a Ph.D. Course requirements start on page 28.
Law Prof wrote:
Thanks, LawProf, for the research.
Yes, my ex-NeoCal pastor (9Marxist/John MacArthur-ite graduate) also engaged in the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine in my state (CA) which can be prosecuted as a felony or a misdemeanor.
Examples of his incomptetence and arrogance:
*He didn’t get an older woman alcoholic to a physician to supervise her treatment.
Instead countless meetings with church members were focused on “gossip” and her problems were treated with Scripture verses. The pastors/elders harmed her (a widow), her adult
children, and church members. She needed bona-fide medical care.
*He didn’t believe in getting a woman dyslexic to medical care. More drama. She has a genetically inherited brain disorder, has short-term memory problems, working memory problems, and auditory memory problems. She gets a monthly disability check from the Social Security Administration and was medically diagnosed with this condition.
When she couldn’t remember entire events she accused other church members of lying and the diploma mill pastor and the other elders took her side. Church members were supposed to be “disciplined” for someone else’s brain problems/memory problems!
The woman in question said that Jesus could heal her if He wanted to. Yes, He could but He hasn’t. He expects her to kick it in to gear and do her part.
@ Lydia:
I do! I’ve been following the blog for about a year now. Are these types of people typical of Evangelical Christianity? It’s a strange dichotomy. The church I used to attend, I didn’t like. Much of what I’ve read, I don’t like. Yet my Christian friends, I like, my wife I more than like, this blog I like. I can only assume that there is a significant number of Christians that do not buy into what these leaders are selling yet my wife (who is a very intelligent & educated woman) sees nothing wrong with the aforementioned church. How does such a system ensnare people? How is it that rock’em sock’em hockey mom here has so many followers?
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Good analysis
Julie Anne Smith wrote:
That’s a fine old Baptist song! We sang it at our little Catholic parish just a few weeks ago.
Correction:
Brent Kassian is not a chaplain for a hockey team as stated in the post, but rather, the chaplain for the Edmonton Eskimos – a Canadian Football League team.
http://www.esks.com/administration/
http://www.cfl.ca/
Jack wrote:
You and I must run in the same universe! I was just thinking, “Perry Who?”
CGC, writing from Ground Zero: Louisville, KY (actually Windy Hills, FIL’s house)
@ Bene D:
Thanks for the kind correction. I remember reading what you shared.
Velour wrote:
it occurs that some of these ‘diploma mills’ might actually be the REAL seminal birthplaces of neo-Calvinism . . . . the ‘diploma mills’ supply the faculties of real seminaries.
How close IS SBTS to being majorly staffed by on-line diploma mill ‘graduates’ ???
@ Christiane:
I have not heard any accusation that anybody at SBTS has a diploma mill degree. Do you have some information to that effect? Whether anybody did any work on line from an actual university I have no idea, but diploma mill? I just really seriously doubt that.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Well, he fired a bunch at SBTS when he became president there who ‘did’ have the credentials, but would not be a member of his party. He took the axe to several “moderate” staff who refused to sign the reformed Abstract of Principles. A dark chapter in SBC history.
Nancy2 wrote:
My word. Wiki just says three honorary doctoral degrees after attending a non-accredited bible college. I had no idea that Falwell ever claimed otherwise. Are you sure that Falwell himself misrepresented his education, because if he did that is serious?
Ya know, I was just thinking. If she is now able to shovel snow, as indicated in her fb comments or wherever online, I think someone should print out a screenshot of her personal snow shoveling achievements and send it to either the defendant, the judge or the defendant’s insurance company and explain that she obviously is no longer disabled and in need of the $$$$$ in compensation for her inability to live a productive, active lifestyle, nor would she still be too incapacitated to do physical labor, such as cooking, dishes, ironing, yard work, etc. She can’t cook because she can’t look downward, yet she can shovel while looking downward? And boast about it? If she continues to milk the system to line her pockets, she’s committing fraud.
@ Max:
That is true, but did he hire people with phony degrees to replace them? All I ever heard was that it was part of the shift from moderate to conservative at the seminary. I am no friend of Mohler after the Carver School business and the thing about the school of church music, but I certainly never heard that the conservatives at the time were uneducated or phony or that sort of thing. If you know something about this I would like to know.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Good analysis
Christiane wrote:
I don’t know about SBTS. That’s for Lydia, Max, Gram3 or someone else to answer.
I don’t know about the history of NeoCalvinism either, so a more experienced person
like Gram3 will have to expand on its history.
It justs seems like many of these men are coming out of sub-par “Bible colleges” where they never were required to do real scholarship. It just seems like a money-making racket.
Max wrote:
It is a very dark Chapter in SBC history that continues at this very moment IMO.
When MK writes that she “studied systematic theology at the doctoral level” what does that even mean? If one doesn’t have a master’s degree in anything and a bachelors in OT, how does one even go about studying theology at the doctoral level? How does one even know that it’s a doctoral level?
If I study theology on my own (I noticed that she doesn’t say what institution of higher learning she is doing her doctoral level studying at) and I feel kind of smart while doing it, does that mean I’m studying at an MDiv level? What if I feel SUPER smart while I’m studying theology on my own. Does that mean I am surely studying at a doctoral level?
I feel a little embarrassed for MK that she has even cited this as part of her qualifications for teaching at a seminary.
Mostly, I just don’t even know what it means.
An interesting post for Mary Kassian from Todd Pruitt at Mortification of Spin:
Read the whole thing. He starts with quotes from Ware declaring that the Father is supreme in the Trinity.
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517/lets-all-be-nicene#.V38PPo-cHIU
Distinguished Professor Kassian who has done doctoral level work in Systematics, are you listening?
Friend wrote:
Exactly.
Comp doctrine strips women of authority while holding them responsible for things they cannot control.
It is a win-win for men and a lose-lose for women.
Comp doctrine, when taken to it’s logical conclusions, is not good news for women. It is bad news for women. It undermines the teachings and commands of Jesus, causing men to believe that they are entitled to do unto women what they would never want done to themselves.
I could go on but you already know all this.
I’m just preaching to the choir.
okrapod wrote:
I’m sitting here with a KJV Thomas Nelson Study Bible in my lap. Under the heading “Contributing Editors” Jerry Falwell is listed. It reads as follows:
“JERRY FALWELL, D.D., D.Litt., LL.D.,
D.D., Tennessee Temple Theological Seminary; D.Litt., California Graduate School of Theology; LL. D., Central University (Seoul, Korea)”
All of those degrees are honorary degrees.
BL wrote:
Nah, it’s typical.
We have our own sayings we throw around from movies to express ourselves.
Some of our favorites:
“What are you going to do today, Napoleon?” (Napoleon Dynamite)
“You dead, mon?” (Cool Runnings)
“And that was very sweet of me.” (The Gods Must Be Crazy)
“… Taters, Precious.” (LOTR)
And these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Gram3 wrote:
OH
MY
GOODNESS !!!
why didn’t someone, anyone that Ware respected speak up SOONER to stop him from digging this deep hole and taking a lot of people into it with him??????
Ware’s quotes are NOT orthodox trinitarian doctrine, and are shocking and clearly heretical
I have to ask WHY someone didn’t intervene SOONER?
Did they want to give him enough rope to hand himself? Or were they afraid to challenge the mighty WARE?
You know, in the Body of Christ, there is a way of moving to help one another and those people who were ‘silent’ and knew but ‘kept silent’ do bear some responsibility here for not intervening sooner.
Christiane wrote:
should be ‘hang himself’
Velour wrote:
kind of like ‘Trump University’
okrapod wrote:
I hope you are right, OKRAPOD.
but who is in charge of hiring the faculty and how did Ms. Kassian get billed as a prominent ‘authority’ while lacking credentials in that field?
The thing is that her presence on that faculty even at the level she is described to be, does make people wonder what ARE the standards for hiring at SBTS these days?
Like I said, I hope you are right. She may be the only exception . . . her presence begs the question: what is the norm regarding requiring solid credentials for faculty members ?
I don’t assume or accuse. I ask.
Thanks for the clarifying question. I could have worded my previous comment with more thought, yes.
Barbara Kelley wrote:
This is a good question. I just tweeted Mary Kassian and I asked her to clarify her education and that we have questions over here about what she means.
dee wrote:
I wasn’t defending Ms. Kassian, I was simply answering those who commented about being in an accident and being stiff and sore for awhile and then being fine.
My point was that you’re not always fine.
Sorry that I didn’t make that clear. The record against Ms. Kassian is pretty damning. I’m surprised the judge awarded her anything at all. The account of her shoveling snow and being too injured to cook made me think of Jack Lemmon in that movie The Fortune Cookie.
Joe wrote:
At least the internet is useful.
Lydia wrote:
Yes! This! Paying a family member to cook meals? Really? That struck me as extremely weird. I mean, my dh doesn’t cook, but if I were incapacitated, he’d at least ask me to make up a shopping list, he’d buy what was on the list, and he’d microwave the tv dinners and open the soup cans and heat them up, even if he didn’t want to tackle learning to cook from scratch…
(And there are so many cool things in stores nowadays, like salad bars. And delis with different kinds of food preparation. Yes, more expensive and probably less healthful than what I cook from scratch. But he’d do it because it would be part of providing for his family.)
And he might just surprise me and teach himself to cook, just to rise to the challenge.
I think he’d be insulted to be offered money to cook for his family.
Another thought: Does she have no children at home who would be able to chip in? Maybe they’re all grown and gone. But it seems to me in the normal, loving families I know, everyone chips in.
numo wrote:
Yes, this is similar to what I was trying to say, only you said it better.
Christiane wrote:
Actually, I think it is the System of Commenders (I think that is what Brad Futurist calls them), especially Grudem and Piper and Dever. I cannot think of anyone who really wants to take on those guys and their loyal fanboys. Until recently.
