“I am ashamed of anyone who has eyes and still can't see.” ― Kathryn Lasky, The Journey link
I always thought that pastors and theologians who took the Bible seriously would show tremendous concern for issues surrounding abuse. It is evident to me that the entire Bible seems to stress the love of God towards the people He created. At the same time Jesus spoke out against any who claim to be leaders yet cause pain and suffering through a heavy burden of rules and regulations. In particular Jesus expressed great love for children who were relegated to unimportant positions by the religious leaders. If that was not so, the following would not have been said by Our Lord.
"If anyone causes one of these little ones–those who believe in me–to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. Bible Gateway NIV Matt 18:6
People were also bringing babies to Jesus for him to place his hands on them. When the disciples saw this, they rebuked them. 16 But Jesus called the children to him and said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 17 Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” Luke 18:15-17 Bible Gateway NIV
Unfortunately, I have become increasingly concerned about the response of gospel™ churches to the issues of abuse. Most Christian would think that churches would place a priority on the welfare of children and spouses who need to be protected. Yet time and time again, I am disturbed by so called leaders who seem to stress the roles of gender as the most important issue of our day, even claiming that it will stop abuse in our churches.
Let's review the Fellowship Memphis/Downtown Church/Second Presbyterian response to abuse.
You can refer to our previous 5 blog posts on this matter. These churches are complementarian in their view of gender.
Rick Trotter, employed by Fellowship Memphis (John Bryson, Bryan Loritts) was caught filming women in the bathroom at Fellowship Memphis. Allegedly, this was not reported to the police, the evidence was reportedly destroyed, the women were asked not to report this to the police and Trotter was fired and sent to rehab. Prior to this, they reportedly knowingly hired Pete Newman who would go to prison for abusing children at Camp Kanakuk.
Downtown Church (Memphis), Second Presbyterian)
Rick Trotter was hired by the church with the full knowledge he was a voyeur. Their sponsoring church, Second Presbyterian, under the leadership of Sandy Willson refused to get involved. Trotter was caught filming up women's skirts during church and was finally arrested.
The arrest should have happened the first time. No excuses from these dangerously naive pastors. They dropped the ball. Is it because Trotter was only filming women?
Fellowship Associates has another sex abuse situation which appears to have been mishandled.
Fellowship Associates is an umbrella organization of which Fellowship Memphis is a member. This involves an instance of child sex abuse at Fellowship Bible Church Brentwood which isa member of Fellowship Memphis. We wrote about this issue here, here and here. Here is an overview of the situation.
The couple, identified only as “John and Jane Doe,” claim that on August 14, 2014; they came to Fellowship Bible Church in Brentwood, a Nashville suburb, for the regular service and left their two children in the care of the church’s children’s ministry. The following weekend, their three-year-old son, “Johnny Doe,” told his parents that he didn’t want to go to church. When his parents asked him what happened, Johnny told them a horrifying tale–a teenage boy who was volunteering at the church’s children’s ministry had taken him inside a bathroom and raped him.
The Does did what any parents would do–they stormed to the church to demand answers. However, the Does claim that church officials responded in the worst way possible. According to the complaint, church officials initially tried to say that Johnny had made the whole thing up, then tried to pressure his parents into not pressing charges against the teen. The Does also say that church officials suggested they might be better off attending one of Fellowship’s other two campuses in Franklin or South Nashville.
The church reportedly did not tell members of the abuse for almost one year! Then they tried to get the lawsuit dismissed. This church sounds like they are really, really concerned about victims….Thankfully, the judge refused to dismiss the suit. Yay, judge! If they won't stop doing this because of their faith, maybe they will if they lose money.
According to the lawsuit, the family's 3-year-old son was raped by a male teenage volunteer in a bathroom of Fellowship Bible Church of Williamson County during church on Aug. 24, 2014. The teenager pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual battery.
Family members left the son at the children's ministry while worshipping, but they weren't aware of the sexual assault until the next weekend.
The lawsuit claims the church urged the family to not pursue charges and asked it to attend another church campus.
It further states that the church "sought to hide the truth about the perpetrator pedophile and about the rape of (the 3-year-old) from other families.”
A local family has filed a $37.5 million lawsuit against a Brentwood church after their 3-year-old was sexually assaulted by a church volunteer.
According to a lawsuit filed Monday, the family's 3-year-old son was raped by a male teenage volunteer in a bathroom of Fellowship Bible Church of Williamson County during church on Aug. 24, 2014. The teenager pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual battery.
The family left their son at the Children's Ministry while worshiping, but they weren't aware of the sexual assault until the following weekend.
According to the lawsuit, the church allegedly urged the family to not pursue charges and asked them to attend another church campus.
It further states that the church "sought to hide the truth about the perpetrator pedophile and about the rape of (the 3-year-old) from other families.”
Why does it seem that Fellowship Bible Church in Brentwood, which is a member of Fellowship Associates, is responding to abuse in the same way as Fellowship Memphis? DNA, perhaps?
Here are some of the related groups who have ties to Fellowship Associates and their decidedly manly Authentic Manhood.
There is a loose connection between a number of the so named Fellowship Bible Churches. Fellowship Associates appears to be the linking group. Lots of these churches and the Associates have connections to the usual suspects.
Crawford Lorritts – his church is a member of Fellowship Associates and he is the father of Bryan Loritts
Sandy Willson – the pastor of Second Presbyterian who refused to get involved in the 2nd hiring of Rick Trotter
TWW wrote a post and linked a bunch of these folks together in The Many Associations of ‘Authentic Manhood’ That Surround Fellowship Associates
- TGC
- Acts 29 (DD, AD -during Driscoll and after Driscoll)
- 9Marks
- The Village Church and Matt Chandler
- Jamie Munson and Justin Holcomb, formerly of Mars Hill
- Various Fellowship Bible Churches
- Fellowship Associates
- Authentic Manhood
- Men's Fraternity
- Leadership Collective
- Crossway (the publisher of the ESV)
- The Austin Stone
- SGM
- CBMW
Wayne Grudem states that complementarianism will prevent abuse. He is wrong, dead wrong.
Recently, A Cry for Justice posted How Wayne Grudem fits his ideas on authority/submission with his thoughts on domestic abuse. Here is what they had to say.
Wayne Grudem claims that complementarianism guards against abuse. He maintains that his ideas on authority and submission don’t lead to abuse because he also emphasizes that men and women are equal in value:
(Grudem) "This created order is also best for us, because it comes from an allwise Creator. This created order truly honors men and women. It does not lead to abuse but guards against it, because both men and women are equal in value before God. (Biblical Foundations for Manhood and Womanhood, link 53)"
Continuing to quote Grudem
I strongly deplore any abuse of wives by their husbands and I believe the Bible teaches clearly against it. When pastors learn about abuse occurring in a home in their congregation, they have an obligation before God to seek to bring an immediate end to it, through direct personal conversation with the abuser, support of the abused, professional counseling, through means such as church discipline, protective personal intervention in dangerous situations, using law enforcement and other legal pressures, extensive prayer, and, if necessary, legal separation. Pastors also need to encourage their church members and attendees to tell someone in church leadership if abuse is occurring, so that appropriate means can be brought to bring an immediate end to it. Nobody in a leadership role in CBMW thinks that abuse within a marriage is justified by the biblical teachings about husbands and wives.
Wayne Grudem, Ph.D., Research Professor, Phoenix Seminary, and co-founder and past president of CBMW
Hold it right there, Wayne Grudem……
.I thought that you said that complementarianism does not lead to abuse. So why all the caveats about what to do when abuse occurs? Please read the entire post at Cry for Justice which cogently points out how all of those steps sound nice in theory but don't happen in reality in many complementarian churches. By the way, Grudem does not allow for divorce in the case of abuse as pointed out by the article.
Why complementarianism does not prevent abuse.
TWW has listed church after church which have experienced abused wives, children, and members within the "complementarian is the gospel answer" crowd. Let's take a look at the Duggars. They did it all correctly by chaperoning, homeschooling, no bathing suits, looking down when girl not dressed in long jeans skirts walk by, etc. They believed in the submission routine on the part of wives and children. It didn't work and their kids were abused by their brother. And there is a darn good reason why it doesn't work for the complementarian crowd either.
Abuse has nothing to do with acting out specific roles, refusing to watch R rated movies, keeping women keeping quiet in church, making sure boys play with trucks and girls play with dolls, etc. It is about mentally unbalanced individuals, some of whom are sociopaths, who crave using power to be in control. You can't cure them with good intentions or church discipline. They need to be turned over to the authorities.
Gender theology will not help them.
1. None of John Piper's weird lectures on how not to upset a man by giving him directions and Tim Challies' church which only allows men to read Scripture publicly in church will stop abuse.
2. No gospel™ understanding of the doctrines of grace or the creation order for men or women will cause abuse to cease.
3. The Danvers Statement is useless in preventing abuse.
4. No child will be protected from abuse by learning "first time" obedience by gender perfect parents.
5. No child will be protected from a pedophile who can quote Wayne Grudem's 83 rules for gender.
6. Reading through the CBMW site 100 times or making sure there are no soap bubble on a woman's dishes will stop it.
7. The lack of women elders will not guarantee freedom from abuse.
8. Lectures about sanctified testosterone will not prevent a guy from becoming a pedophile or an abuser.
9. Church discipline won't fix it and membership covenants will not prevent it.
10. Pastors and church leaders are not equipped to investigate it, make pronouncements on guilt or innocence and provide counseling to make the abuser "walk in repentance."
The shame of many complementarian groups
And that is why complementarian groups like TGC, CBMW, Acts29, Fellowship Associates, Authentic Manhood and people like John Piper, Wayne Grudem, Owen Strachan, Bruce Ware, and Mary Kassian are utterly useless in addressing abuse. Think of the support of SGM during the horrendous sex abuse scandals and remember Al Mohler's joke on CJ Mahaney's Google presence? Why do they never discuss the sex abuse scandals of their member churches? Every single one of these groups have enough to be ashamed of when it comes to the church's response to abuse. Every.Last.One.
For now, there is not a single group in this list that I could safely say is consistently responding appropriately to abuse. I hope I can be proven wrong in the future.
I am gratified to see that Dallas Theological Seminary will offer a mandatory course in preventing sex abuse. I hope more seminaries and churches will offer such courses along with understanding and preventing domestic violence. Until that happens, TWW will continue to point out abuse after abuse within these groups who think their theology will prevent violence. They are naive and potentially dangerous in their continued lack of thoughtful response in this area.
Now, which scandal should we address next…?
This pattern is getting old. I believe complementarianism is harmful for women and children.
Complementarianism in all its forms makes women a second class citizen and renders her voiceless. It stinks as a system.
Wayne Grudem has a book signing next Monday evening at Phoenix Seminary. If someone were to go out there with a sign, what would be a good thing to say on it? Maybe “Complementarianism Doesn’t Stop Sexual Abuse of Children”?
Mark Driscoll is speaking on Thursday the 15th for the Arizona Christian Legal Society luncheon meeting. It is also meeting at Phoenix Seminary. I *do* plan on hitting the seminary sidewalk for that; I’ve already arranged to take the time off from work.
Comps are hell bent on making sure that their legacy lasts that they’re indoctrinating children in this theology. Making sure that little boys and little girls understand their God given roles and accept them without question helps to further along the agenda. Men are the heads and women are the helpers, that’s it, no questioning. And, don’t even begin to question your sexuality. That’s incredibly untrustful of how God designed you.
Kathi wrote:
Comps do not like their system to be questioned.
Home run, Dee. You knocked it out of the park!
Haven’t read the article yet, but after reading the title I can see you forgot Doug Phillips and Doug Wilson . . . 😉
From the post: “…who crave using power to be in control…”
The essential link between pedophiles, pastors, patriarchs, etc.
mirele wrote:
WTH! Does the Arizona Christian Legal Society know anything about Mark Driscoll or his disappearing act from Seattle??
Here’s some background on Fellowship Associates. Fellowship Associates came about as a result of the success of Robert Lewis’ “men’s fraternity” curriculum (now also referred to as “authentic manhood”). Churches and college campus ministries nationwide began using it and men, especially young, naive college graduate types, became enamored with it. Robert Lewis and the other two founding pastors of Fellowship Bible Church, Little Rock AR (FBCLR) are fairly “normal” guys with “normal” families in the realm of contemporary evangelical christianity. none of their children were homeschooled, and they attended public schools or secular private schools. Their kids all went to division one universities and pledged mainstream sororities and fraternities (all of this is a really big deal in the south – i’m just trying to paint a picture that these are not quiverful / gothard type people). The three founding pastors all had seminary degrees, unlike your CJ Mahaney types. Robert Lewis actually attended Western Seminary in Portland OR so he has had a taste of the pacific northwest (significant, considering they were all raised in the Bible Belt and attended the University of Arkansas for their undergrad years). They realized that the men’s fraternity curriculum was very positively impacting young men, especially ones who had grown up with only single mothers raising them. their relationships with their dads were few and far between, and men’s fraternity showed them how to be a man. it filled a void. it met a “felt need,” to use the churchy lingo. the motto of men’s frat. is “reject passivity, accept responsibility, lead courageously, expect God’s reward.” as the popularity increased, the idea of a church planting agency came about. fellowship associates was created and the main program of it was a one-year residency training in pastoral leadership at fbclr. men would move, with their families, to Little Rock for one year to be trained by these “amazing pastors” at fbclr and then be commissioned to go out and plant churches according to the outlines of fbclr. Dave Furman of Redeemer Church of Dubai participated in this, as well as many more you can read about at the Fellowship Associates website. From what i understand, Fellowship Memphis came about when Mark DeYmaz, the student pastor of FBCLR at the time, wanted to receive the blessing of FBCLR to plant a racially / socio-economically diverse church in the heart of Little Rock (FBCLR is in the suburbs and caters to mostly white, upper middle class families). That church eventually became Mosaic Church of Central Arkansas, which you can look up, but DeYmaz did not receive the FBCLR blessing. They said, we love this idea, but we don’t love for you to do it in our backyard. DeYmaz said good riddance and started the church anyway. My understanding is that Fellowship Memphis became the church plant that was initially envisioned by Mark DeYmaz. Memphis was chosen because it was a city with a severely racially divided atmosphere, and it was just far enough away from Little Rock that it would not “compete” with FBCLR. I guess the reason i mention all of this is because Fellowship Associates has alot at stake. They cannot afford to pay (too many) lawsuits. What (i believe) started as a noble mission, has turned into a corporate powerhouse where the 1 percent has 99 percent of the power, just like on wall street. I believe that the only thing that will stop them is for people to come forward and tell their truth over and over again, to put it all over media and social media, and to stop attending and giving money to these churches. in the south, it’s so hard for people to stop supporting their church because it’s like a country club. you lose alot of friends if you speak up and speak out. but i’m finding that with my generation (x and millennials), we are not putting up with it. Once our parents’ generation dies out, churches are going to start dying out too (as long as we make sure our parents haven’t left their estate to their church LOL).
Protecting a doctrine over protecting real people is a sign of missing the mark spiritually, IMO. I seem to remember Jesus calling out a certain religious crowd about doing such a thing…
“This created order truly honors men and women. It does not lead to abuse but guards against it, because both men and women are equal in value before God.”–Wayne Grudem
+++++++++++++++++++
i fail to see the logic.
@ Bridget:
And Kevin “Womb Tomb” Swanson
@ JYJames:
Snort!
dee wrote:
Him too!
Divorce Minister wrote:
Nick posted this comment awhile ago. It was so good, I saved it.
Nick Bulbeck ‘ comment on The Wartburg Watch:
“But I came across a great quote on someone’s blog a few years ago. I’ve not been able to find it since, otherwise I’d attribute it, but the best I can do is say that I didn’t come up with this. It goes, as near as I can remember it, thus:
Where law is paramount, rules matter more than people; and Christians will hurt people in order to obey the rules. But where love is paramount, people matter more than rules; and Christians will break the rules in order to protect people.”
@ razorbackSally:
Thanks for that detailed history.
Big applause here for this much needed article!
The emperor has no clothes.
Velour wrote:
This reminds me of Christ healing on the sabbath and saying that if your ox falls in a pit on the sabbath, then by all means, you get it out. Of course, these groups don’t truly follow Christ.
razorbackSally wrote:
Interesting.
I wonder what the evidence for this is. I hear so many claims that groups or leaders are ‘changing peoples’ lives’ and so on but how does anyone really know?
I’m starting to feel as if 90% of what is said in the Christian world is just meaningless word salad.
Yes, I watched some of the Authentic Manhood videos with my husband. I did notice that “passivity” seemed to be considered the ultimate sin. My feeling watching it was that men may feel pressured to act decisively but unwisely.
The series was pathetically unscriptural, full of cliches and stereotypes, and loaded with logical fallacies. I just did not see anything of value in it. One close friendship with a mature, godly man would be worth more than the whole Authentic Manhood ball of wax.
Further, if they want to put together some sort of “motto” why not draw something out of the scriptures? Like the fruits of the Spirit maybe, or some things Christ actually taught? There is so much there that is being ignored. This is all just ideas and teachings of men.