In the runup to ETS, I really believe Trueman and some others have been working behind the scenes but Piper, Grudem, and Ware would not budge. The attitude in Grudem’s response makes me look practically Mary Kassian sweet. Ware is trying to nuance this away, but I do not think that is going to be sufficient. It is what they have dedicated their lives to, sadly, and they cannot back down. Mohler’s response is the best indicator of the way the tide is going, IMO. They will try to wait this out like they did with Mahaney and Driscoll.
Two things:
1) I put my law degree on my resume for work, but I don’t discuss it. I was mortified when someone mentioned at a divisional staff meeting that I had a law degree. People now think I’m somehow smarter than I really am.
2) Some of you will remember how I damaged myself slipping and falling in a hotel bathroom late last summer and developed vertigo about a week thereafter (which may or may not have been related). After some treatment, it went away. But now it’s back, and disturbingly, I’ve not been able to pin it down to a particular side or action. That said, it’s not as severe as last year’s vertigo problem. I’m kind of hoping it goes away… /problems I don’t need right now.
@ refugee:
Meant to say, “Not that I believe there’s a word of truth in it!”
Paula Rice wrote:
I’ve wondered about that “degree in occupational therapy”. Does anyone know if that is an associates degree, a bachelor’s degree, a master’s degree ……….? There’s a big difference, and I haven’t seen any specific info on the level of that degree.
Mara wrote:
I do agree with you, MARA and yes, on the surface, from the perspective of the neo-Cal comps, it looks like a male win-win;
however, in reality, I think the whole system that drags women down also drags their ‘masters’ down too. When human persons work to degrade the dignity of another person, their own dignity is tarnished in the process. And as people get used to belittling others as a way of life, it gets EASIER to do, and there becomes a gradual progression towards more and more oppression.
I’d say the system they hold to is a product of the Fall in Eden and the consequence for both males and females in patriarchy is a mutual negative and destructive spiral downward.
@ Christiane:
I believe that Mohler hires and fires, because I heard him discussing a certain topic as to what he believed about dispensationalism, and he stated that he was not a dispensationalist but ‘I have hired dispensationalists.’ This was on youtube. Maybe that was just careless talk, but maybe he does get to hire and fire whom he will without having to ask anybody about it. I really don’t know, but maybe Lydia does.
I don’t know who is billing Kassian like that, and I don’t know if it is the seminary or some of her other buddies or herself or all of the above. It is really offensive, whoever is doing it. As much as all of this is offensive, I must have missed where anybody claimed that she had some degree which she does not have. That online stuff from U of South Africa apparently got popular there for a while, and apparently it is a legitimate university, but I have not heard how many credit hours she is claiming, or the seminary is claiming for her or what.
My question is I wonder why they could not have found somebody more qualified, especially since Louisville has an abundance of colleges, at least one university, and a couple of seminaries and I don’t know what else, and especially since Lydia is saying that it is ground zero for the neo-cal movement within the SBC. I think that surely with all that education and religion floating around Louisville they surely could have hired somebody more qualified to do the job to run over there on a part time basis for a course or two per semester.
Gram3 wrote:
Wow.
but if they don’t back off of the ESS disaster, do they not run the risk of creating a schism in the SBC with some going one way on the Doctrine of the Trinity and others going their way with ESS?
they MUST back down on the Trinity, it is a first-tier issue. Yes?
Wouldn’t it be ironic if this whole ESS-Complementarian thing started because Grudem and Piper felt marginalized at the ETS meeting so long ago when they were outnumbered by the egalitarians? So they cooked up this theology of gender and re-worked orthodoxy to make their just-so story of Trinitarian relationships seem like “it has always been the orthodox position of the Church.” Now, with another ETS meeting coming up, this whole ESS thing is blowing up.
Nancy2 wrote:
Either way it doesn’t have anything to do with women’s studies or theology.
Christiane wrote:
Well, I think they have shown what is truly a first-tier issue, and that is Female Subordination. Mohler’s triage puts the Trinity up in the first tier, but it looks like he’s willing to negotiate on the Trinity in order to keep the Order of Creation well-ordered.
okrapod wrote:
Understood.
I don’t get “women’s studies” as far as the Bible is concerned, either. What’s the diff between “women’s Studies” and “men’s studies”? The Bible is the Bible.
Christiane wrote:
One can hope!
Christiane wrote:
Not unless there is a revolt by the pewpeons. The pulpits are increasingly filled with young pups who don’t know anything other than the line “this has always been the orthodox position of the Church.” I cannot express what a mantra this has become. Votes at the Convention have been trending more YRR, so, no, I do not see a schism happening. A slower bleed-out is more likely, IMO, with the sad fact being that the average pewpeon just doesn’t think it matters very much [yawn] and when is the next Sunday night ice cream social?
@ Gram3:
Plus the young pups (who are also the ones who show up to vote at the Convention) are fanboys of Piper, Grudem, and Dever. They will not abandon their idols to maintain the equality of the Eternal Son. Nope, been there, done that. Keyed out. And they know that if they question, they will be keyed out of their circles as well. No conferences and book deals.
@ Nancy2:
This is getting really interesting. I mean, Thomas Nelson publishers did not know about this? Of course they knew. So are you supposed to make some notation when listing this stuff or are people just supposed to know (I mean Seoul, Korea for crying out loud) or did Falwell try to slip something by or did TN try to slip something by or are there rules for how to list what under those circumstances.
So I looked in the only bible I could find at the moment, the Oxford Study Bible, Oxford University Press, and what I find is just names listed with no titles or degrees or anything except just names, as in John P. Jones and such. So I am thinking that the publisher gets to choose how they are going to do it.
So, until I am able to track this down more I have to say that neither Falwell nor TN looks very good at this point.
okrapod wrote:
Thanks for responding, OKRAPOD. Lydia might know, yes. As far as Ms. Mary completing some formal credentials from S. Africa, I believe there was some question about it.
Dee wrote this in the original post:
” Although she is touted as an expert on women’s issues, Mary Kassian appears to hold a degree ONLY in Occupational Therapy.
Neither the lawsuit nor our subsequent research has turned up any other degrees. She often mentions having studied “Systematic Theology on a doctoral level”. Her studies, according ot the lawsuit, commenced in 1997 through the University of South Africa — the same institution from which her friend Dr. Dorothy Patterson received her doctoral degree. We cannot find any peer reviewed doctoral level academic work and/or research on women’s studies. Also, an Occupational Therapy degree is not a degree which involves the study of women’s issues. Yet, this is what Kassian teaches at SBTS. ”
So from this, I understand that there is no published evidence of doctoral work available for review on the subject of women’s studies. That is not to say it doesn’t ‘exist’,
but there are usually available resources that would have them if the doctoral work had been published and critiqued. Yes . . . there would have been a section for ‘possible applications of findings’. Other scholars in the field would certainly be interested to read Ms. Mary’s work, if it exists, yours truly included.
I suppose Lydia and Dee may know more about this.
@ okrapod:
Wiki as well as Falwell’s bio page say that he graduated from Baptist Bible College in Springfield, MO. They do not say what degree he earned. At that time BBC was unaccredited. They also say that the other 3 degrees are honorary.
TN does not mention BBC. It lists all of the contributing editors and all of the degrees each contributor has. It does not distinguish between hongry degrees and earned degrees.
Nancy2 wrote:
Oops. Should say “honorary”. I’m thinking about the chocolate chip ice cream in the freezer!
@ Gram3:
Yeah, Gram, and guess what the theme of this year's ETS conference is? The Trinity. I'll be presenting a paper on the Trinity there. Just got notified last week that it was accepted.
Jim G.
@ Christiane:
I got that. But nobody said she had a degree in theology but merely that she had some work at the doctoral level in theology, which I would assume they meant some semester hours. I don’t think it is fair to demand where is anything she published or where is her dissertation if nobody ever claimed that she had done that. Also, I don’t see where the claim was made that she had some work at the doctoral level in women’s studies. Is there a denial from UofSA that she was every registered or that she ever completed any work? Has she submitted her transcript anywhere and does anybody actually know what if anything she has done? I am guessing there are a few credit hours somewhere, probably U of SA and that is about it.
Gram3 wrote:
In his comment at this site:
Max on Sat Jun 11, 2016 at 10:39 AM said:
MAX wrote this: “The timing of Dr. Mohler’s “triage”, a cute comparison of Christian doctrines with medical emergencies, was intended to keep Southern Baptists together despite their differences on soteriology, as New Calvinism began to penetrate SBC ranks. Think about it, he must consider God’s plan of salvation a secondary issue that we shouldn’t squabble about! Well, complementarianism and its link to the Eternal Subordination of the Son is proving to be a very strike at the heart of the Trinity – an essential orthodox doctrine that we all better get right according to Mohler himself. SBC’s New Calvinists should have waited a while before they started professing and practicing comp and ESS doctrines until they had fully won the SBC masses over to their positions on soteriology and church governance. The can of reformed worms has now been opened to reveal all its slimy aberrations. The SBC is in urgent triage status now … will it live or die?”
I think the neo-Cals truly must back down on ESS.
okrapod wrote:
And yet, OKRAPOD, would a few on-line credit hours qualify her to be called an ‘authority’ on the subject of women’s studies, even if the S.African university is accredited, which I understand, it is?
What ARE the ‘standards’ for professors at SBTS, on which the seminary proclaims that the faculty member is an ‘authority’ in their field?
?
I know it is important not to assume anything, but I think it is important to inquire about this. Do you not agree?
On what BASIS was Mary Kassian hired as an authority in women’s studies at SBTS ? Was her case handled differently than the standards applied to other professors? If so, what was the rationale used?
?
@ Jim G.:
I want to know EVERYTHING I can find out about that conference! It sounds like a well-timed event considering that people are only now seriously challenging Ware and Grudem, after letting them run their ESS thing for quite a while and having the people they respected keep silent.
Would that this conference had taken place much sooner.
Glad you are participating, JIM G. Good news!
11 Police Officers have been shot in Dallas and 4 have been killed near the end of a protest. I know there are many who pray on this site I would ask you to please pray for all involved.
Nancy2 wrote:
Why does it make me think of this clip? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s4nVg_W_6Y&t=9m58s
Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
You mean Perry Noble of “shop Pastor P”? https://www.instagram.com/shoppastorp/
Hey Warburg Watchers, just go over on good ole Youtube and you will find Nancy K. speaking at conferences STANDING UP for nearly 45 minutes. This is AFTER the car accident at the ‘True Woman ’08 Conference. I wonder who was making those home-cooked meals for hubby while Nancy was away. Here’s a video. It’s in 5 segments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRQ_JLQ_fM0
Oh, and by the way just for some extra laughs at no charge, I’ll toss in John Piper’s teaching segment at the same woman’s conference entitled, ‘The Ultimate Meaning of True Womanhood.’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_heWjUoN8M
Daisy wrote:
This was helpful and is an important point to make within the debate: Egalitarians affirm the complementarity of women and men.
Another point I want to add along with this is that since many secularists promote egalitarianism, I refer to myself as a biblical egalitarian. True egalitarianism, which is the belief that unity among Christians is built by employing our differing gifts and strengths, according to the outworking of the Holy Spirit, is based on what the Bible reveals about how the church functions and is edified.
Unity cannot be built when we take our complementarity and turn it into gender parameters and prescriptions. This puts the focus on natural selves whereas the church is a distinctly spiritual reality . Unity is built as we die to ourselves and allow the Spirit, which transcends our flesh, to guide the way in which we are to function together as believers.
Biblical Egalitarians acknowledge the complementarity of the sexes, but we do not move beyond Scripture and teach that any man or woman is ontologically barred from full participation. “Complementarianism” negates the identity in Christ we share together and is a distinctly anti-Christ belief system.
__
“Complementarianism”
The term is derived from the hermeneutical hypothesis that men and women are designed to complement or complete each other on the basis of their gender; that men and women are of intrinsically different worth, and their roles reflect that.
A contrasting viewpoint (the Egalitarian position) maintains that women and men should share identical authority and responsibilities in marriage, religion and elsewhere.
“Egalitarianism, within Christianity, is a movement based on the theological view that not only are all people equal before God in their personhood, but there are no gender-based limitations of what functions or roles each can fulfill in the home, the church, and the society. It is sometimes referred to as biblical equality. Egalitarians understand the Bible as teaching the fundamental equality of women and men of all racial and ethnic groups, all economic classes, and all age groups, based on the teachings and example of Jesus Christ. It should not be confused with secular political, economic, social egalitarianism.”
http://www.theopedia.com/egalitarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_egalitarian
http://cbmw.org/uncategorized/summaries-of-the-egalitarian-and-complementarian-positions/
Complementarianism is promoted by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. (CBMW) http://cbmw.org/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Biblical_Manhood_and_Womanhood
https://www.facebook.com/CBMWorg
http://cdn.desiringgod.org/pdf/books_bbmw/bbmw.pdf
Danvers Statement:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danvers_Statement
Some noted theologians and Christian thinkers who support the Complementarian position include men such as Wayne Grudem, R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Mark Dever, C. J. Mahaney, Adrian Rogers, Richard Land, Ligon Duncan, Terry Virgo, John F. MacArthur, and John Piper.
Groups of churches that ‘broadly’ support this Complementarian position include some members of the Southern Baptist Convention, the Presbyterian Church of America (PCA), the Anglican Diocese of Sydney, Conservative Mennonites, Newfrontiers, the Dutch Reformed Church, and Sovereign Grace Ministries SGM/SGC, among others. A moderate form of complementarianism is also espoused by the Calvary Chapel movement.
__
References:
A brief summary of the Complementarian Position
https://verticallivingministries.com/tag/broad-overview-of-the-complementarian-position/
“A Brief History of Complementarian Literature”, by Owen Strachan
http://9marks.org/article/a-brief-history-of-complementarian-literature/
“Complementarianism for Dummies”, by Mary Kassian:
http://www.girlsgonewise.com/complementarianism-for-dummies/
https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2/183-5877130-6020059?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=COMPLEMENTARIANISM&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3ACOMPLEMENTARIANISM
—
I wouldn’t call SBTS a diploma mill, because students do actually have to put in the hours, and most of the professors there do have doctorates, but the willy-nilly hiring and firing happened at SEBTS my last year there.
I went and looked at their faculty now, and it’s clearly stacked toward young guys with Calvinist leanings, most did their doctorates at SBTS, and only those hold Dean, Asst. Dean, and chair positions as far as I could tell. The professors I had who are still there that I studied under are almost all adjunct faculty (many of whom had pretty impressive degrees), meaning they’ve been there a long time and were passed over by these cherry-picked hyper-Calvinists. The one department that seemed to remain intact was Greek, because I doubt Mohler wanted to lose the reputations of Dr. Black and Dr. Beck.
I’m ashamed to have gone there now, though. But I’ve been wondering if maybe I can transfer and finish off my degree at Northern or somewhere like that.
And maybe I should get ordained, because wouldn’t they hate it if I said I went to SEBTS and was a female ordained minister? Besides, I actually don’t place much value in being ordained, because I don’t see that in Scripture. It says we’re all part of the priesthood. And really in the SBC, any guy can get ordained if they really wanted to. Just not me. 😉
Here is proof beyond doubt that the ESS of Ware and Grudem is heresy, pure and simple. Well done Mortification of Spin.
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517
@ ishy:
Thanks for the info. I never went to seminary, but I did do a bunch of education in a different field, and I probably have a somewhat different take on what a seminary should be expected to do. To the extent that a seminary education would be to equip people to be pastors, then there needs to be at the master’s level some practical stuff. To the extent that a seminary wants to be the master’s level for somebody headed toward a research doctorate at a more diverse university then it needs to offer appropriate material for the student for that purpose.
The rector at our church just completed his D Min, earned at an episcopal school, and he talked to the congregation about that. He said it is not comparable to a PhD but is a ‘practical’ degree like MD or JD. He did not want anybody to be confused about that.
So I am thinking, based on what it takes to educate a physician, that the ‘research’ angle is a part of the equation and also the ‘practical’ angle is a part of the equation. Seminary seems to be the same way. So, I have no problem with placing on a seminary faculty people who are not research oriented if they have had success in the field and ‘know how to do it.’ I have somewhat of a similar feeling about honorary degrees. That has been abused and has become ridiculous and shameful. On the other hand I think it is realistic for academia to recognize those people who have not studied the research but rather who have achievements which in the future will constitute what other people will study in the quest of how to do it.
I have a huge problem with lying, spin, deceit and all their cousins. When schools or people do that I assign them to the trash bin and look elsewhere .
@ brian:
Such senseless violence. Praying for the loved ones of the police officers who were killed and for those (including a mom) who were wounded. 🙁
@ Darlene:
Thanks for those links! Keep 'em coming!
I watched that True Woman '08 video yesterday and have already embedded it in today's post.
Here is a sugar sweet and rather non-Complementarian (in my opinion) interview with the husband.
https://www.reviveourhearts.com/true-woman/blog/getting-to-know-brent-kassian-and-his-mary/
@ Lowlandseer:
I am so grateful that those over at the Mortification of Spin are finally addressing this ESS heresy. I especially appreciated the postscript.
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517
@ okrapod:
I am not sure how the hiring process works now. I honestly believe it is like everything else there and riddled with unwritten rules along side the required rules and inner ring thinking. I think the process is more Amway than Academic.
What was Russ Moore’s CV experience to be elevated to Academic Dean of SBTS, for crying out loud. Mohler prefers them young and loyal to him. Burk is another example. Loyalty to Mohler is more important than experience.
@ okrapod:
I am really interested in whether or not Kassian’s short courses at SBTS were credit based. I have not had time to look into it and doubt if I could find anything.
It could have been something for Seminary wives she embellished for public consumption.
Lydia wrote:
This is true at SEBTS now as well. And it’s clear that Mohler is at ground zero of these decisions. The appointment of Akin was not welcomed at SEBTS, and then Akin came in and started immediately firing professors and putting in the choices vetted by Mohler, and there’s one professor whom I remember was strongly contested, as he was just getting his doctorate, and they launched him right into a tenured position. It was an unhappy time there.
Anybody who doesn’t think any of this was not strategic either hasn’t looked at it, or is lying.
And here is some of her own advice that perhaps she should have taken regarding the law suit.
“A person will tell you things, but first they will tell you their symptoms, not necessarily their problem,” Kassian said.
Frequently the pain is not attached to the problem, she warned. Those offering prayer should observe carefully and be aware of referenced pain.”
http://www.bpnews.net/13270/new-prayer-manual-outlines-handson-team-ministry
Jim G. wrote:
This is great news! Congrats.
brian wrote:
So sad to be waking up to bad news again.
Christiane wrote:
I don’t think it works that way. The watch word is “unity”. They will nuance the differences to death for the pew peons and their YRR front line using lofty insider language.
I don’t know if you saw it but one SBC pastor did a post at Voices/Pravda “proving” ESS with 1 Corinthians 15.
There is no reasoning with this sort of position/thinking. The only thing to come of this will be more mass confusion. Worship of the gurus stilted thinking from way back.
@ ishy:
I still don’t think the average SBC pew sitter has any idea that the SBC has a Pope Mohler.
Nancy2 wrote:
Her degree is “M.C.A.O.T.” according to the CBMW website. What does that mean?
Lydia wrote:
No, me either. And I think the SBC is a goner if people in the pews don’t kick him and a few key others out very soon.
I wonder how long it will take before the “autonomy of the church” clauses will be dropped from the BFM?