@ siteseer:
i.e., what does “lead courageously” even mean, really?
siteseer wrote:
That’s just my observations from being around guys I knew from college who went through the curriculum. The void felt by fatherless men is definitely real and the m.frat. program addressed it. I’m not saying the approach is correct or that it is effective, but it was appealing to many men from this standpoint.
Velour wrote:
Yep. That was me, to a tee. After all, if God is eternally unchanging, Truth is absolute, the Law is the perfect reflection of God’s character, and we are depraved sinners, why shouldn’t we prioritize the rules over people? What’s more important after all?
I’m just glad I didn’t do more damage (by God’s grace) than I did before I realized the real truth…
elastigirl wrote:
The logic is this – a lot of TR types believe in sanctification by correct doctrine. Simply *believe* the right things, and proper obedience must follow, because God built the universe to function along His unchanging creation order.
The fact that this method totally failed in my own life played a huge part in my eventual departure from the TR world…
siteseer wrote:
One can have no doubt that they change peoples’ lives, and probably profoundly, the issue is whether lives are changed for the better or the worse.
No doubt a great number of young men with no father, or absent, indifferent or abusive fathers respond positively to somewhat older men slapping them on the backs and taking the role of surrogate dad, but in too many cases within pseudochristendom, the surrogate dad is opportunistic, cynical, looking to create a following and build themselves up into a Big Thing, and the young men just dying for some male attention are pawns in a larger game, not an end, a means that can be discarded like waste once they are no longer useful. They end up wounded again, worse than before.
Patriciamc wrote:
Exactly.
Eeyore wrote:
What happened to make you realize what you were doing wrong?
Thanks for your candor and transparency.
Thanks for linking to my post on Wayne Grudem, TWW!
I’ve been focusing on Grudem in several recent posts at A Cry For Justice.
The complementarian juggernaut continues to give us the SILENT TREATMENT.
no surprises there — that’s what they’ve always done.
People like Mary Kassian dismay me. She has written about how she has personally helped abused wives get out from dire situations…. yet she is still not doing anything to call the complementarian camp to account for their failure to do enought to teach male headship in a way that protects women from domestic abuse.
siteseer wrote:
Probably means to rush in where angels fear to tread.
Now, which scandal should we address next…? It’s not a scandal so to speak but I think it is a key issue that promotes abuse. I would like to take a crack at it myself is the practical application of inerrancy in the real world in events like abuse. I would like to look at it from the Chicago Declaration.
http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html I find that we actually deal with almost all of our issues in this world using probability and relatively to the situation and not by absolute declarations. It will be based on my experience in the state institution and what I came to understand from those dear people. I promise it will be filled with potential categorical errors, emotionalism, frustration, and best of all the hope I have found again in Christ mainly because of blogs online and individuals sojourning outside the main camps.
Estelle wrote:
Exactly.
In other words, the *leaders* are trying to play the Holy Spirit in peoples’ lives.
brian wrote:
I have been reading Eastern Orthodox Christians’ articles about this topic.
Quite good. http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_solascriptura.aspx
Ken F. and others here have also been reading E.O. on these various topics.
Someone here – I don’t remember whom – recommended Reconsidering TULIP by Alexander
J. Renault. He was a Calvinist who started studying Eastern Orthodox Christianity for research. He ended up converting. It’s a gem of a book — 117 pages. So well reasoned!
Razorback Sally, thank you for the remarks on the history of men’s fraternity an its roots of association with Fellowship Bible of Little Rock (the mother ship). In fact, as you were describing the racially diverse church vision, I thought, “That sounds just like Mosaic.” It has been years since I thought about the connective roots from Fellowship Bible that Mosaic Church sprang from.
I am older than you but I am from that area and I remember when that was getting started. My husband and I were armpit deep in parenting little boys and he had neither the time nor the inclination for such things. I read books on parenting and we made our way together. We both parented. We disagreed sometimes. We compromised. Sometimes one of us “gave in” when we couldn’t find a compromise. We agreed more often than not.
Someone’s comment about the video series that admonished men to not be passive but lead courageously reminded me of something I saw at church one morning a few years ago. Young Mom walks into the building an heads to the nursery. She has her purse, Bible, diaper bag, and two year old on one hand. The other hand is carrying the infant in the usual unwieldy carrier. Where is Young Dad? Why, he is leading his family courageously. He is walking three steps ahead of them, carrying his travel coffee mug. When he was put on the elder board this past year, I knew I wasn’t the only one who had noticed the courageous way he leads his family.
Great post.
Jesus loved people, not the rules. Pharisees loved the rules, not the people.
Same conflict existing today. Are we to follow Jesus example of love, or Pharisee doctrine of rules?
@ mirele:
This just beggers belief. The Arizona Christian Legal Society invited Driscoll to speak?
Tree wrote:
This is an especially vivid picture of the whole movement.
Barbara Roberts wrote:
Equality is best. There is no such thing as “headship” unless there is a body ship or arm ship and such. When someone is viewed as lesser in any way, it brings out the serious problems such as the ever subtle belief one does not need to listen to the deceived female who God says needs a “head” as in authority. That is a colossal interpretive lie. . Jesus Christ instituted NO mediators for women. All the one another’s are mutual. IOW, there is no way to teach male authority that is not in some way destructive to the “lesser” party. And we all know they define kephale as authority.
@ Tree:
He was taught and affirmed as the spiritual VIP of his family. they want us to believe this translates into protection and carrying the heavy load of responsibility. I have seen the opposite in every comp church. Strange how it rarely works out that way unless the comps are operating as mutualist who wear the comp mask at church.
Women are constantly told that they just have not experienced the right type of comp man or that only her submission and prayers will make him a good one. IOW, Jesus Christ crucified and resurrected was not enough for the “Christian” husband.
elastigirl wrote:
It is bizarre. It is not unlike the illogic I saw on display at the Islamic booth at Worldfest. Manned by a young woman in hijab, the literature was all about Islam’s teaching on the “equality of women”. The literature was well done. A big promotional sign said, I love Jesus….because I am Muslim. A new recruiting tactic?
It made me think of all the bold lies of history that worked to the destruction of people. If it is declared bold enough, people believe it. Look at all the young men who were indoctrinated by Grudem for the last 20 years. When will people learn to question?
I have yet to meet a comp that does not insist women are considered equal. Now some Muslims are insisting the same?
“Wayne Grudem states that complementarianism will prevent abuse. He is wrong, dead wrong.”
one wonders exactly how this man defines ‘abuse’, when his system of ‘male headship’ is under-written by the assumption that ‘men’ and their privileges as ‘males’ trump the God-given dignity of their wives and children found in their free will, their moral consciences, and their ‘voice’ as human persons.
When you start with the understanding that a system you have built your empire on is NOT ‘abuse’ but ‘privilege’ by virtue of your male sex;
then the corollaries that follow that system cannot help but reflect its innate corruption.
The ‘male headship’ tolerance for ‘abuse’ is built into the original extreme system. So what do people expect will come from it anyway ????
“6. Reading through the CBMW site 100 times or making sure there are no soap bubble on a woman’s dishes will stop it.”
Dee, you might want to put the word ‘NOT’ before ‘stop it’ in the post in number 6.
Lydia wrote:
Bruce Ware says women are not made in the image of God, and their only purpose is to “glorify man”, and I’m sure he has a lot of comp followers.
Lydia wrote:
The Christian Legal Society is a rather strongly right wing group wrapped in Christianese. Legalistic, rule-oriented, defense of far right conservative ideology.
The abuse continues. Scandal after scandal revealed. Driscoll invited to speak to Christian lawyers – irony there.
I don’t understand what people get out of going to church.
It really is an alternate universe to me.
Jack wrote:
Some churches are OK. Plus, it reminds me that Scripture is correct. Mankind, including Christians, is royally screwed up and we need a Savior.
elastigirl wrote:
It defies ‘logic’ and the reasoning that is God-given to all human persons, yes.
@ An attorney:
IOW, like the left wing only different issues. :o)
mirele wrote:
Be Good And Holy Christian Men: Subjugate Your Women!”
Tree wrote:
Nailed it.
Tree wrote:
God forgive us our foolish ways. I just hope this isn’t a description of a ‘quiverfull’ family scene, or that poor wife might end up as deranged as Andrea Yates . . . . that woman is being ‘led’ all right, right into hell on Earth.
I once saw a picture of Michelle Duggar grooming her husband’s hair …. she looked care-worn as though she had had little sleep or rest, but her lord and master was quite presentable. It was a very telling photograph. It said almost too much about something that sickens the spirit of all women who have any feeling for their put-upon sisters. I thought at the time, if Jim Bob was a REAL man, he would put his wife in the car and drive her to a beauty shop for the works and quit his preening at her expense.
When REAL MANHOOD in that terrible world of quiverfull male-headship is at its most destructive, we end up with the Andrea Yates and the Mary Winklers. Such are the sacrifices offered on the altars of the Golden Bull of Testosterone Idolatry.
“6. Reading through the CBMW site 100 times or making sure there are no soap bubble on a woman’s dishes will stop it.”
Dee is right. My father abused my mother. There would be periods of time when my dad would treat my mom well, but we never knew when he would go off the rails, or how long he would stay off the rails. My mom is a very shy, passive, “submissive” type of person, but that didn’t stop the abuse. There were occasions when my dad would claim that my mom didn’t rinse the dishes properly. He would throw a glass or a cup across the kitchen and hit her. If it wasn’t “soap bubbles”, it would be because she didn’t bring him a cup of coffee fast enough, or he left a pair of pliers laying on the ground beneath the tractor and the pliers were lost because she didn’t go out, find them, and put them in the tractor tool box for him ………. The list goes on. Anything to justify releasing his rage on her. We went to church. My dad: Saturday night wife beater, Sunday morning saint.
“Wayne Grudem claims that complementarianism guards against abuse. He maintains that his ideas on authority and submission don’t lead to abuse because he also emphasizes that men and women are equal in value:”
Bull, bull, and more bull. IMO, if a man has a case of “little man syndrome”, or even leans toward sociopathy, Complementarianism only feeds the monster and makes it grow stronger, more violent, and careen completely out of control! What do our churches do about it? They protect the abusers.
They seem to think they can just SAY ‘we don’t support abuse’ but what you do speaks louder.
Women are counseled to go home to abusive husbands. Women are told they are committing the ‘sin’ of passivity if they do not report to pastors to fix it (which they cannot do). Women are told they are not allowed to divorce. Women are not believed when they report abuse. Children are not believed when they report abuse.
Fix your actions. Then maybe someone will believe your words.
Lydia wrote:
Well of course the right type of comp man would treat them well. That would be because the man is a good man, not because he is a complementarian. Resorting to that argument is admitting the practice of complementarianism isn’t helpful.
ishy wrote:
If Bruce Ware is right, how can women have souls? In this line of thinking, wouldn’t woman clearly be just just another animal that God gave man dominion over? Some kind of china-doll-sex-slave/Labrador retriever/work mule hybrid?
What does it matter how women behave. Snort! We don’ answer to God, anyway. We only answer to men!
I couldn’t help myself. Apologies to tree:
http://www.toondoo.com/cartoon/10386341
Velour wrote:
Thank you, Dee and Deb, for continuing to focus on protecting people over protecting rules, “leaders,” theologies, and institutions.
This quote really sums up the situations you’ve described. We’ve seen it over and over – churches and “christian” organizations closing ranks and protecting their rules and institutions while, at best, ignoring victims or, at worst, actively working against victims. It’s almost impossible to understand how anyone can look at the life of Jesus and justify this behavior. Sadly, it makes me wonder if, for many people, maintaining their own power and authority is the ultimate goal.
Nancy2 wrote:
That’s pretty much how it ends up, yes. And I believe a number of the subordinationists follow that line of reasoning.
Jacob Prasch had some great Youtube videos this summer taking these Calvinista types to task. He said they are the philosophical equivalent of Sharia. He also traces their worldview back to Augustine, who had a colored view of the world from his time in the Manichee cult.
He also goes on to describe their view of God as Platonic, coming from the Greco-Roman concept Augustine had, and not from the Scripture. Basically, they aren’t worshipping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but I think we already knew that.
JYJames wrote:
Ding.Ding.Ding.
Christians are not supposed to be about power and control over others. We are supposed to be about love. Any system that neglects that will fail.
mot wrote:
The Party Can Do No Wrong, Comrades.
razorbackSally wrote:
BWAH! I am so loving your background info on this.
Nancy2 wrote:
Like “Brown Sugah” during slave days — just human enough so it isn’t Bestiality.
elastigirl wrote:
Because there is none. It’s magical thinking. If we SAY we are not for abuse…if we SAY it protects women for them to know their place…then that will fix it all. Grudem even said if you take abuse to the pastor they will stop it. How does he think that will happen? It won’t.
Robert wrote:
Reminds me of “This time we WILL achieve True Communism! Because this time the RIGHT people (guess who?) Will Be In Charge!”
Nancy2 wrote:
Don’t forget dress-up doll for Douggie ESQUIRE’s cosplay sessions.
Hold it right there, Wayne Grudem……
“I thought that you said that complementarianism does not lead to abuse. So why all the caveats about what to do when abuse occurs?”
The only way to make his point is to use a “no true comp” argument. When it comes to abusers, perhaps they should be saying No True Christian.
razorbackSally wrote:
I wonder if the way it filled the void was simply by connecting younger men with older and giving them attention? I don’t know enough about the program to know.
It seems like you could design something without this goofy ‘authentic’ label that put some sort of mentoring in place. I could see fatherless men appreciating the focused attention. But it seems like you could probably have the same results with a focused deer camp or fishing.
And all of this because approximately 1950 years ago Paul told the church in Corinth that the women needed to cover their heads like everyone else because they were scaring the straights.
Lea wrote:
Some of the people I know involved with Celebrate Recovery have said they dealt with a lot of these issues beneficially. CR is still fairly based on the accountability model, but they do have a caveat that the information cannot be used outside the small group (such as by the church). They also take a total depravity approach which I disagree with, since I don’t believe in total depravity and know non-Christians who have successfully beat addictions.
Nancy2 wrote:
Women, know your limits!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w
ishy wrote:
Thank you for the information on celebrate recovery. I have a facebook friend from my old church that keeps promoting it.
On the point about addictions, there is some interesting research about people basically ‘outgrowing’ addictions. Stuff to watch, anyway. I don’t think total depravity has a thing to do with it.
Lea wrote:
I agree with you. I do think faith and God’s intervention can certainly help beat an addiction, but I don’t think it’s necessary. Might be much harder, but still possible.
ishy wrote:
I do too, but sadly I now see some of this Christian counseling stuff as a red flag. This is from the celebrate recovery website: “Celebrate Recovery is a biblical and balanced program that helps us overcome our hurts, hang-ups, and habits. It is based on the actual words of Jesus rather than psychological theory.”
What is wrong with psychological theory? Why are Christians so weird about this? Working in mental health, this just makes people sound like they are ditching anything that is actually proven to help to me.
“I am ashamed of anyone who has eyes and still can’t see.” ― Kathryn Lasky, The Journey
As I’ve noted before, the host of complementarian groups you list would have no stage if they didn’t have an audience. I fault the followers as much as the leaders for allowing this cancer to spread. Jesus has a word for such folks “Don’t you understand or comprehend? Is your heart hardened? Do you have eyes, and not see, and do you have ears, and not hear?” (Mark 8:17-18). The blind leading the blind have fallen in the ditch together.
Christiane wrote:
I think Andrea Yates was badly damaged by Nouthetic Counseling and the complete absence of medical care for her mental health issues, despite repeatedly saying she needed help.
Untreated mental illness + Biblical Counseling + husband (now ex) keeps talking about sin instead of a bona fide health problem + stress/children + isolation = disaster
Lea wrote:
The last SBC church I was at encouraged people in CR to get professional help if they needed it. So I think it’s interpreted differently at different churches.
Lea wrote:
well, throwing out the psychiatrist’s presciption medication on the advice of a ‘Christian’ website will likely have profound effects, but I doubt that the ‘Christian’ website would want to be held accountable for them. People who suffer from mental and emotional illnesses are ALREADY very vulnerable, and when these ‘Christian’ organizations target them for control, and something goes wrong, these organizations need to be held responsible for undermining the professional care of those they have targeted.
When you get ‘know-it-alls’ online who have no humility, you can bet they are more in the business of ‘preying’ than ‘praying’. It’s the hubris and sanctimonious smugness that’s the give-away.
@ Velour:
I have heard that Rusty Yates is now being sued for divorce by his second wife. Just from his photographs, I figured he might not be the sharpest guy out there, and old habits die hard.
I remember how horribly people turned on Andrea Yates when it happened, with little or no compassion for her mental illness;
even where I worked, among an educated faculty, there were people who had no comprehension of her tragic actions as the result of a severe psychotic break. They wanted no mercy for her. I was always stunned by that. And yes, those people were openly ‘deeply religious’ and ‘deeply conservative’. (sigh)
ishy wrote:
That’s good. I don’t think everyone needs medication (particularly if you have mild depression, things like exercise can be as effective as medication), and talk therapy or just group support can help a lot people. So I’m not anti-this program or anything.
I just think that whole ‘it’s not psychology so you don’t have to be afraid’ thing is problematic.
Christiane wrote:
I mean…she murdered her children. I don’t think most people knew anything beyond that. All of this psychological break/husband/quiver stuff I only learned about recently.