@ ishy:
It kind of is a goner through ecclesiastical corruption, theological corruption, and a weakening of baptist distinctives. I hope there is visible fallout from this, and there may be. I just don't see it. History will tell in another twenty, thirty years. This all makes me want to separate and go independent. But independent isn't really the answer.
Jerome wrote:
OT’s here are Masters generally, but I don’t know what they do in Canada.
Daisy wrote:
Daisy, I hear ya!! When I retire, I want to help work for a Workplace Bullying Law here in NC. Tired of the snakes in suits!
The University of Alberta says it offers a MSc in OT.
In the US the C onto the end of things tends to mean ‘certified.’ In Canada????
The CAOT is the Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, which seems to be a licensing board.
I think we are getting closer.
Lydia wrote:
That’s true. But she was on their website too, right?
Whatever she taught, I don’t think ‘phd candidate’ is proper training for it, especially with no prior study in that field.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but PHD’s are not like a masters, where you have a certain number of credit hours? You do research or a dissertation or both and if she did neither I can’t see how that is really even experience.
ishy wrote:
Autonomy is vanishing as more and more Southern Baptist churches are being conformed by the Neo-Cals.
Case in point… ALL of the churches that have been seduced into using The Gospel Project Sunday School curriculum are literally on the same page from week to week, doing the very same lesson.
Jim G. wrote:
Congrats!
@ Lea:
I don’t know about a doctorate in theology, but I followed on line the progress of a woman who first did an undergrad (baptist) and then seminary M Div (baptist) and then went for a doctorate at a Catholic university somewhere in Ohio, Dayton I think. Anyhow she posted on her blog semester by semester what she did, and basically it looked like a stack of books to read, I mean quite a stack but beyond that I don’t know while she was on campus. She was also teaching some classes at that university at the same time. Then after all that she started work on her dissertation after leaving and theoretically trying to go back to work.
Lydia wrote:
Yes, this is tragic. Wake up folks!
@ Lea:
http://news.sbts.edu/2005/06/29/noted-author-theologian-mary-kassian-joins-sbts-faculty/
Now a search for the SBTS “women’s institute” brings up this:
http://www.sbts.edu/search/?q=Women%27s+institute&cx=015271684415897505635%3Aaoyypvuo5tk&cof=FORID%3A11&ie=UTF-8&sa=
Just what I suspected. It seems to be the seminary wives institute which is notorious here. Unless someone can find something else. I think it is smoke and mirrors. Embellishments from Mohler to Kassian. It just does not have to be this complicated and vague. They do that on purpose and it is one reason why I never believe anything they say or that I read from them
@ Lea:
Mary Mohler does the seminary wives institute. It is more like a seminar teaching them how to be good hostesses and what not to wear .
Lydia wrote:
The idea of going to school to be a ‘wife’ is just so mind boggling.
Also, looked at the courses and bruce ware is teaching a ‘Baptist beliefs’ class! Lord knows what he is teaching these people: ‘Building on the foundation of Baptist Beliefs, this course will focus primarily on the study of the attributes of God, on the person and work of Christ, and on the ministry of the Holy Spirit in salvation and sanctification. These core areas of our faith will be explored in order to enrich our understanding of and our heart response to our great triune God.’
Lydia wrote:
Well, there you go. She is rehabilitating seminary wives for their occupation. Mystery solved.
okrapod wrote:
Thanks. I was previously not at all familiar with what goes on at seminary, so this is all fascinating. I assumed everyone was learning greek, Hebrew, etc…and digging deep into history of the time, theologians. But my only academic experience is with regular schools and they seem to be a bit different.
I did know a girl who took I don’t know how many years getting her phd, and she basically was working on her dissertation and had meetings with a faculty advisor. As far as I can tell that was it.
Lydia wrote:
Looks like, from a site search in Google, that the courses Kassian taught were short, week-long courses for the seminary wives. Also, it doesn’t appear that she’s taught anything since 2014. And, most significant to me, it appears that the Women’s Ministry Institute has changed its name to the Seminary Wives Institute. We wouldn’t want women to think that they could actually do *ministry*, now would we?
dee wrote:
That doesn’t speak well of her or the institution. It doesn’t look good for a doctoral program when people linger in it indefinitely without finishing.
On another note regarding the University of South Africa, it’s easy enough to find Dorothy Patterson’s (Paige’s wife) DTheol dissertation, and it is certainly not doctoral level theological research.
dee wrote:
Even more interesting is the fact that the University of South Africa’s website claims that its doctoral programs must be finished within 6 years.
Lea wrote:
I got to observe closely as one of my friends completed a Ph.D at the University of Texas. Yes, there were semesters when he signed up for nine hours of “Dissertation,” but that didn’t include the comprehensive exams he had to take as well. (That’s where you’re asked questions about all those books you read.) And then he had to do the research for the dissertation, and finally, write the dissertation itself. It was not easy. I went to his public dissertation defense. I was the one member of the public there and they stashed me off in a corner while my friend and his five advisors went at it at a table in the center of the room.
I’d just finished my first year of law school and I was horrified at the way my friend was being hammered–law school professors are notorious, but these guys were relentless. Two of the professors were in favor of granting the Ph.D with no changes to the dissertation. Two wanted slight changes to the dissertation. And one, the guy who had done research in the same country back prior to the three most recent revolutions, he wanted to reject the dissertation entirely. At the end, we were escorted out of the room, which was separated off from the lobby by a sliding partition and we could hear them arguing LOUDLY about what to do. Finally, we were invited back in and my friend was given his Ph.D with slight changes to the dissertation. It was nerve-wracking.
The irony is that the guy who wanted to reject my friend’s dissertation entirely, he invited my friend to lecture to his class later in the day. Go Figure.
Jim G. wrote:
Super! Thanks for letting us know.
mirele wrote:
Interesting! This is a piece I did not know.
Lydia wrote:
No need to have a Ph.D. to teach the seminary wives to make sure the women in their husband’s churches stay in line. It is a perverse application of Titus 2.
Dorothy Patterson and her hat remind me of the Wives from the Handmaid’s Tale and their hats. There, I said it.
Lowlandseer wrote:
Ugh.
Gram3 wrote:
The whole thing is creepy to me. I suspect Dr. Ware is teaching them all about how they should be good little slaves, because the father had authority over the son too.
Another thing I didn’t know is women went to seminary to pick up preacher husbands, so they could do ministry together. Or went to seminary just because their husbands were going. I can’t help thinking of Jane Eyre and how that random cousin wanted her to marry him so they could do missionary work together and she just wanted to be a missionary without marrying him and how she thought it was crazy that that wasn’t allowed and this was a book written in 1847!!!!
Also, I just remembered that I have a great aunt who went to seminary! She married a preacher. Now I might ask her daughter some questions when I see her.
okrapod wrote:
Perhaps “M.C.A.O.T.” is not a degree, but “member of CAOT”?
The SBTS catalog says: “B.S., University of Alberta; D.Th (candidate), University of South Africa”.
@ Gram3:
Having a program for seminary wives in not new at SBTS. I have told this story before, but it seems appropriate here. Back when there was this couple at the seminary -he was a good looking guy and was teaching pastoral care IIRC and she, a gorgeous knock out of a woman, was helping the seminary wives learn how to dress, act etc. to help hubby in his vocation. It was easy to look at the couple and think what a great example of the pastor and wife team. Until he was outed and it all fell apart. I don’t know what happened to that couple after that, but I hope they gave up on the religious scene because pretty abandons you with time and it takes more than that.
okrapod wrote:
It should be clear to all Southern Baptists by now that Dr. Mohler had more in mind than shifting SBTS instruction from moderate to conservative. “Conservative” to him means Calvinist and he has done everything within his power to shift SBC belief and practice to the reformed side of the scale.
I continue to be amazed that Dr. Mohler has not been called into account for his words and actions. I find it incredible that he was not challenged in the early days of his rebellion against SBC majority non-Calvinist belief and practice. His 1993 convocation address at Southern Seminary entitled “Don’t Just Do Something; Stand There!” was filled with warnings which majority SBC leadership should have more effectively dealt with while the window was open. In his charge to rally his Southern troops around the Abstract of Principles, he made the following statements:
“The Abstract remains a powerful testimony to a Baptist theological heritage that is genuinely evangelical, Reformed, biblical, and orthodox.”
“We bear the collective responsibility to call this denomination back to itself and its doctrinal inheritance. This is a true reformation … ”
It’s clear that Dr. Mohler, and his reformed colleagues at other seminaries, are on a mission, passionate about their cause, truly believe their theological confession, and are intent on altering the SBC landscape to nothing less than a reformed entity via the release of an army of young, restless and reformed seminary graduates into SBC churches. Over the last 10 years, the New Calvinist movement has made tremendous progress toward that goal.
Dr. Mohler’s 1993 words may very well be prophetic:
“Those who teach the ministry bear the greatest burden of accountability to the churches and to the denomination … It is with a single man that error usually commences.”
Dr. Mohler is singly responsible for leading the “new reformation” (rebellion) within SBC, with all its weeping and gnashing of teeth.
@ siteseer:
From Brent:
“In fact, she can get so focused while working on a project that Brent will get after her about going to her exercise class.”
He also said she liked him because he wasn’t boring like her previous boyfriend. Heh.
Deb wrote:
Quite. And with Sovereign Grace inducted into the SBC, and I forsee all of the Acts 29 churches doing the same, and then all the quick rush into turned all the seminary grads into Mohlerites, there will be in a very short time a shift to where they hold majority voting power at the conference. They are clearing doing to the SBC what Darville did to Rocky Mt.
Will Calvinist pastors who represent non-Calvinist congregations as messengers vote against their congregation if a proposal to drop the autonomy clause?
If they did vote the autonomy clause out, would churches have to suddenly legally unentangle themselves, not realizing what that means? Will Mohler, et al, put in new pastors without warning if the congregation wants out?
mirele wrote:
Maybe she teaches classes on how to keep your closets clean.
Lea wrote:
Yikes!
brian wrote:
Done.
@ okrapod:
I have had one first person report from a comp wife who attended (not sure if it is one of those unwritten rule things you must attend) whose husband used to work there. Even she was appalled at how ridiculous it was– and she is very comp.
okrapod wrote:
I took a class for “Women in Ministry” at Liberty U, and it turned out to be mostly this kind of thing. I was so bitterly disappointed that was the route they chose to go.
mirele wrote:
I’m sorry to hear that it’s back, Mirele. I’ll be praying for you.
You’re a champ and we love you!
Lydia wrote:
*You hear the clunk of a head hitting a desk*
mirele wrote:
Exactly! That is what kept throwing me off. I kept thinking the Seminary Wives Institute could not possibly be the same as the Women’s Institute. Is this stuff free to “Seminary Wives”? Was SBTS paying Mary Kassian to fly in and speak at a week long seminar with no credits awarded yet calling her a distinguished prof?
Deb wrote:
Lemmings they are. A must see video clip – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOOs8MaR1YM
@ Gram3:
From the first hand account from at least 8 years ago, I was told the “wives” were wives of Seminary employees and male students. It was more like old fashioned charm school with etiquette, comportment and a large dose of helpmeet lectures. If you have not met Mary Mohler this won’t sound as much of a horror as it is.
Friend wrote:
I agree with you, too. I found her lawsuit to be frivolous. The guy admitted his guilt. Who sues for Tylenol or whatever pain reliever? That’s over the top.
@ ishy:
The BFM is a great example of my position that creeds and confessions are, for the most part, political.
@ Max:
He would not have a radio spot on the Abstract or Calvin. He had one as a culture warrior. that is how people thought of him. It was what he promoted outside academic circles. As far as I am concerned he was deceptive.
ishy wrote:
Calvinist pastors are not subject to non-Calvinist congregations; they are loyal only to a higher power = John Calvin. Local church autonomy is the last bastion of defense against the surge of New Calvinism. Sure, YRR pastors are weaseling their way around this through stealth and deception, but autonomy is still a protective doctrine for local SBC churches to reject reformed theology and still remain Southern Baptist. If it goes, a once-great evangelistic denomination falls.
@ Daisy:
Thank you, Daisy! I will look into it.
@ Jerome:
That is the best explanation so far.
ishy wrote:
Look at the description! It’s got to be full of this trinity mess he’s currently getting called on – and probably applied pretty heavily to women.
Max wrote:
I think unless congregations stand up against it now, they won’t end up with a choice whether or not to stay in the SBC and retain autonomy. They’ll either have to split off and no longer be Southern Baptist, or accept strict oversight. And I think strict oversight is clearly the direction Mohler is leading his minions.
Lydia wrote:
Weird. Just really, really weird.
ishy wrote:
Who is going to do the overseeing? They do not have a hierarchical system. No procedures like that. No bishops. No monies going to a centralized form of government. The individual churches own their own church buildings. The individual churches decide about ordination of pastors and deacons. How do they plan to get it done?
ishy wrote:
The Southern Baptist dilemma is this: millions in SBC pews are uninformed, misinformed, or willingly ignorant about the New Calvinist movement within its ranks. Only those congregations which have been directly impacted by New Calvinist stealth and deception understand the dark side of the new reformation. The vast majority of SBC flocks are still moving forward with business as usual, looking forward to their next potluck. I continue to lay the fault at the feet of thousands of SBC non-Calvinist pastors who refuse to have “family meetings” to inform and discuss the implications of New Calvinism; to me, this is a critical element of shepherding the flock properly – to feed and protect.
@ mirele:
someone on another blog once likened the ‘hat’ image to that of the character Hyacinth Bucket …. I remembered this because at the time, I didn’t know who the character Hyacinth Bucket was
a resemblance? 🙂
@ Christiane:
That’s a thought. I noticed all the hats on the British aristocracy at the Queen’s birthday. They always do that, it seems. When I see Dorothy in hats I think it is pretentious, and I want to say just who do you think you are and who do you think you are fooling.
Some of what this blog post has been about has been the blatant hypocrisy of Mary Kassian. Today Scot Mcknight on Jesus Creed has a post on heresy, but this statement is applicable to what we’ve been discussing:
Jesus’ focus was on “hypocrisy” more than “heresy,” and it might just be an indication of how far we’ve strayed for us to give so much attention to “heresy” and not enough to failure in praxis.
Did we ever decide what, within the parameters of evangelical christianity, can be defined as conservative and what can be defined as moderate and what is liberal? I get the distinct feeling that we are not all using the same assumptions or definitions about these terms.
Please pray for The people of Todd County, KY. We had about 7 inches of rain in less than 3 days, on already saturated ground …. More rain coming today. I’m good – up on a big hill in the boonies, but I have friends in trouble. 21 houses in Elkton (pop. 2200) have flooded. I haven’t been to town (Elkton), but I have seen photographs. I’ve never seen flooding the bad there. The town has declared a state of emergency.
My route to town is (was) hwy 181, which is North Main. North main is badly flooded. North Main has been closed since school let out because they were tearing out and rebuilding the bridge. Now, the best two detours have washed out, so next time I go to town, I’ll have to detour around the detours.
One house that has flooded is the home of one of my former co-workers, his wife, and their 3 daughters.
okrapod wrote:
Maybe she should toss the hats and start wearing tiaras.
okrapod wrote:
I have a friend who loves hats but you need the right occasion to wear them. She holds parties specifically for that purpose. Maybe Dorothy should do that.
okrapod wrote:
In the SBC world, the conservatives won their “resurgence”, so they get to decide on the definitions. To the victors go the spoils. They decided over time, however, that conservative wasn’t conservative enough, i.e. exit Russell Dilday from SWBTS. Enter the fundamentalists, i.e. welcome Jerry Falwell.
@ Nancy2:
If your husband decides to go to seminary, and if you get up there on campus for whatever, you could maybe set up a small educational business giving shooting lessons and math lessons and lessons on how not to be a pushover. Better do it off campus and under another name, but the ladies up there need what you have to offer.
okrapod wrote:
They’re already centralizing, as seen with NAMB, IMB, and the seminaries. Money is going to those institutions, not just in form of the the cooperative program and the offerings, but also from Lifeway and all their books. Just because it’s not all visible yet, doesn’t mean they don’t have a plan to put in place. The institutions already treat Mohler as the primary decision-maker.
I’m not saying this will happen in the next couple years, but how much has changed in the past 10 years alone?
okrapod wrote:
I suppose that each religious group defines those labels differently. And what would the belief and practice be of a “fundamentalist?” Exact definitions are elusive. During the SBC Conservative Resurgence, SEBTS President Danny Akin produced a chart re: conservative vs. moderate positions (“liberals” and “moderates” were lumped together as one entity). I couldn’t locate Dr. Akin’s chart, but the following link summarizes it: https://gospelfocus289.wordpress.com/2014/11/19/differences-between-conservative-moderate-baptists/
okrapod wrote:
You make some good points. How it works now, in my view, is via much more informal networks where the young pastors’ identities lie. They do not identify with the beliefs which the SBC has historically held. The SBC is merely a resource or a means to advance the agenda of the more informal networks. For example, a guy coming out of the 9Marks network takes over the pastorate at a church in the SBC. His primary loyalty is *not* to the SBC except to the extent that the SBC resources can be harnessed to propagate 9Marks views. Another example would be Acts29. These young guys have been groomed to be loyal to particular men or networks.
The pewpeons are going to only hear from approved sources who are either inside the network or sympathetic to it. Guest speakers from the network are invited to events or to preach on Sunday. Sometimes parallel local associations are formed for like-minded pastors which are outside the traditional local associations. The church libraries are filled with approved books. The impression is created that this is the way the SBC has always been when it is *not* the way the SBC has always been.
People say that Mohler is the de facto pope of the SBC, and it could be said that Dever and Chandler and Platt and Ezell are archbishops. While you do not have nasty fights over buildings as in the Presbyterian or Episcopalian churches, you *do* have tragedies like FBCRM due to the personal loyalties that the pastors/elders in the churches have.
Nancy2 wrote:
Praying for you folks in KY.
Hugs from CA.
Velour
A word or two has passed here about online education. I am informed that the public schools are moving in that direction, and that in my state the software is available but the money to implement it has not been appropriated, and will not be in this economy.
So. going to school online for kiddies is coming to a school near you, but probably not in the immediate future. So they say. On line education is the new tomorrow.
At the same time, one of the persons in my family is contemplating getting a second masters from one of our state universities, and it is offered exclusively on line.
okrapod wrote:
Don’t for get, I can teach them various uses for rolling pins and cast iron cookware. But, I would go farther than that! I’d teach ’em how to scald and pluck chickens, and clean and cook the squirrels and rabbits they bag.
Hey, theses girls need to know how to rough it, just in case their husbands decide to be missionaries in a 3rd world country, or some backwoods area! My school motto: “Be Prepared!”
I’d use my own name! My husand would get a good laugh out of it. He might even recommend my school to these poor city boys that don’t know how to survive without Starbucks and cinnamon rolls.
okrapod wrote:
She is making an ostentatious display of her great virtue as a submissive wife. It is all about appearances. I agree that not many people are fooled, but there is a headcovering movement that some young SBC women are either practicing or investigating.
Imma just going to leave this here. It’s not an easy video to watch, but the attitudes expressed by “Aunt Lydia” in here do mirror those of our complementarian-promoting people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNn_pNt2Fx8 (indoctrination scenes from “The Handmaid’s Tale”)
Max wrote:
Fascinating! I am finding here that I might be a liberal of some sort.
*Affirm congregationalism with strong pastoral authority/leadership.