Lea wrote:
Thing is, it was all over the news where we were at the time. I know certain parts of the country only listen to certain news sources, and certain radio shock jocks, so I don’t know how they spun the ‘not guilty by reason of insanity’ defense plea.
What I heard is that they went after her like it was a witch hunt. As soon as people in my area heard about the medications she had been on (heavy) and her suicide attempt, and her prior hospitalization, PLUS learning about her living in a renovated bus and home-schooling, with a new baby;
we put two and two together and figured it out.
I think that her story was told differently among certain news organizations, so maybe that is why you are now just learning about some of the facts of the tragedy.
I always ‘blamed’ her husband, but now I just think he was stupid and foolish, and in way over his head with a wife who had serious mental illness and was led by the wrong kind of ‘help’. God knows the truth of this terrible situation, but Velour is right about church ‘counseling’ that does not deal with real medical and psychiatric realities. The woman Andrea was victimized long before she drowned her babies, and those responsible for her victimization share in the guilt, although no one could foresee the nightmare that unfolded. The signs of her desperation were ignored, though.
@ Eeyore:
TR…. hmmm, the acronym’s not registering…. what is it?
Christiane wrote:
I don’t know why you mention ‘shock jocks’.
The only news I saw was the basic national news and I didn’t exactly follow it obsessively. It was mostly ‘here is a terrible thing that happened’.
razorbackSally wrote:
I had heard part of this before. I believe that Fellowship Memphis started with good intentions. They were originally located in a racially diverse part of the city and had one location. Now they have switched to the multi-site model. All of their sites are in predominantly white/upscale areas of the city. Most of their “fellowship groups” meet in the whitest, richest neighborhoods of Memphis. I would be very curious to know the racial makeup of Fellowship Memphis now.
Barbara Roberts wrote:
I’m a bit confused by this statement. This makes it sound like teaching male headship is fine, as long as it is taught the right way . . . the way that protects women from domestic abuse. This is exactly what the comp camp says they do. It is not their fault, after all, if there are rouge comps that don’t understand male headship. I simply don’t find male headship in scripture at all.
I’ve dealt with depression just about all my adult life. In my experience many people who don’t have problems with depression simply don’t understand those that do. The problem is when those people believe any problem can be solved by faith and assume positions of spiritual authority. I’m trying not to be judgmental because we all have our strengths and weaknesses, but I don’t know how someone can be a pastor without being especially compassionate.
Another problem is that many people seem to think psychiatrists and psychologists want to “cure” Christians of their faith. In my experience that isn’t true at all.
ishy wrote:
So many people were hurt so much by the CR and do need help. Other churches celebrate the CR.
@ Jack:
“I don’t understand what people get out of going to church.”
+++++++++++++++
it’s a unique experience. it’s social, but you don’t have to do anything.
you can sit in padded chair in a warm environment with lots of smiley people, all mm-hmm-ing and chuckling in sync, and just receive. no need to make eye contact or make conversation.
it’s God and spiritual, but you don’t have to do anything.
you can sit in said padded chair, listen to a speaker go on for 30 or so minutes with all the right voice inflections to match the right gestures (content is secondary), you can zone in and zone out, day dream, make that shopping list, think about how you want the afternoon to go. and then leave, feeling like you earned some God points to set you up good for the upcoming week.
Lea wrote:
Or taking them along to fix the single mother’s car, repair a neighbor’s roof, play with the grandchildren while your daughter and son-in-law have a date, clean up the neighborhood playground, mow grandpa’s hard, etc, etc.
Christiane wrote:
Sadly, this IS the quiverful lifestyle. When I was still married to my ex-husband he often went running on Sunday mornings and I was left at home to get the 5 children ready for church. Then he usually slept through the sermon.
Lea wrote:
yes, a terrible thing happened . . . something that goes beyond ‘normal’ for a young mother in all ways that are reasonable …..
and THAT was a red light that there was more to the story that made it humane to reserve judgment until the mother’s mental health state was examined thoroughly
the horror of what happened …. yes,
but I look at the way some people viewed Andrea Yates and couldn’t see through to the causes of what she did . . . and so, without any comprehension of what mental illness plus stressors and a psychotic break can lead to,
these people judged HER as though she was in her right mind and competent to stand trial ….
these people ‘had hold of the wrong horror’ and could not see through the terrible results of something dreadful that led up to them
So it is with many who judge only on the surface of human situations without comprehension of the full story. It is not without reasons, that it is written that Our God alone can judge the hearts of man.
Our judicial system, at least, understands that mentally incompetent individuals are not fully responsible for what they do;
even if many of our citizens refuse to acknowledge this truth.
Nancy2 wrote:
Wife Appliance. That’s the term you’re looking for.
mot wrote:
But if you were born with a penis, that’s not a bug, that’s a feature.
“ME MAN! RAWR!”
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
When Caesar Augustus started enforcing Roman laws against adultery, sex slaves became very popular among Romans of means. Because slaves were household appliances and you can’t commit adultery with a household appliance.
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
You did not deserve that kind of ‘desertion’ and I know you must have experienced upset from that kind of treatment. Selfishn behavior on the part of men is the last thing any Christian organization should be celebrating. All this privileged ‘male headship’ nonsense is ridden through with a strong self-centeredness on the part of ‘the men’ that is so far from Our Lord’s own example of self-giving the Church is sent into the world to model.
Christiane wrote:
Sadly, I see evil stories of women’s treatment of their children far too often. Of mens murder of their children. They are not all attributable to mental illness. This one was just more dramatic than most. But I know how your mind works on this, so I won’t go any further. I will say
Christiane wrote:
This is why we have a justice system. That is good. Most people who casually hear an awful story in the news think ‘that is awful’ and then leave it to the courts, who they understand will hear more details and be able to hopefully make better judgments. And if they were on the jury, they would listen to the facts and base their decision on that.
“Tullian Tchividjian has remarried and is now working on a book.”
That was fast!! But maybe it was wasn’t if he had a relationship with said woman while married. I wonder . . . is she a good comp woman?
Tree wrote:
Probably got put on the Elder board BECAUSE he knew how to keep Widdle Wifey in her God-Ordained Place.
Proof of his Godliness.
“Put another log on the fire…”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4KJrvlMccw
Bridget wrote:
Replaceable Wife Appliance.
Robert wrote:
Remember Job’s Counselors — it’s always those who have NEVER been there who are first with the wagging fingers and glib platitudes for those who ARE.
But then how can you smack them down with your Spiritual Superiority?
“It’s because YOU don’t spend Fifteen Minutes With The LOOOOOORD Each Morning!”
— Actual advice given me once, “Lord” actually pronounced with all-caps and multiple O’s
“You eat MEAT, don’t you? You gave yourself Cancer because YOU EAT MEAT!”
— Secular version given me during my prostate cancer scare three years ago
Lea wrote:
The Psych Gospel According to L Ron Hubbard and David Miscavage.
Mainstream Psych is a threat to both Nouthetic Counseling and Dianetic Auditing.
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
Yes. Wife Appliance …… Evironmentally Safe! Made from 100% Organic Materials!
Bridget wrote:
I wonder …. how long before he cheats on her?
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I guess just opening the bible and reading it and then claiming your counseling is affective is a lot easier than going to school for years, doing research studies, tracking depression/ptsd scores for improvement, prescribing and managing medication etc…
Nancy2 wrote:
He probably already is.
Lea wrote:
If you can stomach it…
http://www.authenticmanhood.com/
Robert wrote:
Remember “Castrati”? Male sopranos castrated as children for the high notes in church choirs? Commanded by SCRIPTURE because “Woman shall keep silent in church.”
All because approx. 1600 years before St.Paul had the church in Ephesus handle this one woman (who probably came out of a local female-supremacist cult) who was apparently disrupting everything.
razorbackSally wrote:
This is what struck me when reading your comment. How sad!
Lea wrote:
He Man, and herd bulls always amass a harem.
Lea wrote:
Pffft.
More importantly, glory and praise must be piled upon the men o’ gawd, and not some silly, useless bunch of trained professionals.
Bridget wrote:
Douggie ESQUIRE, Faux Highborn (On your knees before your Betters, Peasant!) and PENETRATE/COLONIZE/CONQUER/PLANT Douggie?
@ siteseer:
“Yes, I watched some of the Authentic Manhood videos with my husband. I did notice that “passivity” seemed to be considered the ultimate sin. My feeling watching it was that men may feel pressured to act decisively but unwisely.”
+++++++++++++
yes, this is the overriding conclusion and feeling.
a silly illustration: we love the county fair. i love disneyland. the last few times we’ve gone all together as a family, my husband is out in front of our pack, leading us on with all manner of purpose and energy. on a mission! the only missing was the machete to cut our path. (I said to myself, “hmmm, i see he’s put a leader hat on… alright, let’s go with it.”)
all we did was walk aimlessly, in circles (but with purpose, mind you).
i finally got out in front, pulled everyone aside, said, “ok, here’s what we’re going to do”…. i mean, i knew exactly what to do, where to go, how to do it to maximize everyone’s fun and make the most efficient use of our time (and big money spent to get in).
my husband didn’t mind. i think it was a relief for him.
Eeyore wrote:
You sound like the young man who takes me to task whenever I post a link to an uncomplimentary comp article. I don’t even know why he bothers. We left his church quite awhile ago. Is this his odd way of expressing love and concern, by calling us to repent and turn from our sin, and threatening us with the fact that we’re going to spend eternity in heaven with these other grim, abusive believers (and some lovely people, too, who were at that same church), so we should get on with the business of forgiving them, and get back into fellowship with them, and let go of past hurts, etc.
Believe me, I don’t dwell in the past, and I’m not hanging on to past hurts. But I certainly have no inclination to go back there and start grasping nettles again, either.
siteseer wrote:
What I learn from this is that men are CONFUSED! So very, very confused.
This is why they should be in charge. Because of the confusion.
siteseer wrote:
Also, according to the artwork, this is literally a pyramid scheme.
Christiane wrote:
I think Rusty works for NASA. (An engineer?) He’s probably very rigid. Being around an intractable guy, and he does strike me that way, wouldn’t be a joy.
I was one of those people who didn’t get Andrea Yates and I was very harsh on her.
Forgive me, Lord.
Now that I’ve had a tour of duty of a NeoCalvinist church, complete with the debacle known as “Nouthetic Counseling” (aka fools with no medical licenses engaged in the Unlawful Practice of Medicine, a crime in my state)
@ Eeyore:
p.s. I meant to ask, how did you come to the truth?
This young man I mentioned was one of the kinder people at that church, but he’s certainly a hardened doctrine-spewer now.
^Part 2 to Christiane: …I feel sympathy for Andrea Yates because she was treated with Nouthetic Counseling (malpractice) instead of critically needed and bona fide medical care.
Lea wrote:
“Based on the actual words of Jesus”… There are so many wildly differing interpretations of the words of Jesus, what he meant, what his point was.
Velour wrote:
She actually did get some bona fide medical care… but then her husband required her to disregard the advice she got because it did not support his comp view. For one example, her psych had stressed that she should have no more children, that it would be dangerous to have children. But Rusty needed to have his quiver full. That meant she also needed to go off her medication, to have a safe pregnancy. He went through the motions of getting care for her but then ignored and disregarded it because he was the king of the castle (or bus, as the case may be). Maybe he thought he was “leading courageously” I don’t know.
No amount of ‘proper headship teaching’ can fix the stupid in a man like that.
siteseer wrote:
Thanks for filling me in on those details. It’s been awhile since she killed the kids in the bathtub. And in all honesty, it was so painful for me to hear about that I avoided the more detailed news stories.
Jack wrote:
Some people will pay big money and jump through lots of hoops to get rid of guilt.
We stopped going to Sunday church at a point when we were connected with a couple of home fellowships, which met in the evenings. It took several weeks to not feel guilty, or at least out of place, sleeping in on Sunday morning. Then it takes longer to stop looking down on the other people you see around town on a Sunday morning, jogging, going to the store, and wondering, “Why are THEY in church?” Maybe judgementalism is the flipside of guilt.
Eeyore wrote:
It took me a long time to connect those dots in what I was witnessing from that movement.. You state it perfectly: Sanctification by correct doctrine.
siteseer wrote:
In fairness to some of these men, they have seen the problems that result from absent fathers who are men of good character. So I think it is true that many young men have no idea what “being a man” looks like. IMO this is a case of seeing a problem but jumping to the wrong solution.
I don’t think any Christian should be passive, whether male or female. The “solution” they are proffering is an artificial “manhood” that is certainly not Authentic. To make it an even sadder story, many young men are attracted to the older men who are teaching this and, IMO, look to them as surrogates in a way for their absent or ineffective fathers rather than looking for that healing in their new identity in Christ.
The real solution is to teach young men *and* young women to emulate Christ and his values and attitudes rather than the world’s. What the Usual Suspects have done is attempt to sanctify the world’s methods and attitudes. And that is worse than futile. It is destructive.
That, in a nutshell, is why I am so gravely disappointed in those who want to have a diverse church that looks like the Kingdom. Except at the leadership level. That is reserved strictly for males. One would think that people like Thabiti Anyabwile and Loritts family would get that at a very deep level.
siteseer wrote:
I found this extremely interesting.
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/red-letter-gospels
Law Prof wrote:
Beat me to it and said it better. And it bears repeating.
elastigirl wrote:
Totally Reformed. The term’s probably a bit dated, but it was current when I was involved in that world. It designates someone who is fanatically devoted to Reformed theology and it’s application to life. It was used both as a descriptor and as an insult.
Jack wrote:
Those of us who grew up in decent churches have had a hard time with the encroaching authoritarianism and corruption. I grew up in churches that viewed the pastor as an employee, the lay people set the budget and voted on it every year with quarterly reports mailed out to each member. It was a different world. It wasn’t usually profitable or glamorous to be pastor.
Lea wrote:
According to my former cult, all that education and State sanction makes your help dangerous. You are trying to usurp the pastoral ministry. They actually say this in their literature:
“This same separation from the context of the Body now occurs with the pastoral ministry, as marriage counselors, family therapists, psychiatrists, psychotherapists and so on now provide the “expert” pastoral care for people’s minds and spirits. Instead of having an accreditation from God by signs and miracles (Acts 2:22), these new psycho-pastors have accreditation from the State. As more people stand unwilling to accept responsibility before God, they fall prey to these false pastoral ministries that do not confront people with their responsibility but primarily seek to absolve them of the guilt of sin.”
https://homesteadheritageinfo.blogspot.com/2016/08/when-homestead-leaders-play-psychiatrist.html
It’s very twisted and dangerous thinking. No wonder they had their own version of Andrea Yates. A woman who doused her kids with gasoline and set them on fire.
okrapod wrote:
Very interesting!
Velour wrote:
LOOOONG story. Let me explain…. no, is too much. Let me sum up. 😉
It was a combination of factors over time. First, as I alluded to earlier, the whole “sanctification by correct theology” scheme was a total bloody failure in my own life. Second, I realized that most of the great theologians I admired were pastors first, theoretical theologians second – and that being a good pastor was more important. Third, by force of circumstances I had to interact with progressive Christians much more than I wanted to, and discovered that y’all are not satanists in Christian drag. 😉 Last but not least, I was very lucky (providentially – I’m still a Calvinist 😉 ) to get some good classes at RTS before the TRs purged the faculty – classes that taught me to see things much more Christ-centeredly than was good for an aspiring TR fanatic.
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
And I bet if you had mentioned any frustration or exhaustion, you would have been rebuked because it was *your* fault for not asking for help, and how is your husband supposed to know what kind of help you need if you don’t lay it out clearly for him and ask his aid (with the corollary being that you are obviously falling down on the job because you can’t handle it yourself, and, sigh, not only does he have to do the hard work of headship and supporting the family, but he has to pick up *your* slack in terms of home and children, as well).
Off-topic share. Harley from Texas who posts here wrote this powerful poem the other day which she permitted me to share on my new blog.
I wanted to share it with all of you.
My friend Geva Roberts, a writer in Texas, submitted this poem she just wrote for me to share with all of you on my blog.
WILL YOU STAND WITH ME? By Geva Roberts ©
Will you stand with me,
When a little boy is scared to go back to church.
When others tell him it is all right and no one listens.
Will you stand with me for him?
Will you stand with me for the little girl that was
Hurt at church and was forced to forgive her abuser?
Will you stand with me, if not you, then who?
Will you stand with me
when young ladies are molested by a church member.
When the church says it was partly their fault.
When these young innocent ladies are shunned.
Will you stand with me.
Will you stand with me when the husband abuses the wife,
But the church says it’s ok. He is a man of God after all.
When the husband thinks it’s ok to look at child pornography,
And the church stands beside him instead of his wife.
Will you stand with me when these “Ministers” of the church
Accuse others unjustly of gossip and slander.
When they put their members in ungodly church discipline.
Will you stand with me, if not you, then who?
Will you take a stand with me,
Shout it from the roof tops,
Cry with me till there are no more tears.
Pray till we get the answers.
Will you stand with me and others
So that innocent people are no longer hurt.
Will you speak for them, when they have no voice,
If not you, then who?
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
Whoa!
Very disturbing.