*Oppose women as pastors: (complementarians in the home/church).
*Find no mythological elements in Scripture.
NO mythological elements in scripture??? Does this mean they reject all the obvious imagery or just the big stuff?
I think the thing about ‘autographs’ of scripture is interesting too. Maybe this is something talked about in seminary but not real life so much, because when somebody threw that around the other day I had to figure out what he meant.
@ Nancy2:
I’m so sorry Nancy! Hope everyone comes out alright.
ishy wrote:
Granted, I live in the boonies, and we are about 10 years behind the rest of the world, but I had never heard of the BF&M 2000 until it was brought into the church we were at in late 2010 or early 2011. Even the rural churches are starting to push it. I figure it is only a matter of time until churches and church members are required to sign contracts agreeing to the BFM.
okrapod wrote:
LOL. The expression “She’s a pistol” comes to mind. For those of you who are not native Southerners, this expression can be either a compliment if one likes strong women or not a compliment if one cannot bear a strong woman. I like strong women who make the likes of Owen BHLH melt into a puddle of hyperbolic overadjectivation. 🙂
Gram3 wrote:
Ergo, Hyacinth Bucket. “Keeping up Appearances”.
Gram3 wrote:
Hee!!
May we all make Owen terrified.
okrapod wrote:
Georgia has a state online school system. It’s getting pretty popular.
And I did a post-grad degree all online. Never been to the campus once.
okrapod wrote:
With the advances in technology more courses are being offered online that are academically challenging. I’ve taken online college courses from the state colleges here (CA) that were rigorous, a friend who is a librarian obtained a second Master’s from an online program from a state college and it was an extremely hard program, and a family friend who is an Anthropology professor teaches her state college classes online.
Online courses are an asset to people who need to take courses or get a degree but can’t get to a college campus.
The downside to online courses is that the nation-wide educational research studies show that there is a higher drop-out rate and failure rate for students who take online classes than who attend in-person classes. My state’s community colleges and state universities are reticent to offer too many classes online because they’ve experienced this with students.
My ex-NeoCalvinist/9Marxist pastor bought his Ph.D. from a diploma mill in Missouri. He didn’t do any real scholarship.
ishy wrote:
Kentucky is going with Pearson’s. It sucks. I tutored my daughter and 3 other students through Pearson’s college algebra . The instructions and examples are horrible.
Nancy2 wrote:
The late 20th cent. poet James Douglas Morrison described them thus:
“…Smug in the woolly cotton brains of infancy…”
brian wrote:
It’s now up to five officers dead. (Five cops killed, several wounded.)
Dallas Police Shooting Suspect Identified; 5 Officers Are Dead
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/us/dallas-police-shooting.html
“The sniper was killed, and three other people are in custody, officials said.”
Burwell wrote:
You’re welcome. That book has helped me.
Nancy2 wrote:
Numerous SBC churches did not adopt the BFM2000, preferring to stick with the 1963 version. Some viewed it as a product of the divisive Conservative Resurgence (they may have agreed with the mission of the CR, but not the aggressive tactics used to cause disunity in the Body of Christ) … some noted that long-standing Baptist doctrines of priesthood of the believer and soul competency were diminished in the revision, and they were not supportive of that .. but only a few recognized it for what it was – a statement providing sufficient theological wiggle room to trend the denomination into Calvinism (heck, some on the revision team didn’t even see that coming!).
Nancy2 wrote:
Math education is a losing proposition in America these days. In a word, it’s gone down the outhouse pooper. Way too much time is devoted to abstract theory and not nearly enough expenditure to drill and the actual working of problems. Pearson’s huh? How dare those proles and rubes chafe at what the enlightened ones decree they must buy!
__
“Beyond Brass Tacks & 501(c)3 Religious Abuse, Perhaps?”
hmmm…
Wartburg,
Instead of debating the lack of validity within the complementarian position (or its proponents) which your blog and it’s commenters apparently oppose, why not further present your case for the Egalitarian position (with scriptural examples of its positive out-workings) , which you appear to completely embrace; as these issue(s) it would appear go far beyond male to female abusive practices past or present, in 501(c)3 churches or beyond.
Is this issue truly about an individual’s character, or is it rather about about Jesus’ wonderful plan for His bride to be, while here on the earth as spelled out in the pages of the New Testament.
Yes, the sixty-four dollar cosmic question: How does God really spell out His wonderful plan for his Son’ bride, in the pages of the New Testament, while His Son’s ‘bride to be’ is here on the earth?
ATB 🙂
Sopy
—
Muff Potter wrote:
We are losing because we have forfeited. When I was teaching, it drove me nuts when I had 9th grade algebra I students that didn’t know their multiplication tables and could not do long division. How are they supposed to do division with algebraic equations? How are they supposed to simplify algebraic fractions? Okay kids. Close your textbooks for a few days and let’s go back to 4th grade, so you can do the 9th grade math!
No! I am ” old school”!
And, Core Curriculum criteria is useless when the students are behind. It does more harm than good.
Christiane wrote:
I can see it now. She’s an expert in women’s studies because she meets the two essential criteria (you can fudge the first but the second is non-negotiable):
1) She’s a woman. (As mentioned, this one is flexible. I’ve seen any number of books written by men purporting to tell women how to live godly lives.)
2) she knows her place, and she keeps to it. (Her “place” as defined by the Big Boys — not sure I’d go so far as to call them “men” even if they are biologically mature.)
@ brian:
I started praying the moment I heard the news. Thanks for bringing it up.
Lea wrote:
Sounds like a great opportunity to brainwash, er, get in a few good pokes for ESS.
@ Max:
Thanks, Max. That is a good link. I did not see myself in either profile. No wonder I was getting confused about the whole thing.
refugee wrote:
Derivatives.
okrapod wrote:
Then you would be a hybrid known as a “modervative.” ;^)
I hate labels.
@ Nancy2:
Praying, Nancy.
Nancy2 wrote:
Sounds like a scene out of ‘Winter’s Bone’ …. when Ree is teaching her little brother and sister to ‘feed themselves’ … great movie, powerful
Nancy2 wrote:
I will pray vigil for them tonight. As climate change becomes more ‘catastrophic’, I suspect we all shall be impacted sooner or later.
Nancy2 wrote:
I can identify. At the end of my first year teaching in the inner city, a father comes up to me and said, I want to shake the hand of the first teacher who helped my son finally learn his time tables. (We did grids every day as warm ups, with numbers across the top and down the left side, starting with 2, 3 , 0, 1
I GREADED ‘EM. And the kids got their papers back daily. Pretty soon they were getting 100’s. It didn’t take much … a few minutes each day. But they LEARNED. You can’t function in math without basic skills. I also filled in the ‘gaps’ in their learning. I bet you were a great teacher, NANCY TWO.
Christiane wrote:
GRADED 🙂
Sopwith wrote:
The reason it’s important to shoot down the lies of complementarism and rigourously discuss it is because of all of the Christians who are being harmed by these insufferable, heretical, abusive teachings.
I came out of a Comp-promoting church. It was refreshing to find this blog and also Julie Anne’s Spiritual Sounding Board. (Ditto A Cry for Justice, Jeff Crippen (pastor) and Barbara Roberts’ blog about domestic violence in the Christian church.)
These blogs, and other posters (shout out to Gram3), have helped deprogram me of this hateful stuff that was shoved down my throat when I thought I was the only one, thought I was losing my mind. I wasn’t!
Nancy2 wrote:
If Mary has a degree in OT and her husband practices PT, they brought a certain expertise both to her medical treatment after the accident and to the lawsuit. This might have emboldened them to sue.
However, the judge thinks that she ignored good medical advice and instead received treatment that caused further damage.
So it appears that she sued the driver for damage partly caused by poorly chosen medical professionals. Not sure I’d visit either Kassian if I needed PT or OT.
[106] … the treatment that Mrs. Kassian elected to seek out after her discharge from Mr. Ariza’s clinic in the summer of 2004 has caused additional harm rather than improvement according to Mrs. Kassian’s own expert orthopaedic evidence.
[111] … I do find as fact that Mrs. Kassian’s inappropriate plan of treatment has either prevented recovery from her neck and scapular injuries, or aggravated those injuries beyond the level that caused by the Accident.
[114] I have found that Mrs. Kassian has prolonged and aggravated the effect of the injuries that she had suffered as a consequence of the Accident via her failure to consult the appropriate medical experts, and having engaged in an inappropriate treatment regime. Logically, this fact should reduce the damages that she would be awarded, and again, from the point at which she failed to take the appropriate treatment steps.
@ okrapod:
If the state conventions are signing non disclosure agreements with Ezell at NAMB because they were threatened to lose benefits, something major has changed about the process. That bit came out from one brave guy in Maryland who is now without a job.
And I do know the KBC is Mohler loyal and they pretty much ran the pulpit committee at my last church. It is normal practice for churches to call upon local association/state convention for help. Mohler loyalists are in those now, too. Or at least They now find it more profitable to do so.
All of this done under the guise of autonomy. It’s like the IRS claiming they have come to help you with the books.
Christiane wrote:
Tee hee! When I worked in one particular public school, I was called to the office after school …….. A woman from the BoE, who checked lesson plans randomly, wanted to know why I wasn’t staying within core curriculum guidelines. I told her why. She didn’t know what to say.
Lydia wrote:
Oh. My. Goodness.
I looked at the online brochure for the Seminary Wives Institute. Each class meets for an hour and 45 minutes, once a week, for only SIX weeks. That’s all it takes for a “credit” and it takes 13 credits to get your “Certificate of Ministry Studies.” It makes some of the real, actual Bible Studies I’ve done seem like “study on the doctoral level.”
Ruth Tucker wrote:
Very true.
okrapod wrote:
I think it is very confused. And the lines are blurring. The old definitions don’t work.