An attorney wrote:
So, I guess we shouldn’t expect them to ask Driscoll about the RICO suit pending against him…
elastigirl wrote:
If you sign on to the proposition that it’s indeed the Almighty’s “created order”, based solely on plumbing received at birth, well then yeah, the “so-called logic” fits together like clockwork…
If you don’t buy into the starting point (created order), you see it for the steaming pile of horse poo-poo that it really is.
Refugee wrote:
If she had asked more than once, though, that would be nagging, which we all know is a cardinal sin.
Eeyore wrote:
Heh, heh, heh. 🙂 Beautiful quotation.
Divorce Minister wrote:
Not only that. “Doctrine over person” is one of Dr. Lifton’s criteria for thought reform (affectionately known as “mind control”). In other words, it’s a sign you’re in a cult.
Nancy2 wrote:
Maybe they will be on the cover of People magazine with excerpts from his big redemption story. (Wink)
Refugee wrote:
Nailed it.
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
That is another dot I finally connected! Thanks to Brad Sargents work.
Lydia wrote:
Sadly, it could happen.
@ Elizabeth Lee:
I’ve seen your comments here before, but I didn’t realize you were also former P/QF. I can relate, except my hubby was one of the HOH failures who actually helps his wife.
mirele wrote:
How about something like this: “Complementarianism: Not Biblical, Not Effective, Not Even A Real Word!”
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
Complementarianism: Fake Word, Real Pain.
@ Refugee:
I’ve always smiled at those dads who walk around with their baby in that front baby-holder. Now THOSE are AUTHENTIC MEN. All children deserve dads like that, and all moms deserve husbands like that. But I guess ‘male headship’ forbids such behavior on the part of ‘authentic men’. It’s their loss. Bonding with their babies is something they can’t replicate later when the children are older. And the security that the baby feels is something so precious in a world where some ‘churches’ teach parents to beat their infants to ‘break their spirits’. God have mercy.
Christiane wrote:
Or alternatively, they know they’ll get brownie points for being “authentic” men. My ex-husband was all about publicly parenting. Image rules.
Lea wrote:
I doubt you understand my ‘mind’ and I don’t know you personally. I do think some people blog here under multiple names, but that doesn’t apply here as I give you the full benefit of the doubt.
Something to know about me:
I started out of college working for social services, and I can tell you ‘horror stories’ and no way was the parent involved anywhere near ‘normal’. And as a teacher over many years in the inner city, I had to report numerous cases of child abuse, usually to my direct administrator and the school nurse, and the counselor, who took it from there and called Social Services. I was required by law to report what I observed. I’m neither naive nor ignorant of what people can and have done to children, and on top of this, my family include a pediatrician, two pediatric nurse practitioners, AND a child psychiatrist (my cousin). I’ve heard it all.
The wisest words I ever heard from any knowledgeable person came from Dr. Rachelle Burleson, who told her husband Wade that ‘hurting people hurt people’.
It is NOT normal to abuse or hurt children or abuse animals, but our world sees a lot of this as a result of some VERY troubled people.
No, you don’t know how my mind works, and I’m not sure I even do, but feel free to judge me in your fashion. I’m a big girl. I accept responsibility for the way I come across to others. 🙂 No bad feelings on my part, LEA.
@ ishy:
I thought your ‘toon was very well done. At first, I wanted to say “hilarious!”–but considering how outrageous the actual anecdote is, I realize that it illustrates a monstrous reality in male-dominated churches today.
Christiane wrote:
It’s not judging; I simply disagree. I have heard you cite ‘hurting people hurt people’ many times. Sometimes that true. Other times, it is a way of waving away blame from an evil person.
Just not interested in going round and round on this again and its not really germane to the discussion.
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
That gives me pause! It’s still a sweet sight to see a man ‘front carrying’ an infant. They didn’t have those baby carriers when my babies were little which makes me very old indeed.
Your husband must have put you through a lot, it sounds like.
Lea wrote:
but they have cool fonts!
I like these helpful tips from the leader’s guide:
siteseer wrote:
! LOL. I think this idea was created by a non sports fan.
siteseer wrote:
‘energetic’ as in yelling?
If Complementarianism is so fabulously Biblical & wondrous where are the testimonies of men who previously were wife beaters telling of how it’s straightened them out as they realised the true value of their wives? Where are the Pastoral tales of when men like the one mentioned, heading into church in front of his over-burdened wife, being taken aside & reminded to help her & his children, who God has given to him as amazing gifts? I think it’s totally right that some men function well in Complemetarianism, I know some who do, because they are decent men & have read not only the verses in the Bible about headship, but those about loving your neighbour as yourself, & that funny little verse (what was Paul thinking?) about love not insisting on its own way.
Lea wrote:
I’m not into that way of thinking, as when I think of a person exhibiting REAL satanic evil, I think of them being ‘possessed’ and needing ‘the rite’ of exorcism.
I see most people who exhibit severely evil behavior as ‘troubled’, sick, disturbed, and often needing to be kept isolated from others because they are so very rabid and can do great harm in their condition.
Sin is different. People CHOOSE to sin. Mentally ill people are ‘non compos mentis’ and their reasoning processing is out of whack. When Rusty Yates spoke of his wife’s ‘sin’, it showed he had no comprehension of how sick she was, or of how her sickness interfered with her ability to think rationally and act accordingly.
You know, in the old days, mentally ill people were chained to walls in prisons and beaten. So were people who were profoundly retarded. I know that the history of the way both of these groups were treated. Even today, parents raising a ‘special needs child’ are sometimes confronted with some very aggressively ignorant and abusive attitudes from individuals who are not able to understand either on a humane level OR on an educated realistic level. That is something I know from my own experience.
We surely do have different perspectives, and that is not only ‘okay’ but it also adds something to the blog comments in diversity. It’s a good thing.
Eeyore wrote:
Thank you for explaining how your views changed.
I chose my screen name “Velour”, because our lovely blog queens Dee and Deb are sometimes called “Satin” (sic), “Daughters of Stan (sic)”. I decided to make myself into a fabric for the cause.
I heard about the purge of the moderate teachers. Sad and bad. I’m glad you got to learn from them while they were at seminary.
@ Beakerj:
Excellent commentary!
Beakerj wrote:
Complementarianism has always been around in the church, and I think historically in the SBC it was heavily balanced by free will missions theology to “reach the world”. There are decent and genuine non-Baptist Calvinists who practice “love your neighbor” in many ways.
The patriarchy crowd has taken Calvinist theology to the extreme, though. They don’t see much point in loving neighbors, because God will elect them or He won’t, and if they’re elected, they’ll show up in church eventually. I know a Calvinista church near me that is real big on foreign missions, but they totally ignore anyone local. Everyone I know who has visited there described it as “cold”, even those who didn’t know I knew all of them.
Beakerj wrote:
Then these good men are good in spite of ‘systems’ where ‘love’ is not a priority or ‘one of the Nine Marks of a healthy Church’.
Beakerj wrote:
I think it works fine if it is sort of more ‘technically/soft’ comp. If men are decent and actually love their wives and are selfless. I think an egal marriage with the same type of man would work equally well.
It doesn’t work if it oppressive to the wife, if she doesn’t have a say, if she isn’t respected. When you teach comp, though, THAT is the side of things that is taught. Men are not supposed to be telling women to submit or how to submit. Period. Men are supposed to be taking care of their selfless loving part and we know what love is because paul helpfully described it. Comp advice is unbalanced.
Beakerj wrote:
I don’t believe those exist and if I heard one I would honestly be quite suspicious.
I did spend a wasted few moments on the authentic manhood blog about all the many many ‘awesome men of god’ pastors who fell into deep sin (driscol, noble, a bunch of cheaters, etc). Summary: How did this happen, even though they’re so awesome? Remember all you can do is pray, don’t judge, and have grace. There are literally no other things to do. Because even David had problems. Let me tell you about the many times I cheated on my own wife, and she forgave me. Isn’t that great?
Lea wrote:
Actually I just remembered one! The guy giving the marriage talk at Gateway a few months ago was apparently a ‘bad husband’ early in his marriage. I learned later this was code for abusive. But now he’s cool. According to him. Didn’t hear from his wife or anything.
Christiane wrote:
In 2001, social media was not as well developed. Most news is sound bite and us ignorant people not ‘in your area” mostly had only the 30 sec sound bite or headline story to go by. More information came out later for the ignorant ‘not in your area’ to understand better. It’s not like the major media reported their patriarchal association right off the bat.
Lea wrote:
Was Wifey standing there silently nodding and SMIIIIIIIILING?
Lea wrote:
“I kill my own mother and still they cheer me!”
— Caesar Nero, in Paul Maier’s historical novel Flames of Rome
Christiane wrote:
Like a lot of the main characters in Harry Turtledove’s In the Presence of Mine Enemies (about secret Jews in the Third Reich some fifty years after the Nazi global conquest). Germans or secret Jews, a lot of them come across as basically-decent people who have to live under an Evil System.
Eeyore wrote:
i.e. More Calvinist than Calvin himself.
Like how the Taliban & Daesh are More Islamic than Mohammed.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
She was probably batting her eyelashes, thinking, ” These people must know what a great and glorious Saint I am!”
Gram3 wrote:
An artificial “manhood” called Hypermasculinity similar to what the Nazis proffered to young German men some 80 years ago and what Taliban/ISIS/Daesh proffers to young Islamic men today. With special appeal to losers.
Nancy2 wrote:
Folks, this was Gateway. They watch pre taped sermons on the TV. No one was actually there.
Christiane wrote:
That is good as far as it goes, but I note that the quote did not say ‘only hurting people hurt people’.
The psychopaths among us hurt people but do not themselves hurt being lacking in empathy. And then there are the narcissists-which some say may be on the same spectrum. Some people with no malice but an overdose of stupidity sometimes hurt people. Some kinds of psychopathology do not seem to be accompanied by pain but people who suffer from it can inadvertently hurt other people. And there are the people who grow up in a social or family culture or religion which teaches them that certain kinds of persons deserve to be hurt and that somehow the people who do the hurting are pleasing God.
I do not see sufficient evidence to establish the idea that only hurting people hurt people, or that those who hurt people should be presumed to be themselves victims, absent a thorough evaluation of the person by competent professionals.
ishy wrote:
Oh, I’m sure young Dad was heading to a manly meeting, and in a rush because young Mom had delayed the family’s departure by changing a diaper. He had to be on time, but she had allllll daaaaaay to live out her appointed duties, no pressure and no rush.
Lydia wrote:
Yeah, maybe we should start referring to extremists as right wing tips and left wing tips, since both are out flapping in the breeze. The part of the wing near the bird’s heart is usually working hard and forced to cooperate. 😉
Included in that company is John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church and its network of affiliated parachurch ministries including The Master’s College, The Master’s Seminary, and The Master’s Academy International. They’re committed to promoting female subordination through the false doctrine of the eternal subordination of the Son of God. Here’s TMS’s map of affiliated churches around North America. Try entering search parameters for other parts of the world and you’ll see their influence is very widespread.
http://www.tms.edu/find-a-church/
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
This is a terrible mischaracterization of what counseling is and how counselors seek to help people!
elastigirl wrote:
I understand and respect your experiences and viewpoints. However, plenty of churches have not turned into Sunday morning comedy/variety shows with a dress code and special training in hypocrisy. Or into me-Tarzan-you-Jane festivals of oppression.
There’s hope!
If you want to try out a church–and of course you don’t have to–look for a church that looks like a church, not a storefront. Check out their website and make sure it is in a human language, not jargon. Maybe post the names of some churches here and see if TWW folks know anything about them or their affiliations. Then drive past on a Sunday morning and make sure nobody from TWW is picketing. (That’s a love note to Mirele.)
My church has pews and an organ, new carpet but busted A/C, an annual business meeting with a fully disclosed budget, male and female lay volunteers and clergy, and the love of Christ.
Just recently, I was emailing with clergy about a local family with a new hardship. Although my email was a prayer request, an ordained female clergy member wrote back immediately and asked if she might anonymously offer $100 of her own funds to help the family. She doesn’t even know the family. This is the good Samaritan today.
There’s hope!
@ Eeyore:
“Totally Reformed. The term’s probably a bit dated, but it was current when I was involved in that world. It designates someone who is fanatically devoted to Reformed theology and it’s application to life.”
+++++++++
you’re kidding…. it stands for ‘totally reformed’? sounds like valley girl talk. (which i’m sure dates me)
@ siteseer:
That doesn’t surprise me. The people who wrote that are masters at manipulating others through fear. They found news stories of people being admitted to mental institutions against their will, only to be released when the insurance money ran out.
They don’t just do this with mental health, but also medical care, home birth vs hospital birth, home education vs. public education.
It’s worth noting that last night Owen Strachan was, “discussing the tragic effects of the sexual revolution and hope in Christ, with reference to the tragedy in Minnesota (http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2016/08/30/teacher-husband-found-dead-in-apparent-murder-suicide/).” Dear Owen was on the Steve Deace Show.
He has no qualms about pointing out sexual abuse by two gay men — where is the “discussion” about his own friends and their seeming blindness to abuse in their own circles.
Here’s the link to the actual show and what Owen said:
http://stevedeaceshow.libsyn.com/highlight-worldview-wednesday-on-voter-responsibility-and-the-morality-of-a-vote
elastigirl wrote:
If I’m lyin’ I’m dyin’. You can Google it. 😉
Friend wrote:
Exactly.
I am contacting Sunnyvale, CA about organizing protests in front of Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley, renting from the Seventh Day Adventists on Fremont Ave.
Christiane wrote:
I do not remember the details of Andrea Yates, but I think there are mental disorders which render someone incapable of understanding right from wrong. There are also mental disorders in which the person is perfectly able to discern right from wrong but who chooses the wrong because it serves their perceived self-interest. That is evil, IMO, though I’m neither any kind of psy* or any kind of theo*. This is not a defense of Rusty Yates by any stretch, but I do think there are people who know but simply do not care who they hurt or the wreckage they leave in their wake.
Christiane wrote:
Yes, someone who is striving to imitate Christ does not need a System to do that. And, actually, any System would be utterly superfluous if not harmful.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
I think you are correct. So, why not offer the real Gospel? I don’t mean that as a challenge to you but to the Gospel Glitterati. They are offering a false path to significance and fulfillment which only comes by realizing who we are In Christ.
elastigirl wrote:
In my world, TR is/was used to distinguish those who are more strictly confessional from those whose confessional adherence is somewhat looser. It is/was a pejorative sort of like fundy or Puritan.
Christiane wrote:
That’s a matter of opinion. That hairstyle is so dated, just screams bad taste, flake, oddball, creep, the kind of man who has a perfectly fine name (James Robert) yet goes by the asinine “Jim Bob”. Like when I was a young man in the 1980s and you could generally the spiritually and emotionally constipated, full of self, pharisaical churches because the men proudly wore their hair exactly 30 years behind the times.
Unepetiteanana wrote:
Just like Michelle and JB Duggar didn’t discuss Josh’s “mistakes” as they raked in the $$$$$ from their oh-so-wholesome “reality” TV show. And Josh went to work for the Family Research Council promoting “family values” while hooking up through Ashley Madison. Those dirty sins always take place among the “others.” It’s just not good marketing strategy to not only admit that your brand failed, but that it was never very effective to begin with. Just look for the New And Improved labels to assure you it WILL work this time. After all, people tend to forget over time. Just give it a few years. The media will move onto something else.
Lea wrote:
The SBTS Masters in counseling program only requires 7 courses in counseling. The balance of hours are primarily theology. I’m sure the 3 semesters of Systematic Theology more than makes up for any inadequacies when someone is doing marriage counseling and has only had one course on Marriage and Family. Do I need to say “sarcasm off”?
FW Rez wrote:
Not for those of us who speak it fluently. 🙂
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
+1
“Complementarianism will not stop foster abuse.” There, fixed it for ya’.
@ Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist:
And I guess my html tags didn’t work…
Update from Dee:
Well, 2016 is going to go down in the Parsons’ books as “one of those years.”
Today, at 6:30 AM we called EMS for my stepdad who is in both congestive heart failure (new) and increased renal failure. He has been admitted to a Duke Hospital. My mother than proceeded to develop a stress fracture of her foot and they put her in one of those ridiculous huge removable casts this afternoon. I spent the whole day at the hospital.
Please keep me in your thoughts as I continue to juggle the needs of my elderly parents. I know many of you are struggling in a similar fashion. Please know I think of all of you as I go through these times.
Good news-I found this great under eye brightener to cover the dark circles:)
FW Rez wrote:
I am one of those who thinks that SBTS’ program is abusive by design and genuinely wicked. Anyone who has had the opportunity to work with an abused spouse will quickly understand how I come to my conclusion. I see this as an area where SBTS is openly doing the work of the Devil.
@ dee:
So sorry to hear about your stepdad and mother. 🙁
Yay for under eye brightener!
@ BeenThereDoneThat:
I also got 5 “cute shoes ” compliments from the ER staff.
@ dee:
🙂
I’m sure you’d rather have gotten complements about your cute shoes from people at the grocery store than the ER, but I’m glad you have your sense of humor. This has been a difficult year for you.
dee wrote:
Always look on the bright side!
And best to your family.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Amen and Amen. And now it is in many churches as SBTS trained pastors use the same foundation for drive by counseling. I cannot warn people enough the ripple effects coming out of SBTS.
Jenny wrote:
They certainly teach female subordination but I’m not aware of Macarthur supporting ESS.
@ FW Rez:
Grudems ST?
@ Friend:I like it!
Lydia wrote:
That is my understanding.
FW Rez wrote:
Insanity!! I think our church program for lay people has more hours than that.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Wow. But I think you’re right. Especially if Lydia is correct and it is Grudems ST.
Was that the seminary where they got rid of the real social work program, or was that a different one?
FW Rez wrote:
Purity of Ideology, Comrade.
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
“And this time We WILL Achieve True Communism!”
dee wrote:
Dee, I’ve had a few of those years and understand some of what you are going through. I prayed for you and your parents just now.
Lea wrote:
I assume that they used to have a program that led to licensing. I know that SEBTS and SWBTS replaced their real programs. But at least SWBTS has a homemaking major now.
dee wrote:
Mrs. Muff sez:
“With the right pair of shoes a girl can conquer the world.”
@ dee:
Dee, I am so sorry. I am recovering from a rough 18 month stint of caregiving and deaths.The ” Peace that goes beyond understanding” was definitely there during those months, but it still takes a physical, mental and emotional toll. Be assured you are in my thoughts and prayers. It does get better with time, but there will always be bad days. Grief/Share was a big help to my husband and me. Take good care of yourself so you can take good care of others.
@ dee:
I am so sorry, sweet Dee.
Tell your elderly parents that we all love them and are praying for them. Ditto for you and your husband.
Is there any thing we can do from afar? Organize care packages? Pizza? Meals?
Anything at all.
Hugs from California.
dee wrote:
That was to be expected. What’s the phrase about you…”pathologically cute”?
Or “adorable”? That’s our Dee.
Velour wrote:
Ok, I can’t hear this without thinking of its always sunny in Philadelphia!
@ dee:
Keeping you and your family in my prayers. It seems to be a season of caring for your family. Take care of yourself.
@ dee:
Praying for you, Dee.
And would love to know the name of the under-eye brightener – lol!
Now that someone has “broken spades” with the request for the name of the under-eye brightener, I might as well confess that I kinda want to know, too. I’m just “asking for a friend” (wink).
GC wrote:
Same here. I hope it’s not Clé de Peau. I hear they one of the best concealers for, ahem, mature skin. I’m just not willing to spend $70 on concealer.
GC wrote:
Becca Under Eye Brightener ( I am told it makes me look awake!)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00USIPGR6/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o02_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Cute shoes Rieker Daisy
http://www.shoebuy.com/rieker-antistress-daisy-62/435504/1268149
Thank you for your prayers!
dee wrote:
There’s always a bright side. ; ^ )
Sorry to hear the news, Dee. Again, make sure you take good care of yourself. If you don’t do that, you can’t take care of those who need you and depend on you so much. These “authentic manhood” flakes could learn some lessons from you.
FW Rez wrote:
I want a teaching position there! Basics, ya know? Don’t matter how pretty you set the table, for a roasted chicken dinner, if you can’t scald and pluck the rooster! I’ll show ’em how it’s done! — and then some!
Y’all think they’d take me? Bwahahaha!
W/r to Dee’s original post… This crowd has elevated “compartmentalization” ” doctrine” to their highest form of purity/works… That and neo-Calvinism…. Talk about idolatry…. Especially when they do not protect the abused/”weaker”….
Nancy2 wrote:
They’re unteachable. Ignorance is fixable, stupid doesn’t wanna.
@ Friend:
“However, plenty of churches have not turned into Sunday morning comedy/variety shows with a dress code and special training in hypocrisy. Or into me-Tarzan-you-Jane festivals of oppression.
There’s hope!”
+++++++++++++
hi, friend. thank you for your kind-spirited words.
i’m very jaded. (although a certain proportion of that can be called ‘realistic’)
I’m sure there are a number of churches brimming with integrity and character. i would guess those churches would also be described as ‘simple’ — in a good sense of the word.
i honestly don’t think such churches exist in the town and environs where i live.
the catholic church here is just the best, though. so down to earth. and simple, humble. wanting to make a difference in the community in a low-key kind of way. no big advertising, marketing campaigns. no slick, image-conscious professional christians. not trying to gain market share.
i might go to mass, sit in the back, and just absorb it all. just absorb God/Jesus/Holy Spirit.
@ dee:
you’re in my thoughts, dee. i have similar travails (although not quite as vivid as yours!)
perhaps we can take comfort in knowing there’s a sisterhood and brotherhood all going through similar things. kind of like when one is awake at 3:00 in the morning with the weight of the world on one’s shoulders, it’s comforting to know that dotted around the country are many other tiny reading lights shining in dark bedrooms.
elastigirl wrote:
There most definitely is elastigirl, there most definitely is.
elastigirl wrote:
It’s meaningless because in practice, i.e.- real life – women are not equal.
dee wrote:
Hey Dee. I’ve got elderly parents myself, so I can relate. Many prayers for you and your family!
A good concealer is invaluable!
Serving Kids In Japan wrote:
The suit was recently dismissed without prejudice (meaning it can be refiled). The plaintiffs ran out of money to pursue it.
I understand why the plaintiffs brought the suit, but my understanding of civil RICO is that it’s very difficult to make the case stick, which is why I have not supported them in their efforts. I rather wish the state of Washington would have investigated where the money went with regards to the Mars Hill LLC corporation.
Darlene wrote:
It works like this: Right now, 10 U.S. Dollars is equal in value to 8.9 Euros. Suppose a man is represented by 10 U.S. Dollars and a woman is represented by 8.9 Euros.
If I drive to a U.S. Walmart, and try to pay for for a 10 dollar purchase with 8.9 Euros, what do you think will happen?
Yeah, that’s how equal in value, but not in roles works!
Women stay folded up and tucked away somewhere out of sight and out of mind, while the men are seen, used, and appreciated.
@ elastigirl:
Friend is from a mainline denom that would, imo, work for you – depending on the congregation. In the meantime, going to Mass at your local parish church sounds like a plan.
@ elastigirl:
So true!
dee wrote:
So sorry to read of your parents health struggles. God doubly bless your days,giving you strength and humor,in your caregiving.
elastigirl wrote:
I think ‘totes Reformed’ is possibly the perfect way to say that currently. 🙂
@ dee:
Dee, I will be praying for you & yours as you continue to wrestle with your ‘annus horribilis’ as my Queen has been known to say.
In the case of any organisation that employs a significant number of people, there’s an easy way to tell whether they consider men and women to be of equal value.
Compare what they pay them.
After all, since we are fixing our hopes on an everlasting kingdom, and the fleeting mist of this world’s riches are deceitful and unimportant, a man of God will be only too glad to forego a salary scaled according to this world’s values. Paying men and women the same hourly rate is the least we can do as a token of our commitment to our equality in value, isn’t it? Paul himself bent over backwards to live out his own message in this area.
Moreover, perhaps we shouldn’t be giving any money to local churches at all. You don’t need money to tell someone about Jesus, or to lay hands on a sick person and heal them, or for the public reading of scripture. Rather, as Christians, perhaps we should give our money just to secular causes – famine relief, health, education, research, that kind of thing. It’s not that these things are “worth” more than local church, you all understand. They are equal in value. It’s just that they have different roles. In fact, by withholding all monetary and other material benefits from the professional clergy class, we can paint a beautiful picture of just how special and valuable they are.
@ dee:
Dee, sorry to hear of your difficulties. Will pray for you and your family members today and tonight. What you’re going through must seem like a long journey with no end in sight, but being there for loved ones is its own blessing, as by now you must realize.
Loved the ad about your ‘cute shoes’. 🙂
Can’t remember the last pair I had that were that cute, as now live in Berkenstocks or Walmart’s best six dollar sneakers (I just bought a RED pair for joy)
Eat well, drink plenty of good spring water, and get some vitamin smoothies. Get out for a long walk, or go for a swim. When you can, go out for a long lunch with a good friend. Go buy some good books and a box of beautiful chocolates. Put on some great music when you are driving and know that people appreciate all your good work for the many that have suffered abuse and are in need of help and a place to tell their stories. God love you, dear.
dee wrote:
I am so sorry to hear this. You have been and continue to be in my prayers. I can somewhat relate as I am caregiver for my 90 YO mother who is rapidly succombing to dementia. Hang in there and don’t forget to take care of yourself
Darlene wrote:
I just noticed he said they are equal before God…God is not the one who is abusing. If they are not equal to men, what good is equal to God as concerns abuse.
@ Lea:
Yes. Just reading these types over the years one finds patterns. Example, They all say “equal value before God”.
They use the Galatians passage a lot to argue this from a salvation pov. Such as, God chooses women as well as men to save. Slaves as well as free.
They teach that Galatians (written to professing believers) reference as only about salvation. Not about being full heirs.
So see, you have equal value in salvation but not as full heirs here and now. Strangely enough, that is their view of “advancing the kingdom of God”.
It is also a horrible interpretation.
@ Lydia:
If you have to qualify equality? It’s not equality.
Even their hatred of the word ‘egalitarian’ tells me something. The definition of the actual word is “of, relating to, or believing in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities.”
They do not believe that.
@ Lea:
I have always gotten the sense that they erroneously define egalitarian as Matriarchy.
The tactics of the French Revolution did not help the word, egalitarian. :o(
I really believe scripture shows us the importance of striving for mutuality. Those who don’t, who crave power, use others for power or think they are above the law show their true colors no matter what sort of syrupy language or rationale they use to mask it.
“Yet time and time again, I am disturbed by so called leaders who seem to stress the roles of gender as the most important issue of our day, even claiming that it will stop abuse in our churches.”
‘gender’ is now a topic in play in our country big time as we move towards November;
so maybe the ‘attitude’ in certain religious circles is merely a reflection of what half the voters in our country have been brought up to ‘respect’ (or disrespect)
I think the ‘gender’ issues connected with abuse of women in ‘churches’ and parachurch organizations is not seminal, but reflective of a much more deeply seeded misogyny. Best news of the week: FOX’s apology to one of its former employees who had been victimized by sexual harassment. Worst news of the week, a candidate for office who responded to reports of sexual harassment in the military with an extremely misogynistic statement.
Time to take another look at the congregations that support these abusive ‘churches’ and ask:
‘is the tail wagging the dog’? Are these ‘churches’ merely dishing out what the payees want to see and hear? People flock to them what talks their language, folks. It is written.
“3 For the time will come when men will not tolerate sound doctrine, but with itching ears they will gather around themselves teachers to suit their own desires.” (2 Timothy 4:3)
Christiane wrote:
Horsefeathers.
Lydia wrote:
Ha. I really wish we could leave politics out of it except insofar as it is unfortunate and distracting that supposed religious leaders keep trying to attach themselves to different political movements. I joined a liberal church and they are bad about it too sometimes.
This Danvers nonsense is 30 years old. It’s not really about current politics. I think they use the ‘trans’ and gay political part to try to push what they actually want, which is control over women.
@ Lea:
The comp world has been divided on this going back 20 years. We had a lot of fun with it a few cycles ago. The purists vs the opportunists. I think it only exposed the doctrine in ways they never imagined.
It only showed the real problem with comp/pat.
This time, opportunists within that camp are more concerned with keeping the oligharcical establishment where they think they can keep a seat –even in the back benches.
Again, focusing on gender as a group instead of the individual is short sighted on both sides.
Things are never either/or or black/White as some seem to think they are.
Perhaps of women is seen by some in the Church AND in the culture as a reasonable reaction to women who step out of their ‘place’.
Piper cautions women not to upset their husbands by daring to give them directions. My goodness, can you imagine a wife actually doing that? Of course, the husband is going to blow up at her, probably in front of others, just to nail down his ‘authority’ before witnesses to her folly, the stupid, stupid woman.
And yeah, women in the military report sexual harassment and the response is ‘What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?’
It’s about keeping people ‘in their place’. It’s about ‘control’, and abuse? ….well, what do expect when women open their mouths to speak, or pick up a gun to fight for their country in battle???
Misogyny is the larger problem. Abuse is ONE way some have seen as a ‘reasonable’ response to women stepping over the line that SOME men have drawn for them.
Political ???? Theological?
or maybe something wider in the culture, an ancient tension which finds its way into all the places where power and control are up for grabs and playing the ‘gender card’ is now being re-examined closely as still morally acceptable to decent human beings.
Correction:
first line should be ‘Perhaps abuse of women …’
Lydia wrote:
My personal bias tends to always be that the dumber ones are purists, the smarter ones are opportunists 🙂
Lydia wrote:
It tends to lead to inaccuracies. Groups as big and vary wildly. When you try to make them all out to be the same it is both boring and wrong.
Christiane wrote:
Is that why you are a catholic? If not, then perhaps you might hesitate before implying that this is why conservative evangelical protestants are what they are.
Lydia wrote:
Men are true sons of God, full heirs to the Kingdom. Women are God’s red headed step-children. God, of course, will remember us, but men get preferential treatment. God plays favorites.
That is what they believe, but if you say that bluntly to them, they puff up and start talking in circles.
@ okrapod:
Hi OKRAPOD
there are plenty of conservative evangelical people who don’t fit into the category or the ones I am referring to …. a lot of them come here to tell their stories and they have been in the ‘churches’ were the abuse has occurred and they are witnesses to it
the group I’m writing about are any and all who seek out and find a ‘church’ that follows their ‘standard’ of how women ought to be kept in their places …. and IF the women are considering ‘stepping out of line’, there are plenty of people like Piper who have some advice for them in order to help them NOT to antagonize or upset men
not quite sure if that covers your question, but let me know what is on your mind if it doesn’t
Christiane wrote:
Christiane wrote:
The quote above certainly sounded like you were linking this to half the population.
Please lets leave politics out. Applying motives like this to giant groups is almost always a bad idea.
Christiane wrote:
It was not a question, other than to ask if you were a catholic for political reasons.
There is a lot more going on in conservative evangelical churches than merely gender politics, just as there is a lot more in catholicism than gender politics-although women in their place might include no women in holy orders, which is the catholic position at this time. And, BTW, when the vatican made the proposal to anglicans that they had an option to convert, the issue at stake was a broad application of gender politics.
So I am saying two things. It is not correct to blame either protestants or catholics of whatever sort that the only thing which makes them choose a church is gender politics. Or, at least, I do not see it as a single issue matter. And I am saying that the pot should not comment on the condition of the kettle.
@ Lea:
I think if you want to get to the roots of the ‘abuse’ problem in the Church, we have to widen the lens a bit. Not even involving politics is wide enough. It’s even beyond that.
I’m saying the trouble in the Church is a reflection of something much larger. And there is this to think about, that even in the Church the ‘disorder’ is seen as a consequence (result) of the ‘fall’ and NOT something ‘prescribed’ by God in response to the fall:
” “domination” indicates the disturbance and loss of the stability of that fundamental equality which the man and the woman possess in the “unity of the two”: and this is especially to the disadvantage of the woman, whereas only the equality resulting from their dignity as persons can give to their mutual relationship the character of an authentic “communio personarum”. (Mulieris Dignitatem)
I think in order to deal with the problem in the ‘churches’, or at least to comprehend it, it might be necessary to take the boat out into deeper waters, to widen the ‘lens’.
Do we ‘tolerate’ in our culture that which we decry in one setting and permit in another, and then wonder why things don’t get better?????
Why not go after the basic attitude wherever we find it and CONFRONT IT???? I’m Catholic and I can go into my own Church and be honest about what is happening in ALL the areas where abuse has occurred and discuss how it can be prevented, and beyond that, how we can examine our own selves for our attitudes about ‘looking away’ in areas where we are told ‘not here’ or ‘don’t go there’.
This is one of those years where a LOT of people are questioning how we got to the place where we are at now as a country. It’s not just about politics, or the media, or the Church anymore. It’s bigger than that. And compartmentalizing may make us more comfortable but I question if that reason is good enough anymore to ‘look away’ in one area, and be against misogyny in another. (?) I raise the question. I don’t have all the answers, folks.
@ okrapod:
I thought that’s where you might be headed. No, I’m not in the faith for ‘political’ reasons, no. It doesn’t work that way. Not in my faith, no.
We can vote according to our own consciences and we do. In 2012, 51% of Catholic voted Dem. and 49% for the Republican candidate . . . that is a fairly good example of how we don’t ‘cluster’ around one political party.
I’m in the faith because ‘Christ’.
@ Lea:
What motives are you speaking of, and what groups are you implying that I attribute those motives to?
Take another look at what I wrote and don’t assume you ‘know my mind’ and can speak for me. 🙂
Christiane wrote:
Politics is a much broader topic. People make choices based on a whole lot of things, most of it has nothing to do with sex or misogyny. You are trying to link it all to not just politics but a specific political party and everybody in it! That is what I object to. That leads into a whole bunch of other topics like economics, like foreign policy, like what the role of government itself should actually be, that are not relevant to this thread. Unless you want to talk about the kind of government that believes it should, like certain churches, be involved in every aspect of your life.
Christiane wrote:
If you wanted to widen it to broader culture that would be different. You want to blame half the country for their supposed ‘attitudes’ based on their party affiliation.