@ Elizabeth Lee:
A “certificate”? Good for what? Job as Seminary wife?
Nancy2 wrote:
I understand the lady Hyacinth Bucket liked to be called Hyacinth boo-kay in the French pronunciation.
Sopwith wrote:
Where have you been Sop, we’ve done this on several posts.
Have you looked on the Christians for Biblical Equality site? I think I’ve recommended it to you before. They have several great articles on the nitty gritty of scripture and egalitarianism.
Jerome wrote:
I can’t find that as a qualification for any other person on Google (except for some Miss Capital Area thing…). Taking a wild stab… CAOT stands for Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. Could the M mean Member? Master?
Is there a Canadian in the house? 🙂
Gram3 wrote:
Bingo. The key all along has not been winning elections but making appointments to entities, state conventions, church planting and taking over existing debt free churches.
It has been very stealthy.
Nancy2 wrote:
Wow. We were closely ‘supervised’ and observed, as were our plans, etc. But when I was hired by the school system, the interviewer asked me, ‘to whom would you answer ultimately’ …. and I told her ‘the children .. because if I let them down, who would help them?’
They hired me. And I kept my word.
@ Nancy2:
This issue infuriates me. Glad to meet a math teacher who sees it. Too many “experts” in ivory towers changing what was not broken. Our country suffers because of it.
I used to do quite a bit of business with Japanese executives who moved here to oversee Japanese companies. They were so appalled by the math education they started their own Saturday schools for Japanese kids to be drilled in the basics.
@ Lydia:
Btw, math is the major reason I chose private elementary and middle schools over public.
okrapod wrote:
So I Google “kassian mscot” and get a lot of results about hockey mascots…
okrapod wrote:
Not Reforming them?
Friend wrote:
Let me guess: Managing Closets And Organizing Things (M.C.A.O.T.)
Nancy2 wrote:
I will never as a pastor sign the 2000 BF&M. If it costs me my job so be it.
Lea wrote:
Doctoral dissertations are supposed to contribute original knowledge to the field. To prove something brand-new about Hamlet, for example, instead of demonstrating mastery of all previous knowledge about Hamlet.
Original thinking is not encouraged among the folks we are discussing today. Although, strangely, they depart from previous knowledge, without demonstrating mastery.
Ruth Tucker wrote:
You are correct. I know I am scared re: ESS. Practice is important and there is plenty of hypocrisy in my tradition, the baptist church. It just seems so much worse than ever. There are many here who have had very bad experiences with Neo Calvinism. We tend to look more critically at Neo Calvinist orthodoxy because of Neo Calvinist and fundamentalist poor Orthopraxy. We are the midst of a kind of civil war right now. Some of us are critical of complementarianism because woman are to be treated like children and are to behave like a child toward their husband as they winsomely submit to his authority. At least this is why I am critical. Those who flourish in these relationships and give their lives as an example can be manipulative and passive aggressive I and have far mor authority than they would admit to, which is hypocritical. These are sad times.
Velour wrote:
Strange.
That reminded me of this classic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXnFdNriAEk
@ Velour:
Great comment!
Lydia wrote:
It’s not just our public schools. I taught math once in a drug rehab for boys who were 14 to 17 in age. The shop instructor came to me and asked if I could emphasize fractions and measurements. He said that most of these boys did not have the advantage of growing up with fathers who worked with them on cars and with simple wood working. (Thing is, my students in the drug rehab were VERY good at one math skill: subtraction …. they had to calculate making change on the streets)
okrapod wrote:
In our district, online instruction is used in a very limited way. It helps students with significant medical problems. I know one teen who was gravely ill for two years. He did some online work and some tutoring, with the help of school districts in two states (because he had to cross state lines for lengthy inpatient treatment). He has now returned to regular school without being held back.
What’s more common here is online testing and submission of work, as well as online textbooks. Arguably this helps students prepare for the workforce, but I think it’s a mixed bag.
To link this to an on-topic tangent, perhaps an online wife training curriculum could be developed to Stepfordize women with greater efficiency. I’m sure somebody could make millions.
/gets fire extinguisher, aims it at burning bra
mot wrote:
Bless you!
I went around trying to find out the requirements for ot licensing in Canada education wise and it was sort of down the rabbit hole – at least more than I feel like finding right now. Varies by province? Makes sense I guess as things vary by state here. You do have to have significant fieldwork.
Friend wrote:
Please. Friend.
Don’t encourage Ms. Mary.
@ Friend:
I love my kindle for reading but I’m not sure that online textbooks are a good idea. Maybe in limited capacity, but for subjects like math I know I would want to flip back and forth.
Mara wrote:
That was really good.
Lea wrote:
One problem is that the parent has to generate an ID and password to view the child’s online textbooks. Trust me, this is not a smooth and reliable process. So much easier to open a book together.
/throws wooden clog at nearest power loom
@ Lea:
The following link gives a history of the development of the teaching of occupational therapy. Quite a lengthy document, the u over site of Alberta does get a mention.
http://www.uwo.ca/fhs/ot/about/files/history.pdf
U over site = university
@ Velour:
She says she is BS in occupational therapy. If you read the link above, it is Bachelor of Science and it is a four year course.
Lydia wrote:
This is a definition from a contributor on ThePuritanBoard website
“A fundamentalist is someone who got saved after listening to Tim LaHaye scare the “h” out of him in a “the clock is ticking and the antichrist is on the scene” sermon. Now he reads his Bible, goes to church, doesn’t smoke, drink, dance, watch anything beyond a PG movie, or go with girls that do.
A conservative is a fundamentalist who graduated from a Christian liberal arts college and discovered (much as Origen did with his self administered inguinal orchiectomy), radical legalistic “solutions” to the problem of sin don’t always lead to permanently satisfying outcomes. The conservative reads his Bible, goes to church, doesn’t recognize fellow Baptists in a liquor store, and watches his movies on DirecTV. He reads Left Behind books but is a little embarrassed to admit it.
A Reformed person comes in two flavors: “mainline” and “micro denomination.”
* A mainline “Reformed” person doesn’t know what a Tim LaHaye is, has never heard of Left Behind books, has a Bible, goes to church (when in or near Grand Rapids), smokes like a chimney, prefers cocktails and hard liquor, and may even make hard R rated movies about the p*** industry (e.g., Paul Schrader’s Hardcore . . . “Oh my, that’s my daughter.”)
* A micro denomination “Reformed” person knows about Tim LaHaye from a Gentry or DeMar DVD, reads the Bible (but only in the KJV, Geneva, or ESV versions), goes to church 2x on the Sabbath, enjoys beer and liquor in moderation, smokes cigars, and only goes to a movie when not homsechooling his 8 children or posting on the Puritan Board about the dangers of the Federal Vision, theonomy, or female deaconesses.”
__
“Clarify The Problems Facing Jesus’ church, And Providing
Long Term Solutions, Perhaps?
hmmm…
Patriciamc,
hea,
Unfortunately, I have witnessed more sword, and less pen on these revelant issues.
huh?
As you are well aware, Max continues to faithfully inform us that ‘many’ who attend services at an SBC Baptist church are still unaware of the unfruitful events unfolding in their midsts. If the New Testament is presently being utilized to abuse both women and men alike, a clearer understanding, and a far more efficient surgical procedure is apparently required for a thorough remedy.
TWW has been a seven year effect (to date) to get the word out. Instead of using TWW as simply a social media outlet, commenters continue to be in a solid position to clarify the problems facing Jesus’ church as [they] sêê them, and ‘possibly’ providing tailored long term solutions as well.
As always, I commend those who are presently proceeding along these fruitful lines.
Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword, apparently never really encountered a New Calvinist 501(c)3 church.
(sadface)
Sopy
—
Lowlandseer wrote:
Thanks.
Lea wrote:
The school that Mary Kassian claims to have graduated from does not currently have a Bachelors degree in Occupational Therapy. They offer a MSc in Occupational Therapy. Their practices have probably changed over the years. Mary is now in her mid-50s (I think) and I’m assuming she was a student there in the late 70s/early 80s.
Her husband has a Bachelor’s Degree in Physical Therapy (from their business’s website) and is licensed to practice in Canada (verified by the physiotherapyalberta .ca website).
I did a LOT of Googling for “M.C.A.O.T.” As far as I can tell, it’s not a standard abbreviation referring to any kind of degree. In fact every document I found online using this abbreviation (except for one from the late 70s) referred to Mary Kassian.
As far as her official bio…in my experience bios are usually written in 3rd person by the subject of the bio.
Lydia wrote:
Agreed. Nice neat categories and definitive boundaries don’t work because real life and real life people rarely live exclusively in the prescribed boxes. Take me for instance. Politically, I’m an old Socialist (FDR style), a gun owner, staunchly anti-abortion, still wax maudlin over the patriotism of my father’s generation, and couldn’t care less if Adam marries Steve or if Judy’s sweet on Jill.
See what I mean?
Lowlandseer wrote:
Hilarious. Gary DeMar is a riot, too.
Christiane wrote:
Kids generally do can’t do simple math. In economics I spent two weeks every year to teach seniors how to add subtract, multiply and divide with a calculator. Caught h*ll for it the first couple of years I did it, until Someone realized, these kids don’t know their ” times tables” ….They had never been taught. Simple stuff and probably shouldn’t have used two weeks away from micro and macro, but sometimes you have to do the fundamentals…..
@ Lowlandseer:
Oh dear.
“Mary graduated from the faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine from the University of Alberta, Canada and has studied systematic theology at the doctoral level.”
Other than CBMW, has anyone come across ‘degree i.d. letters’ posted after Mary’s name ????
Does she have an associate’s degree? a Bachelor of Arts/or Science degree? a Master’s degree ?
does she have published record of having completed ANY degree work ?
I’ve searched all over the internet, and I can’t find anything that hasn’t already been mentioned on this blog. It’s a bit of a mystery.