Christiane wrote:
Christiane wrote:
I read what you wrote. I am responding to it. When you speak of respect and attitude linked to politics, then linked it to why people in religious circles act as they do, you weren’t speaking of motives? Come on.
Christiane wrote:
But things are better in the legal and equality of opportunity sense. What are we comparing it to?
Equality of opportunity always brings with it both evil and good in whatever category we are discussing. Females with power are not automatically better than males with power because they are female. Males are not automatically misogynist because they point out wrong doing by powerful females. That is tokenism. that is the typical group think. That is not a wider lens but a narrow one.
Lea wrote:
In Gods eyes men and women are equal. Not buts or different roles.
Christiane wrote:
The same Piper who gets “the vapors” like a Victorian ingénue (though with fluttering hands instead of clutching pearls or fainting onto a fainting couch) when he is in the presence of “Muscular Women”? Need I say more?
@ Lea:
I’m not criticizing the choices a person makes as to what they support in one area and what they don’t support in another area. But I am asking folks to think about these choices in the light of a wider context if they can see the wisdom of doing that.
We all have to make conflicted decisions, and the process is neither easy, nor comfortable. We do the best we can. The wider context gives us more to think about and weigh, yes; but it also provides us with a chance for a more integral and personal choice.
Lea wrote:
HOMOSEXUALITY — what a word.
Just the mention of it causes massive panic and hostility reactions in the Christianese brain, deactivating every neuron above the brainstem and waving a Bright Red (ed.) Flag in front of what’s left.
Really should be in the D&D spell list as one of the “Power Word” spells.
elastigirl wrote:
Though I suspect the number of neurons firing above the brainstem is similar.
Another little momento from Classic Doctor Demento:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfn9n1w3J4o
Jenny wrote:
“Today America, TOMORROW THE WORLD!”
Lydia wrote:
Exactly.
Lydia wrote:
NOBODY is as on-fire for keeping those on the bottom on the bottom than those who are second from the bottom.
Like poor white trash in the Jim Crow south, rank-and-file of the Third Klan, whose only thing to brag about was their white skin. And the Planters and Boss Hoggs and Imperial Wizards used and exploited them to keep themselves on top.
Lea wrote:
I don’t even think they know what it means. It’s a pure snarl word of duckspeak, just like “COMMUNIST!” to a Bircher or “FASCIST IMPERIALIST CAPITALIST!” to a Communist or “COLLECTIVIST STATIST MOOCHER!” to an Objectivist.
Lea wrote:
Pie in the Sky when you Die?
(Christianity lost a LOT when Fluffy Cloud Heaven replaced Resurrection of the Body and the Kingdom of God…)
Muff Potter wrote:
Same with “I Can Do No Wrong” Righteousness.
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
I read “SBTS Masters” as “SBTS MASHERS” — “Masher” was a Victorian English word for rapist.
Freudian Slip or Holy Spirit?
Christiane wrote:
To be fair, I want to say that this “Young Dad” is not the only picture of a comp dad I’ve seen, which is what made it so confusing to live in that culture. There *were* dads in our church who could be seen pulling a share of the load, like carrying in burdens, holding a fussy or active little one so a tired mom could actually listen to the sermon. (How I envied those other moms!) But then there were the others who didn’t seem to notice their wife’s struggles. Self-absorbed? Clueless? Unloving? (thinking of the “love your wives” verse that was paired with the “respect your husbands” that we regularly heard) Or maybe their definition of “love your wives” was limited to working hard to earn a living on a single income so the wife could stay home as she was “biblically” commanded to.
Some husbands seemed to limit their role to just that, actually, leaving almost all the household upkeep and car maintenance to the wife, in addition to the cooking, cleaning, child care, and homeschooling. And yet, being the sole source of income, with all that entails (everything hangs on you — the roof over your heads, the food on the table, the medical bills, transportation expenses — and if you hate your job, too bad. Can’t afford to quit. Hopefully you won’t get laid off or fired), is also stressful.
Regarding lazy spouses: I know I’ve heard complaints in two-income families about women going out to work and then coming home and doing all the housework, so it’s not limited to comp families. (I also knew a couple where the husband worked all day and then came home and did the housework, too, because his wife couldn’t seem to cope.) The families I’ve seen, from the outside at least, that seem to work best, is where everyone pitches in. But it’s got to be an attitude thing, because if it happens only because of nagging on the part of the more responsible partner (whether male or female), it’s just as exhausting and discouraging to live with.
Sorry, just thinking aloud and got to rambling.
@ numo:
i dunno…. i have zero tolerance for churchtalk, churchface, church body language, church social rules, church hypo-sexuality, church hyper-sexuality, church intolerance, church hypocrisy, church blindness to their own hypocrisy, church elitism, church politics, church format, church music, church decor, ….
competitive insecure paranoid judgemental fake phony contrived plastic franchise 100% unoriginal…. it’s like an alternate reality of perpetual jr. high. talk about a nightmare.
as per usual, i’m continually amazed at how the institutional pursuit of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit brings out such developmentally regressive, obnoxious, unintelligent things in people.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Tell me about it! Have just exited an extended online debate with someone from the former church who could not believe our troubles were not because of our own sin — somehow the bullying that made our kids’ lives miserable was their own fault. In his view, it couldn’t be possible that the elders wanted to deal with our kids “just because” they wanted to go to a different church. No, there had to be some kind of terrible sin in their life that made the elders want to deal with them, and they wanted to leave and go to another, more tolerant church that wouldn’t confront their sin.
No, they just wanted to go to another church where they wouldn’t be bullied!
But this guy just couldn’t grasp that. It had to be their fault. It simply could not be the fault of the church or elders or elders’ bullying kids.
Due to the headline of this post and in light of the link below, I would like to advocate paid sabbaticals for all over worked, underpaid TWW commenters who give to a church :o)
http://sbcvoices.com/the-sbc-could-do-better-in-helping-pastors-with-sabbaticals/
@ elastigirl:
ah, that’s better now.
elastigirl wrote:
Hee! I like this one.
I’ll never forget a friend in high school who saw someone in the hall and was all ‘hey sugar/hugs /love you /mwah’ an then when she left said ‘I can’t stand her’. I have never been like that. If I can’t stand you, you’ll know it. I’ll be polite, mostly, but that’s it.
@ elastigirl:
Come on, tell us what you really think! Hee Hee.
“Franchise” really says it all. It’s not just location but a cookie cutter way of thinking depending on the brand.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
Nope. The really rabid ones don’t even give women that. Women (in their eyes) will be eternally subordinate, even in heaven.
Well, I guess in a sense they’re in good company with Christ, the Eternally Subordinate Son.
Lea wrote:
I think I went to church with her! As a matter of fact, she was an elder’s wife.
@ elastigirl:
“…how the institutional pursuit of God/Jesus/Holy Spirit brings out such developmentally regressive, obnoxious, unintelligent things in people.”
+++++++++++++
i think it has something to do with rulesrulesrules and the concept of God.
generates ultimate fear and paranoia, which in turn stunts the free exercise of the creative mind. the creative, sensing, feeling mind is short-circuited if not turned off altogether. which leaves the only alternative of simply copying what others are doing. and what others are doing is simply responding to the stimulus of the loudest voices with the popular brand name.
all so disappointing.
refugee wrote:
just to clarify… by “confusing” I was talking about those of us whose husbands were more like the apparently carefree “Young Dad” in the anecdote. We saw dads who didn’t seem to think that taking care of the children was limited to discipline at church, but carrying a car seat or holding two kids on his lap or bouncing a fussy baby in the back of the church, and we wondered — what were we doing wrong? We were told that the better we were at respecting our husbands, the more we’d be encouraging them to Christlikeness. Or something like that. It wasn’t necessarily spoken from the pulpit, but it was certainly ingrained in the culture. It was *our* fault (the wives and mothers) if we were overburdened.
Because, you know, Christ said his yoke is easy and his burden is light.
It was our fault. We just weren’t getting something right. We were doing something wrong. The formula is always right. You just have to do it right.
refugee wrote:
This is the same person who was personally devastated that sandy patty had an affair! lol.
@ Lea:
I’m not laughing at the affair, just the devastation about a total stranger. Just to clear that up. I guess that was hero worship…
@ elastigirl:
Yes. Indeed!
mirele wrote:
Boooooo-urns!!! 🙁
Much love to Dee and to her family. May God give you strength for whatever comes!
@ refugee:
“We were told that the better we were at respecting our husbands, the more we’d be encouraging them to Christlikeness. Or something like that. …. It was *our* fault (the wives and mothers) if we were overburdened.”
++++++++++++++
what co-dependent bullsht imposed on you all. crickets of all kinds to the persons and bedrooms of those who required this of you.
a discussion, below, on interdependent vs co-dependent that i thought was helpful. (co-dependency is a little murky to me.)
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolution-the-self/201412/codependent-or-simply-dependent-what-s-the-big-difference
dee wrote:
I got a lot of different responses to my statement regarding what people get out of church. Thanks to everyone for their insights.
Here’s the rub, a lot of churches aren’t ok. Sometimes it takes going beyond even the website and Sunday sermons. I think it was “Eagle” who suggested looking in the church library. “Friend” has found a good church and good for them, there is always hope.
I think that we need to find a balance between faith and skepticism. It’s a balance that Dee & Deb appear to have.
I would say I am more on the skeptic side – I don’t have the surety that God even exists, let alone if he had a son or not. That’s probably why I find myself genuinely perplexed by the religion excercise. The irony is that I was a believer early in life, I just can’t seem to find my way back to that place
.
What I can say is that this blog provides a lot of food for thought.
Dee – take care of yourself as you go through your challenges. All the best.
elastigirl wrote:
Wow. Lots of triggers in that article. But good food for thought.
Thinking further, it is those dads (the ones I saw holding two kids on the lap during a sermon, so the wife could actually listen and even take notes) who defend our old church to me, who are staunch defenders of complementarianism. Because somehow it is not leading to conflict within their own families, but harmony.
Therefore, along with the fact that it is a “biblical injunction,” makes it applicable (mandatory?) for everyone.
refugee wrote:
Comp works more or less ok when the men are truly loving their wives in a non-selfish/self seeking way, respecting them, listening to them, etc…The people who defend almost invariably claim that their marriages are like that. Great.
The problem is when things go wrong. They have no answer to abuse, beyond saying it shouldn’t happen or that they will somehow fix it. And sadly, some of them focus on this leading thing, which isn’t actually biblical, so much that they never get into the love, or what that love is actually supposed to look like. What would these comp churches look like if instead of preaching on authority and submission, they preached incessantly on how men should love their wives, respect them, not hurt them, and then launch into the beatitudes and the fruits of the spirit? IF nothing else, that kind of preaching would probably not hurt someone. The authority preaching just reinforces and corrupts men who listen to closely.
@ Jack:
Some of the most decent people I know are where you are. I worked for one of them many moons ago. He was fair, just, generous, humble, loyal, compassionate, reasonable, etc. I used to tease him that he would make a great ‘real’ Christian. :o)
refugee wrote:
And that’s why the elders in your church are never to blame. This same attitude extends to the church environment. If you leave it’s because you’re not up to snuff. You just couldn’t meet the church’s high standards. The deficiency is in YOU. Or so they will tell everyone.
refugee wrote:
I’ve seen this play out in real life. The woman my son married turned out to be a real piece of work. He did indeed have to do everything (housework, cooking cleaning, laundry) after his long workdays.
They’re now divorced and my son is a single dad raising his three kids alone.
Lydia and Gram3 are right, laziness and “me-ism” are not confined to any one particular gender, regardless of what the extremists on both ends of the spectrum want you to sign onto.
@ refugee:
in the sober light of day, all they were doing is employing kindness, treating their wife the way they would want to be treated. just like my kind agnostic and atheist friends & relatives do.
they definitely get credit for the kindness they’ve shown.
all the rest, the lead/leader/leading rickrack embroidery, serves to foster a feeling of empowerment. the answer to the quest for significance. (among other self-serving things and goofy things)
nothing really honorable about that.
Christiane wrote:
Certainly, it is a trait of the fallen nature, pretty much evident worldwide and in all ages. What one would expect is for the church to be an oasis where things are different, because in Christ there is no male or female, only believer. One is sadly disappointed to see the same fallen motivations and paranoia setting misogyny down as not just culture, tradition or habit but as theology- as God’s way, God’s holy design. As a woman, that is the huge disappointment in the church.
There are two very interesting posts on “The Mortification of Spin”. One dated today by Carl Trueman and one dated yesterday by Todd Pruitt.
Muff Potter wrote:
Blessings on your son and your grandchildren as he raises them. Too many women have found illegitimate power in victimhood. To be clear, I am not talking about real victims but about people who put on the mantle of victim falsely because it gives them real power over people to use and abuse people. That false victimhood diminishes those women (or men!) who are true victims of abusers.
@ Lea:
“What would these comp churches look like if instead of preaching on authority and submission, they preached incessantly on how men should love their wives, respect them, not hurt them, and then launch into the beatitudes and the fruits of the spirit?”
++++++++++
certainly sounds better.
but i can’t shake the feeling that it reduces to me to a political being.
i’m no longer an individual, a human being. i’m a being whose existence is recognized because of my relationship to someone else. i’m the pink pawn, and my job is to receive the action of the blue pawn… for his sake, for the viability of the church’s sake, for the viability of the pastor’s sake, for the bible’s sake, for the glory of god’s sake.
i’d just love for someone to cut through all the religious red tape and say, ‘people, practice acts of kindness (random & otherwise) and senseless acts of beauty. meeting adjourned.’
Leslie wrote:
Those were totally depressing to read. I really hope the names get named of these racketeers and bullies. CBMW is trying to clean up their internet theological crime scene, but I do not think it will work. I imagine Denny Burk has disciples who will do the dirty work for him so that his hands remain clean. A *real* leader would expose his disciples doing such. They bring great shame on Jesus’ name regardless of how much they crow that they are all about “spreading the fame of Jesus’ name.” Sickening.
@ Gram3:
Leslie wrote:
“There are two very interesting posts on “The Mortification of Spin”. One dated today by Carl Trueman and one dated yesterday by Todd Pruitt.”
Gram3: “Those were totally depressing to read. I really hope the names get named of these racketeers and bullies. CBMW is trying to clean up their internet theological crime scene, but I do not think it will work. I imagine Denny Burk has disciples who will do the dirty work for him so that his hands remain clean”
++++++++++++++++++++++
Deebs — this deserves the publicity of a post.
Muff Potter wrote:
Hi MUFF,
sounds like your son really loved his children and did what he could to take care of them …. I’m glad they are with him now although it must be very, very difficult for him to do everything alone …. God bless him in his struggles.
mirele wrote:
Right. I suppose they don’t want to touch a religious issue like that with a ten foot pole.
Meanwhile, Driscoll will spin it as if he’s been exonerated.
@ dee:
When it rains, it pours.
You are in my thoughts, Dee, and my prayers.
@ Leslie:
Wow!!
@ Gram3:
Thanx Gram3! Your prescience (without going into the particulars) about my son’s situation astounds me.
Deebs — this is the story outline:
*CBMW, under the umbrella of Big Eva, is the maffia.
*CBMW is attempting to rewrite their own history.
*They are lying about it (to themselves? definitely to their audience).
*They are being called on it, with much evidence (see Rachel Miller’s post).
*Their thugs have been deployed with threatening tactics.
*The thugs are lauded celebrities who enjoy the limelight and profit from it.
*Elastigirl was heard saying, “i’ve never seen anything like it.”
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/postcards-from-palookaville/in-the-end-it-all-comes-down-to-this#.V9L3GJgrKhc
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517/another-follow-up-on-my-post-concerning-denny-burks-article#.V9L4gpgrKhc
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517/another-follow-up-on-my-post-concerning-denny-burks-article#.V9L4gpgrKhc
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/postcards-from-palookaville/rachel-miller-on-cbmw-and-efseras#.V9L4tZgrKhc
http://www.alliancenet.org/mos/1517/will-cbmw-refute-efs#.V9L4ypgrKhc
Velour wrote:
Oh, I wondered about your name, that is funny! A fabric for the cause 😀
Jack wrote:
I found a great one too, but once I dscovered them, I had to look carefully at their website and sermons and articles on the Internet to make sure everything was kosher.
Lydia wrote:
My bank account has been enjoying a sabbatical from these self-important religious professionals for quite awhile. These overworked religious professionals have *no* problem asking for volunteer work from people who are also overworked and stressed in the real world where people who ask for sabbaticals are laughed out of the room or fired. Life is good inside the bubble.
elastigirl wrote:
That’s true. I think it would be better than what they are saying, though.
Obviously we are all supposed to be loving god and loving each other. We know what love is. That’s the most important thing, according to jesus. It should probably get a little more headspace in church.
Patriciamc wrote:
I basically gave up on finding a Baptist or non-denom church that fit, and ended up in a reformed church, which I don’t really believe. But I think it’s a good church in the things that matter, I guess?
Leslie wrote:
Whoa. How pathetic, from Carl’s article, that ‘such vile attacks are part of the culture’!! Do these people have no sense of propriety, manners or shame? Clearly not. They feed on each other and become rotten to the core when you challenge them.
Lea wrote:
sadly, certain ‘churches’ cannot preach on what they do not believe
refugee wrote:
Refugee, I am so sorry that your kids went through this and that as their parent, you have to endure the character assassination in addition to the harm done by the bullying.
The cognitive dissonance that makes it so hard for people to believe that their pastors/leaders would lie, unrepentantly sin, collude, etc. makes things twice as bad for any victims. The abusers get the benefit of the doubt and the victims get re-victimized.
I wish your average church goer knew the prevalence of narcissism in the pulpit and the typical lying that goes along with it. They might not be so sllllloooooow to consider the possibility.
Leslie wrote:
This cracked me up from Trueman, btw:
Todd, however, is more sensitive.
@ Lea:
“Obviously we are all supposed to be loving god and loving each other. We know what love is.”
+++++++++++
well, i think you & I do, as well as the TWW community, I would think.
i have my doubts about some theologians and the people who ingest their ideas (as if they were 5 hamburgers on an empty stomach, & weed to for recreation & to self-soothe). it’s like they’ve stared at the material for so long their brains have twisted inside out like a paper cup.
i think they’ve deprogrammed themselves or reprogrammed themselves into this weird belief system.
elastigirl wrote:
They look at the wrong things.
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love takes no pleasure in evil, but rejoices in the truth.…It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails.
They would look at that list and the only thing they would see is the ‘endures all things’ and say women should endure abuse, because look! There it is!
siteseer wrote:
I’m just a lil’ square in the crazy quilt.
Bear with me a moment.
At my most recent 6-monthly check with the Forth Valley NHS Diabetes Squad (that’s not the formal departmental title, as you might perhaps have guessed), my 3-month average blood sugar level – and there’s an ingenious way to measure this – came back at around 6 mmol/l. This is not just within target; it’s within a standard deviation or so of what you’d expect from someone who isn’t diabetic. Whereas I’ve been diabetic for around 4 years; at the point of diagnosis, my levels were more than double that.
So, how do I do this? Well, it’s fundamentally a question of attitude. I don’t live with diabetes; it lives with me. I don’t know who first said that – I didn’t think of it myself – but I entirely agree with them. I have an almost obsessional aversion to out-of-range blood sugar measurements. By reading, asking, research and trial-and-error, I’ve developed a broad and deep understanding of what kinds of exercise do and don’t help. I’ve got my insulin dosages down to a fine art, again by trial and error. And here’s where the attitude really comes in. When I measure my blood glucose, and it’s high, I pretty much consider it a personal failure. And I don’t ignore it – I decide what to do differently about it. And if it doesn’t work, I don’t ignore that either – I try something else, until it does. When I need to ask advice, I don’t look for someone who’ll tell me it’s not my fault, I look for someone who knows what they’re talking about (fortunately, the Forth Valley Squad are pretty knowledgeable, and always available to field questions). So, sure, I take the positives from every little failure and grow from them – but first I have to accept failure.
That’s how you control Type 1 diabetes. It’s also how you control abuse in a church. Not by pretending it doesn’t happen and that, when it does, it didn’t really happen and it’s someone else’s fault anyway. Nor by casually hiring paedophiles and pretending your doctrine will protect you. But by ruthlessly forcing yourself to face up to the evidence when it tells you something you didn’t want it to.
That’s my own story. Many other Wartburgers could tell a better one. Preventing abuse isn’t impossible.
numo wrote:
Thanks for jumping in, numo, and greetings to elastigirl.
I have at times gone to Mass at Roman Catholic churches, benefited from the liturgy, and experienced God’s presence. I wish that non-Catholics were still permitted to receive Communion in RC churches, but that would not stop me from going back. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church is still struggling with the huge problem of sexual abuse, and that will stop a lot of people from thinking about going. You might want to evaluate your local archdiocese’s actions in recent years.
But I think most on TWW will agree that there are no litmus tests. Some people persist in slugging it out at churches that they hope will improve. Some people can’t, or won’t, take it anymore. If God is everywhere, and if we have something like free will and sound judgment, I think we have the right to worship wherever we find God.
Jesus said, “See, I am sending you out like sheep into the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16). The passage foretells persecution of the Disciples, but I think it applies also to our own discernment as we just try to find a safe, sound place to sit with others on Sunday morning.
Lea wrote:
How can He Who Can Do No Wrong (by definition) feel shame?
And shame (like blackmail) requires a third party.
“If nobody knows of my sin, I Am Not Shamed!”
(And dead men tell no tales…)
elastigirl wrote:
PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY.
Everyone fall on your swords so the Big Dog is not exposed/shamed.
Leslie wrote:
Links?
Nick Bulbeck wrote:
Yes.
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
You can find them here: http://www.mortificationofspin.org/mos
@ Headless Unicorn Guy:
They are here (didn’t copy them so as not to clog up the response to you) –
@ elastigirl:
Lea wrote:
They used to have an accredited counsellling program. Moore got rid of it.
@ elastigirl:
WOW.
@ Nick Bulbeck:
Good post, Nick, about controlling diabetes…and also the issues in abusive churches.
I liked the part about attitude.
I did something to my foot and it’s swollen. So I have a compress of apple cider vinegar on it. It seems to be helping. I thought what you did…first I started to beat myself up, and then I changed gears and thought, “OK, I’ll have to figure this out and try different things until it improves.”
Dr. Fundystan, Proctologist wrote:
Probably because it wasn’t ‘Scriptural’ enough for him? It didn’t line up with a ‘Biblical world view’?
Lea wrote:
Except when he was throwing around the slander accusations here. Sigh.
@ elastigirl:
same here, elastigirl.
Like I said above, much depends on the individual congregation or parish. Some are great, lots are so-so, some are downright awful.
@ siteseer:
well, that’s the outline of how i summarize the situation.
Velour wrote:
try icing the foot and keeping it elevated as much as you can
@ Jack:
Friend and I are not from evangelical backgrounds (e are both from liturgical churches), though I spent many years in the evangelical wilderness.
At any rate, while there are certain flaws in Friend’s denom and mine as well, it’s just… different. Very hard to explain in blog comments, unfortunately. Sometimes you have to go and just sit with things and see what’s happening.
One thing I know for sure: the denom in which I grew up lets people live their own lives, doesn’t treat them like stupid adult “children” who can’t be trusted to make decisions on their own. The kind of thinking and practices that so many of us have encountered (me, too) is rare to nonexistent, depending on where one looks. There might be *other* difficulties for those who think we are too “liberal,” but again, that varies from congregation to congregation. One parish might be something that makes you want to run away screaming, while another might feel like home. It depends, because both these denoms are pretty big tents, so to speak.
Abi Miah wrote:
Most people do not get it until it happens to them.
And yet, it would be so simple to test, really, if anyone wanted to know the truth! Just start asking some questions, expressing some doubt. Play the devil’s advocate. And see what happens.
elastigirl wrote:
I’ve not seen anything like it, either.
Friend wrote:
Thus right here. Very important.
As for going to bat, de nada!
@ numo:
This
Christiane wrote:
Thanks. I have the elevated part. I can’t stand the ice part. OK, I will do as you suggest and drag out the ice pack. (I don’t do ‘cold’ well. I’m a California native. If temp drops below 70 degrees, I put on a sweater.)
numo wrote:
Things went generally well for me, a conservative Christian, at liberal churches. There always seemed to be a group of people who were like-minded conservatives with whom you could meet, they always seemed to congregate to the same Bible studies and meetings, and there always was a live-and-let-live attitude from the other parishioners and the pulpit (even though we might not have believed like most others the liberal church, we were allowed in a spirit of tolerance to practice our faith), as well as a refreshingly humble attitude from the pulpit (have never run into a malignant narcissist in a liberal pulpit. Am sure they exist, but never saw one) and a spirit of community and mutual submission. Can’t seem these days to walk into an evangelical church without being preached at from the pulpit by one whom for all the world seems to have no clue as to whom the one he’s allegedly preaching about really is.
@ Velour:
you can ice periodically, and remove the pack when it gets TOO cold . . . just try to do what you can and it will help to bring the swelling down (I hope)
if you don’t feel like dragging out the ice pack, then go to your freezer and get a bag of frozen veggies (peas work well) and use the bag like an ice pack …. it saves time and I know you are hurting, so this might be a better idea
take some pain meds (aspirin, whatever) and that also might help and YES, WE will pray for you who takes such faithful care of all of our prayer needs so well 🙂
Gram3 wrote:
These guys get no sympathy from me or my money.
Lydia wrote:
To me, he was sensitive. He got in a snit and left. He could not get past himself and his concern for Carl to even listen. It takes a a secure person to put their issues aside and listen.
Velour wrote:
Thus does science begin.
Good luck! Your guess is as good as mine on the swollenFootProblem…
Leslie wrote:
Thing that seems inexplicable is Todd’s post about how he took his critique down, he spoke about being in “hot water”, referred to those in power being a “racket”, all friends, willing to take down any opposition, he even made Godfather references. If he can be that blunt about those people on a public forum, why in the world would he take down his critique of Denny Burk? So he’s afraid to leave it up, as he claims he doesn’t have thick skin, but not afraid to absolutely lambast the ones who compelled him to do it? I don’t get this. Not that I doubt him, he sounds sincere, but I’d think if you were afraid of criticism, after writing what he posted yesterday, why oh why wouldn’t you be afraid of even more? I guess the neocalvinist world is an enigma to me.
Law Prof wrote:
Ay, “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma”
Bridget wrote:
And to consider the possibility that what he was reading about Trueman’s Mahaney episode was *not* necessarily an attack. I am a Trueman fangirl, but I was disappointed in the position he took on Mahaney’s fitness. I think it was an incorrect decision *and* I can understand why someone with a Presbyterian mindset might decide the issue on narrow grounds.
I wish that Todd and Carl would both consider that possibility, because that might lead to greater understanding all around. It is very hard to do that, especially when the issue hits so close to home. Pointing the finger at myself…
Law Prof wrote:
Yes, I don’t get that part either. If his criticism of Burk is legitimate (and I think it is) then leave it up and let people decide for themselves. IMO, taking down a post does not make it disappear. It does not increase clarity on the issues, and it does increase the noise in the discussion.
@ Gram3:
Denny Burk has shut down his ‘comments’ section on most of his latest posts. So, he either has no time to ‘moderate’ comments OR he just doesn’t want to have incoming criticism now that he is Prez over at CBMW. I don’t think he is a petty person, but taking on that new position likely has affected him somewhat. Maybe he just needs a bit of time-out to adjust to the new gig. ?
Law Prof wrote:
Speculating is one of my favorite hobbies. I think it is somewhat likely that he received a credible offer he could not refuse because, if he refused it, he might find himself facing some disciplinary action. That’s my working hypothesis. Presbyterians can go to the mattresses just like Baptists. With Roberts Rules, of course. Or is it Robert’s? I need a ruling from the chair…
Christiane wrote:
I imagine he and his interns are pretty busy scrubbing the CBMW website of inconvenient articles on ESS and Soap Bubbles and Sanctified Testosterone and such. And also trying to come up with a plausible grounding for Danvers now that ESS is off the table.
@ Law Prof:
I think there is also a clue lurking in “they are all friends with one another.” There is one Presbyterian among the T4g quartet. When the ESS thing blew up, I said to watch what Ligon Duncan says and does. We shall see what cover he provides for the others with the PCA study committee report. Because the conclusion has already been written, in my humble, female opinion.
Gram3 wrote:
What? Todd is Presbyterian but isn’t Burke Baptist? Why do you think Todd might face disciplinary action?
Muff Potter wrote:
I know your son has a tough row to hoe. But congrats to you, Muff. You raised your son to be a great man.
Gram3 wrote:
The first rule of Fight Club is . . .
Bridget wrote:
Because Denny’s friends are Duncan’s friends who are Presbyterian. Once you get past the idea that the T4g guys really care about Presbyterian or Baptist doctrines all that much, it is easier to see that they really are an amalgamation with a totally different agenda. IMO and based on what we have observed, Big Eva (as Trueman calls it) or the Gospel Glitterati (as I call it) really only want to promote their own importance. And there is nothing about Jesus or the real Gospel in that.
Velour wrote:
Been there, done that. An epsom salt bath always helps me. I dump the whole bag in the tub and soak. Relief. It pulls the pain out and brings down the swelling.
Nancy2 wrote:
And may the Lord spare him from the divorce shamers. Muff’s son has rescued those innocent children. People need to be aware that it is very, very difficult for a dad to rescue children from an abusive mother. Moms can get away with things that would land a dad in jail. I could never be a pediatrician or the like and see what they see. Some people who should know better cannot face the fact that a mother would do the things that some mothers do. Just like some people cannot face the fact that some pastors do what some pastors do, so they turn a blind eye or rationalize it away. Because she’s the mother! Because he’s our pastor! So, Muff’s son faced down some tough odds and got the kids out. Well done, Muff’s son.
Gram3 wrote:
I get that, but they’re willing to destroy him over the critique, but not willing to destroy him for basically calling them a bunch of mafioso? Try and help me make sense of this.
Gram3 wrote:
Agreed, don’t care if they call themselves PCA or SBC, a neocalvinist is a neocalvinist is a neocalvinist.
Todd Pruitt’s Facebook page is worth checking out
Law Prof wrote:
Burk’s foremost task right now is to re-write the theological and practical history of CBMW. He has problems with ESS and with Spousal abuse. Right out of the chute he put up articles about abuse and about how ESS is not necessary in order to support Danvers. Danvers is the Ten Commandments, and if you touch the Danvers Mountain, you die.
TThe purpose, IMO, of putting Burk back at CBMW is to divorce CBMW from Owen BHLH and Bruce Ware. Bruce Ware has way too much baggage due to his remarks at Denton Bible Church and ESS. Owen is Ware’s son-in-law. CBMW has given up on ESS because they have been refuted by trinitarian scholars from many traditions. But Todd Pruitt pointed out that Denny has himself promoted ESS in the JBMW. See also Rachel Miller’s takedown of the attempted revision of history at CBMW/SBTS regarding ESS.
So, Pruitt is unmasking the new narrative they are trying to push as the Big Tent Trinitarians who *NEVER EVER EVER* insisted that ESS was “always the orthodox position of the Church” whenever anyone questioned them on it. Pruitt and Trueman and Byrd and Miller are obstructing the advance of that narrative, and without that narrative, CBMW is ugly black toast. And there are a lot of legacies tied up with CBMW.
JYJames wrote:
OK. I’ll try that next. Thanks, folks.
@ Law Prof:
Neglected the main point of your question. IMO, the Syndicate does not care what anyone calls them. What they have not been able to endure, however, is facts and analysis and questions. Pruitt, with his mafioso remarks, is merely stating what Trueman has been saying for years about the Gospel Glitterati. They tried to tame Trueman at one of the T4g events (2012?) but that did not work.
When Pruitt says “hot water” I think he must be talking about disciplinary action which might affect his credentials.
Muff Potter wrote:
That is the story, which Moore published in a tract that is given out to all new students. Of course, everyone in the school understood that it was a religious excuse to cover the fact that the school simply couldn’t afford to maintain accreditation.
Gram3 wrote:
If you’re over there and see anything…save it on The WayBack Machine.
https://archive.org/web/ [see the box on the right side of the screen when you’re on the website]
People here advised me that my former abusive church – Grace Bible Fellowship of Silicon Valley – would be scrubbing the internet and to start archiving pages on the Wayback Machine website and to take screen shots. That was good advice and it turned out to be true.
My new blog devoted to the Spiritual Abuse and Authoritarianism going on at my ex-church.
https://gbfsvchurchabuse.org/
I recently emailed an elder and asked for a full financial refund of everything I ever gave them and for them since they lied to me about what they were about and I would have never become a member, or given money, had I known the truth. I also asked them to pay for an Italian cross to be sent to me, since the senior pastor (Cliff) and one of his women friends took “offense” to an Italian cross I had hanging in my living room. Rather the hateful woman did — she’s a former Catholic without a shred of boundaries or good manners (the kind of woman who runs her mouth and has a dumb opinion to share about everything). She gave me a lecture about ‘false idols’ for a beautiful piece of Italian art on my living room wall, my birthday gift, cost hundreds of dollars, had it for years and loved it.
I asked the senior pastor how to deal with her, since he knew her for years. He took her side, said he would be offended by it too, that I shouldn’t have it, blah, blah, blah. Under enormous pressure from him, I got rid of my own birthday gift in my own home!
I never walked in to their homes and conducted myself with that kind of breathtaking self-centeredness and uncouth behavior. I think they should each line up their favorite birthday gifts, most expensive, hundreds of dollars, stuff they like — and I’ll chose which one they each have to get rid of.
Bunch of nutcases. I wished I walked out then of that…gulag. It’s not a church.
I also asked in my email for the church to refund the good doctor whom they excommunicated and his wife their money, all of the nice books and DVDs he bought for the church lending library, and paying for the senior pastor to join him on a trip to meet the Rev. Billy Graham a few years ago at his log cabin home in North Carolina. The doctor and his wife accused the pastors/elders of lying about them, abusing them.
And I asked for a full refund for the woman that was our first church discipline case, because she thought they were nuts and left for a saner church.