Nancy2 wrote:
Besides asking them to make change for 68 cents good luck getting them to tell you who we fought in the revolution or in WWII, they can’t even get the date into the right century, and this is a university town. They can’t identify the three branches of government but are self assured what they think is wrong with the country. This may be part of what is wrong in churches.
Lowlandseer wrote:
Thanks. Most of the ots I know have masters.
Excellent points…
Friend wrote:
Bill M wrote:
Exactly.
So, if, having taken a Bachelor of Science degree from an accredited school,
Mary Kassian was listed as a professional person then she is, without pretense, able to use the letters after her name, this:
Mary Kassian, B.S.
except I can’t find her name anywhere with those letters after it . . . . . more mystery . . .
has anyone seen any evidence that she uses her letters in a professional description of herself?
I just learned from watching Fox cable news (on “The Kelly File”) that the camera person who ran towards gun shots to film what was happening in Dallas last night – was a lady camera person.
I know police officers were also running towards the gunshots, but I don’t know how many, if any, were women officers.
But the camera-man from Fox was a camera-WOMAN.
I wonder if John Piper, Wayne Grudem, and other complementarians who regularly lecture that women are weak cream puffs who should rely on men for protection (which the complementarians often fail to do, see, for one example, Doug Phillips who molested his teen girl nanny, Ruth Tucker’s story, and so many others), would have had the courage to run towards gunfire?
Christiane wrote:
Could it be a typo? Maybe it should be MScOT. That would at least make sense.
@ Gram3:
Maybe someone from Canada has info about how degrees are denoted there. Back in the good old days, I had a roommate who was working toward a B.S.O.T. here in the US, but maybe it was BScOT in Canada. So, maybe she has a Master of Science in Occupational Therapy???
My sister is an OT here in the US. She graduated in the late 70’s with a BS in OT from USC. It was a five year program to get certified. She went to school for four years and then did a clinical rotation at several different facilities for a year before she was technically certified. My guess that is what Mary has as well. A few years later, most schools changed their programs to a 5 or 6 year program and students graduate with a masters.
Sopwith wrote:
You’re right, Sopy, that I’m ‘lucky’ to be out of that mess of NeoCalvinism/cultic Heavy-Shepherding church (that was also 9Marxist/John MacArthur-ite).
I do part company with you, however, about the TWW articles. I have found the criticisms of these church practices and the rigorous dialogue we have here to be refreshing. It has honestly deprogrammed me.
A dear Christian woman at my ex-church, whom I sure has questions about their practices, recently emailed me to ask how I was doing. I gave her a report and also filled her in on some bullet points about why I disagreed with the ex-church (topics we’ve discussed on TWW).
I shared with the history of how these abusive teachings came in to practice and got spread.
Sopwith wrote:
‘cult’, yes
INTERESTING:
https://secundumscripturas.com/2016/07/08/an-open-letter-to-liam-goligher-carl-trueman-and-todd-pruitt-ontrinitarian-equality-and-distinctions-guest-post-by-bruce-ware/
Sopwith wrote:
The tongue is mightier than the sword, too!
Sopwith wrote:
I’m not sure what you mean, Sopy. What is the “wonderful plan”? Does character impact this plan at all? Exactly how is it spelled out?
Christiane wrote:
Ware gets bonus points for including quotes from James Petigru Boyce *and* James Montgomery Boice. As if the discussion were not confusing enough…
@ Elizabeth Lee:
CAOT is the Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. http://www.caot.ca/default_home.asp?pageid=2412
And, according to the Canadian Who’s Who Directory – an “M” in front of an organization is a way to designate “Member of.”
https://www.canadianwhoswho.ca/abbreviationsindex.php#skipnav_M
Thus, MCAOT = Member of Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists.
As an RN-BSN, BA…on my resume, I have listed every professional organization of which I am a member. This promotes my active involvement while also highlighting my areas of expertise and professional development/accountability.
That being said. It would never take the place of my educational background, certifications, licensures, etc. Even if I were to drop my license, this abbreviation would not appear in place of it. It would simply be noted that I am still actively involved in said professional organizations.
So, if I have correctly pegged the MCAOT abbreviation – it is placed rather oddly as a degree listing.
However, there could be one other explanation. In the US, OT Assistants are given the acronym: COTA for Certified Occupational Assistant and hold a Bachelor’s Degree. As others here have already pointed out, today the threshold to professional entry for an OT is the Master’s level degree. I don’t believe anyone was grandfathered in (but I could be wrong). I have one friend who graduated 20yrs ago w/ a BS in OT and her designation is: COTA. If my friend wanted to practice at the OT level, she would be required to obtain her MS. I would be very surprised to learn that Mary has her MS (or an active OT license). I would be more likely to believe she has her Assistant certification.
All that to say: MCAOT could be an odd or distinctly Canadian way of listing Mary’s credentials – the Canadian equivalent to the USA’s COTA. It might translate as: Medically Certified Assistant in Occupational Therapy – which would fit both her subject matter (OT) and the likely degree (BS). Why the M? It could be a track distinction. Medical vs Sport, as an example.
This is pure speculation on my part – as I have not yet found Canada’s certified medical personnel acronyms.
siteseer wrote:
I wondered the same. How exactly is this spelled out? While I get the metaphor of self-sacrifice in marriage and putting one’s spouse ahead of one’s own me-ism, beyond that, it gets… well… it gets creepy… and quite frankly was probably never meant to be carried beyond just a simple and practical ethos for living.
Mark wrote:
It’s very sad. One of my profs there was possibly the most educated theologian I’ve ever known, and humble and kind to boot. He was on his way out, a few months from retirement. The Replacements were all young, unqualified males with degrees from fundamentalist diploma mills (mostly other Southern Baptist seminaries), who had all the grace of an inebriated hippo wrapped around fundamentalist dogma. Theological misanthropy, as I like to call it.
__
“Avoiding 501(c)3 Bad Company, Perhaps?”
hmmm…
(tears)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V3uvx_GLN2I
Velour,
hea,
Parting company over what?
Skreeeeeeeeeeetch !
I ‘too’ commend TWW ‘s grand slam effort(s) to bring “awareness” to the 501(c)3 abuse of holy scripture, the frequent spiritual abusive practices some 501(c)3 churches perpetrate upon the fairer sex, the practice of harboring those supporting pedophilia perpetrators in 501(c)3 churches, the damage caused by New Calvinism, the unlawful pursuit of individuals who wish to (in a civil manner) discontinue the relationship with their 501(c)3 church organization, the increasing pattern of stealthy Calvinistic take overs of 501(c)3 SBC churches, and the frequent, errant , failed in New Testament qualifications 501(c)3 pastor.
hmmm…
Krunch!
…did I miss anything?
bump.
hum, hum, hum… Thy word is a lamp unto ma widdle feet, and a lit’l lite upon Your wonderful path for me…
(grin)
(Lord, have mercy now!)
—> GREATER IS HE (JESUS) WHO IS IN ME THAN HE (Deablo) WHO CONTROLS THIS WORLD’S SYSTEM…
hahahahahahaha
Hum, hum, hum…In the ‘company’ of Our Lord Jesus, until the day I die…
Come quickly Lord Jesus!
Oh! yeah!
***
God’s wonderful plan for Jesus’ bride?!?
Da b creatin’ for Kind Folk who place their ‘trust’ in Jesus, a grand future heavenly plaze free from da bad stuff, N’ da bad people…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=RDxZKuzwPOefs¶ms=OALAAQE%253D&v=xZKuzwPOefs
“Go ye therefore into all the world N’ preach the good news gospel unto everyone…” – Jesus
What is that ‘good news gospel’ ™ ? :
huh?
“God so loved the world that He gave His [only] Son, —> that ‘whosever’ BELIEVES in Him shall NOT perish, but HAVE eternal life…” -Jesus
Cheers!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZKX3eyYuJ9c
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i7lv9oMjv_0
ATB
Sopy
—
__
“Da Lamp?”
hmmm…
Nancy2 wrote:
‘The tongue is mightier than the sword, too! ‘ -Nancy2
huh?
God’s word s mighter than all!
(grin)
ATB 🙂
Sopy
—
@ Sopwith:
Thanx Sopy. It’s great when you or anybody else for that matter proclaims the very person of Messiah and nothing more. No attachments, no strings, no convoluted theology, no nothin’ but his very person.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
Their arrogance is insufferable. If they weren’t so smitten with Mohler, I think they would tear each other to shreds. If fact, I think we will see more of this as his power is consolidated more. That movement has to have a common enemy to thrive. It used to be the culture. Then it was Christians who don’t know the “true” Calvin Gospel. What will it be next? Will ESS be the big issue? I think Mohlers response to this issue shows he fears just that.
Sopwith wrote:
Thanks Sopy for your post and clarifying what you meant.
Daisy wrote:
Its a LOT more arduous than cooking. That struck me as totally weird– She can shovel snow, but she can’t boil a pot of spagheti?
And I have a handicapping condition, too, as well as being an open-heart surgery survivor. But it would never occur to me to whine about not being able to rappell & water ski anymore, which is what I heard from MK. That’s just not what you do; you do whatever you can, & you use the microwave a lot.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
“all the grace of an inebriated hippo wrapped around fundamentalist dogma”
++++++++++++++++
ha! that’s funny! i’ll have to remember that one. what a great insult.
zooey111 wrote:
And what did Mary Ka$$ian do for her husband’s meals when she was off flying around giving motivational seminars, speaking engagements, etc?
Velour wrote:
Chef Boyardee, perhaps???
Does Mr. Paul Roy know that Mrs. Kassian is shoveling snow, since he (or his insurance company) is paying her until 2022 for the injuries she claims makes it impossible to cook? He, or the insurance company, may have a case to have the settlement nullified. Is there a way to contact him?
If this question was asked in comments before mine, I apologize for the repetition.