Leslie wrote:
I looked at this and read the two articles on the Mortification pf Spin. It’s good to see people within the movement question it and note the rotten fruit (the bullying, the attacks, etc). I particularly like the comment on how certain beliefs have been used to justify domestic abuse.
I copied this off of Todd Pruitt’s facebook page. I will freely admit I don’t know what this quote means. Can anyone explain it?
“Denny Burke on Philippians 2: “Paul argues here that in his pre-incarnate state, Christ existed as *theos*. Yet in this pre-incarnate existence, Christ Jesus did not seek to be like *theos* in every respect.”. It’s caused a stir in the comments.
Gram3 wrote:
Oh – horse hockey on that!
Gram3 wrote:
God/Jesus/Holy Spirit is not concerned with their legacy me thinks. These guys are more worldly than kings and princes IMHO . . .
Patriciamc wrote:
They certainly do not speak in a plain way do they?
Gram3 wrote:
Blackmail, in other words 🙁
Law Prof wrote:
He went from criticizing a specific person by name to being shadowy and vague and calling burk a great gentleman.
mot wrote:
Denny’s ‘alternative view’ section mentions this:
” ‘Equality with God’ and
‘form of God’ might not be two
ways of referring to the same thing. ”
I was shocked to read that, as the implication is not in the realm of orthodox Christianity at all. Of course, I’m from a different tradition, but even then, the statement seems totally shocking.
I have often left on Denny’s comment section the caveat, “si comprendo, non est Deus” but just as often it was removed by ‘moderation’. Well, I tried to help at least. (sigh)
Law Prof wrote:
Makes you wonder if some sort of threats were made or implied?
Velour wrote:
I second this excellent advice. Anyone who is familiar with the site and the articles.
@ siteseer:
I need to remember to reload the page before I make a comment…
Gram3 wrote:
And no names are named, so…
@ dee:
You are an angel, really. God bless you.
Law Prof wrote:
Yes it is to me, too. Trueman has “critiqued” the celebrity Christian world without ever mentioning his part in propping it up for Mahaney. It’s like that did not happen or we don’t have all the facts yet we are “slanderers” for bringing it up, according to Pruitt.
I spent years around cowardly “pastors” like this in the seeker world. Of course he took it down. He threw Aimee under his bus by doing so, too, whether she admits it or not. So much for “comp” protection of women. It’s how these guys roll if they even want to keep their place…whatever that is. I have seen how the pressure works. It’s subtle but the message is clear. Not going along is a career killer. And so much of Christianity is basically a career climb these days. Being known. Having followers.
@ Gram3:
You know what I find confusing about this? They put higher standards on pew sitters that they themselves are not willing to model yet they make a living teaching Christ. I just don’t have the patience or understanding with it anymore.
And when Truman was tapped to prop up Mahaney–it was outside the Presbyterian ecclesiastical court world. Seems to me that would have caused him to ask even more questions about his “narrow” task.
Lydia wrote:
Thinking out loud here . . . Do you think Truman was asked to help out with the Mahaney issue by “their” common friend Duncan? Isn’t Duncan part of T4G?
Bridget wrote:
The joke here is that SBTS is the “real” Presbyterian seminary in town. I think the relationships (money, promotion) are so intertwined through para church orgs like TGC, T$G, CBMW, Crossway, LifeWay and seminaries that they affect careers across any denominational protections.
Bridget wrote:
I have no idea. Trueman won’t tell people how it came about or even if he regrets being a part of it. Which I find telling and the reason he has no credibility with me even if I agree with his vague critiquing posts.
Patriciamc wrote:
It is Burk arguing a non point to try and make the Incarnate Christ into a lesser God in eternity past and future. That last part is very important. (Note they hardly ever mention the Holy Spirit) It’s the old salesman trick…get people agreeing. (I heard Burk preach on this years back. He was struggling to emulate Ware)
He mangles Phil 2. In fact, Phil 2 tells a different story. The Theos gave up Glory Himself and humbled Himself. Some translation use “grasp” like the ESV which alludes to Jesus Christ was not in control at all. The NIV says:
6 Who, being in very nature[a] God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8 And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11 and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.
The NIV seems to accept equality within the Trinity but Jesus did not use it. “He made Himself….”
They twisted a lot of proof texts to make Jesus a lesser God. Just think, 1 Corinthians 11 was their main go to passage to prove ESS! That tells most of what we need to know about that ridiculous teaching.
siteseer wrote:
If you don’t name names, you cannot be accused of breaking the 9th commandment. That is what I think Pruitt is getting at. I think someone told him they were going to bring charges against him. Serious stuff if you are ordained.
Lydia wrote:
Lydia wrote:
And how long will it be before someone realizes that without ESS, the assumption that kephale means authority over no longer makes sense in 1 Corinthians 11? They may actually be forced to acknowledge Paul’s own conclusion to his own argument instead of trying to make Paul say what he never said. Nah, that’s not going to happen.
@ Christiane:
No, it’s totally shocking to Protestants as well. Really crerpy, and, imo, verging on Mormon beliefs. (Not condemning Mormons, just saying that these guys have created another religion.)
Gram3 wrote:
Here is the irony of all this: Denny Burk can write and teach ESS/EFS but if Burk says publicly it is not EFS/ESS he is writing or preaching, that is to be the end of it.
From then on, if you dare say it IS ESS and why, then you are to be disciplined, shunned, booted off blogs, etc, etc by his protectors. I saw this exact thing for years in that movement over all sorts of things doctrinal and behavioral. It is extremely Orwellian.
These are guys that if they preach that it is raining on a sunny day you had best agree it is raining on a sunny day. That is how it works in their world. They are not to be questioned or second guessed. Todd was to accept Burks explanation and drop it.
Mohler knows he has a real problem on this one and will pull in every chit to shut it down from “Reformed” sources. He ignores the non Calvinists in the SBC who have brought it up. He swats them away like annoying flies or just makes a call and ruins them.
Lydia wrote:
That’s pretty much how it happened for me. Ask an in convenient question. Answer, “Shut Up.” They get the message from HQ and pass it on.
Here’s a link to a copy of Todd’s blog post which he took down, apparently due to having been blackmailed by one or more celebrity christian famous names.
https://jennysstool.com/2016/09/09/calling-clemenza/
——————
Here’s what stood out to me:
Todd says,
“Perhaps it is because I am obtuse but after reading Denny’s article several times I still cannot quite decipher his theology beyond his clear denial of the Son’s equality with the Father. In this he argues along with Grudem and Ware for an eternal state of subordination of the Son to the Father within the Godhead.”
——————
Todd describes the motives for Mort. of Spin’s pushback on ESS, as has been promoted at CBMW, the 2nd of which is:
2) It is damaging to the church. The theology of the eternal subordination of the Son (ESS/EFS) is found in lay-friendly theology books, marriage books, books for women, and even books for children. In the last two week I have heard from two women in my church who have spotted the errors in a book by a woman closely connected to CBMW. She is, I am sure, a fine woman who loves Jesus. But understandably she gets her theology from those theologians who lead the efforts at CBMW. As such she has drunk deeply from the EFS fountain and imbibed its errors. Now it is being passed along to others.
So once again pastors like me have to clean out the resources recommended to the women in our churches. We have to risk alienating wonderful people who grew fond of certain books and writers. We have to correct errant notions of the Trinity and complementarianism advanced in supposedly trustworthy resources. All this because a parachurch organization has chosen to teach a brand of trinitarianism which finds precious little support among evangelical systematic theologians and church historians. Worst of all, it finds no support in God’s Word. I hope CBMW will once and for all refute ESS/EFS. And I hope they will do so with the same vigor with which they have promoted it.
@ elastigirl:
So, this expresses what is thought to be the core of Denny’s departure from orthodoxy:
“Burk states his purpose near the front of the article:
My purpose here is to highlight the grammatical item in this verse and to briefly note its potential theological impact on our understanding of intratrinitarian relations. (emphasis mine)
He understands that his conclusion will have an impact upon the way the relations within the Trinity are to be understood.
His conclusion will surprise many:
The theological result is that “form of God” and “equality with God” should not be regarded as synonymous but as phrases with distinct meanings. Therefore, in Paul’s Christology “form of God” is something that Jesus possessed by virtue of his deity, while “equality with God” is not. In fact, “equality with God” is best understood as a role that Jesus refused to pursue so that he could pursue his redemptive work in the incarnation. (p. 33)”
Wow . . . that so goes against the ancient Councils which held that Our Lord Jesus Christ was BOTH ‘fully God’ AND ‘fully Man’
Lydia wrote:
It will be up to us non-connected peons to expose this. I’ve sent my penal substitution questions to about a dozen redormed ministries. A few have responded. None will answer the questions. But I am hoping they will make a difference anyway. I can get away with doing this because they have no leverage over me because I am not a paid minister. I’m not even an elder.
@ Christiane:
But you can see how his tortured erroneous explanation lines up with comp doctrine. Yet, he will insist he is affirming equality in the Trinity. This is why I think these guys are total deceivers.
Ken F wrote:
Well, of course they will not answer your questions, impudent questioner. You make a good point that they have no leverage over us. The real question for a lot of young (and some older) pastors is: Why do you turn a blind eye to what is going on? Dissidents get disappeared, metaphorically. They do not want to teach. They want us to obey what they say, and they don’t particularly care whether there is a textual reason for what they say.
Julie Anne wrote:
Gram3 wrote:
This is what we need to be asking our pastors and elders. It’s what I am doing. My SBC church has not yet gone YRR. I don’t know what difference I make, but I plan to keep asking questions.
I made a mistake on my post above. It was a response just to Gram3.
A lot of complementarians are in denial about the link between their gender teachings and abuse of girls and women.
A few months ago, Tim Challies went so far in his review of Ruth Tucker’s book (her book about how gender complementarianism played a role in the abuse of her by her last husband) to tell other complementarians not to bother reading that book.
Yet other complementarians scream and yell on other blogs and sites demanding hard proof in the form of stats and studies any time complementarianism is discussed in the context of abuse.
Not only does complementarianism give men prone to abuse an easy pass and ready-made justification for spousal abuse (or treating girls like trash), but their teachings set girls and women up to be tolerant of this mistreatment.
That’s a point I raise in a point or two on my blog like in this post:
Christian Gender Complementarianism is Christian-Endorsed Codependency for Women (And That’s Not A Good Thing)
https://missdaisyflower.wordpress.com/2016/03/29/christian-gender-complementarianism-is-christian-endorsed-codependency-for-women/
This (what I link to below) would fall under the umbrella of complementarian views and teachings, but some of your average complementarians would, at this juncture, like to say what the guy quoted in the post below is doing is “not true complementarianism.”
Oh, yes, it is. All complementarians cannot completely agree on what complementarianism is and how it should be practiced, but I bet you dollars to dough-nuts the pastor quoted below thinks of himself as a complementarian, or, he shares their interpretations of “male headship” to mean that the husband is a boss over the wife.
Christian Pastor: The Reason Most Marriages Go Bad Is That Women “Believe They Are Equal Partners”
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/09/09/christian-pastor-the-reason-most-marriages-go-bad-is-that-women-believe-they-are-equal-partners/
A classic (well, as far as I’m concerned, anyway):
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
razorbackSally wrote:
I was discussing this on Julie Anne’s blog about two weeks ago.
I said over there, I don’t understand this odd obsession with some Christians thinking that boys need to be taught how to be men.
And secondly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen a similar Christian group cry and worry about girls raised by single fathers, and oh dear, how will those girls ever learn how to be women?
I’m also not seeing why they aren’t more concerned with helping kids become decent people, and maybe point them to Jesus Christ as an example? (As opposed to freaking out over gender-related issues, eg, how they will act as a man or woman)
Barbara Roberts wrote:
Not only that, but Kassian said this in a CT article published not too long ago:
The Complementarian Women Behind the Trinity Tussle – Behind the Trinity Tussle
by Kate Shellnutt
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2016/september/behind-trinity-tussle.html
From that page (Kassian being quoted):
Lydia wrote:
That whole post was quotable, but I wanted to comment on the part I put in bold face.
For the most part, and certainly in the complementarian marriages I’ve seen in person, the husband’s “big responsibility” merely involves things like…
Being in control of the TV remote control, or the husband gets the final say if the married couple move across country or not.
If we’re talking about that kind of marriage, I fail to see how any of that is a heavy burden for a guy to carry.
ishy wrote:
I have spent zero percentage of my life glorifying men, or even trying to, and I have no intent on starting now. Ware can take a long walk off a short pier.
Nancy2 wrote:
Exactly that.
A person who is unassertive and passive will either tend to attract abusers, exploiters, and assorted jerks, or, their passive, shy natures will keep them stuck in abusive relationships for a long time.
My mother was like that. Thankfully, my father was not physically abusive of her, but he could be somewhat emotionally abusive, in that, he would tease her until she cried, be too critical of her, etc.
My mother brought me up to think being passive and always sweet was proper behavior for girls/women (especially if one was Christian).
So, I went through life being a sweet, unassuming, passive person – which did attract bullies to me, consistently.
Not just men on dates, but I had female co-workers, bosses, friends, etc, take advantage of me too, in jobs, at school, and so on (getting me to do their work shifts for them on top of mine, etc.).
This stuff falls under the rubric of codependency – being passive and unassertive and so on.
Complementarianism encourages women and girls to think that being codependent is biblical and God’s will for females. It just keeps them stuck in harmful relationships or being on the receiving end of being exploited or used and abused.
Robert wrote:
It looks to me as though many of the guys who are laid-back and treat their wives well and like equals are egalitarian in practice and only complementarian in name.
There are a few well known complementarians who have noticed this and are dismayed by it, and even have tossed out getting rid of the word complementarianism altogether and just going with “patriarchy.”
Lea wrote:
I had clinical depression for many years, low self esteem, and I still deal with anxiety.
I used to try the spiritual only approach with those problems (read the Bible, pray etc), and it never stopped the depression, anxiety, and low self esteem.
One key thing is that these types of Christians don’t seem to realize is that the teachings of Jesus can be misunderstood or misapplied.
My mother meant well, she really did, but she always interpreted (mis-interpreted, I should say) the words of Jesus to mean that Jesus wants Christians (especially women and girls) to be doormats.
I had to un-learn that well into my adulthood, starting a few years ago. Most Christians teach that Jesus/ God/ the Bible teaches Christians (women in particular) to be little sweet doormats (be codependent).
I’ve not come across many Christian authors / psychologists / psychiatrists who speak out against this type of thinking.
They do exist, but they get drowned out by the paranoid Christians who are fearful of psychology and/or who take sola-scriptura to absurd lengths (trying to apply ‘Bible only’ views to mental health problems).
Lea wrote:
I don’t know about the rest of the nation, but a lot of this information was in the local press at the time.
I used to live there when that story broke. I had to drive past Yates home every day on the way to my job there.
I had one co-worker who despised her for what she did to her kids, but I reminded him she was mentally out of it, and her family and in-laws knew and didn’t get her any help.
I’m all for holding people accountable when they do wrong, but the particulars in her case was such I don’t think she was fully culpable. I actually felt her husband and in-laws were partially to blame.
Robert wrote:
I understand. I had depression from childhood about into my late 30s. If I had a nickel for every Christian I heard on TV or in person or saw in a book tell me to just pray the depression away, or just read the Bible more, I’d be a multi-millionaire. (None of those spiritual approaches lifted the depression.)
Another thing I find really annoying verging on deeply insensitive and insulting are the Christians who depict depression (or grief from death of a love one) as being a form of “self pity.”
Elizabeth Lee wrote:
Years ago on the internet, before Facebook, when everyone was forwarding lame jokes around via e-mail, people were e-mailing a “Wife 2.0” joke, which sort of compared a wife to a computer’s operating system. I think there was also a similar joke about going from Girlfriend 1.0 to Wife 1.0 or something.
This may be one of the jokes:
Girlfriend and Wife 1.0
http://www.jokesandhumor.com/jokes/165.html
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
There’s an advantage or two in NOT having one, like google the word “Candiru”
See also:
“That’s My Purse Failed Bobby VS Peggy”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBcAguZbS4s
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
It’s sad how people come up with ways to skirt around morals or laws like that.
There are some Muslim groups that forbid extra-marital sex, which the men get around by taking temporary wives: they “marry” a woman for an hour or day, and after fooling around with her, they divorce. That is how they get around their religion’s prohibitions of extra-martial sex.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
My sister’s ex-boyfriend’s mother had this happen to her once. She was sick (I forget with what), and another Christian told her God was punishing her with sickness. There are Christians who just assume if hardship comes your way, it MUST MEANT you surely did something to deserve it.
I had a Christian woman tell me once (after I confided in her I had depression), that I must “want” to be depressed.
No, can’t say as though I ever wanted it. I was desperate to be rid of it and saw shrinks for years, took medications for it, read books on how to get rid of it.
I see some Christians who think that way about mental illness – they think if you have something like depression that it’s a choice you are making, that you are choosing to have it.
Caroline Leaf does this thing every so often on her show. She bills herself as a Christian ‘neuro-scientist’ or some such, and she has a weekly TV show on TBN.
She will say every so often that people who have depression are choosing it. It’s such an insensitive comment and attitude. I can assure her that most people with depression are not “choosing” to be afflicted with it.
Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:
One other thing I wanted to say about that.
What is it with all the tele-evangelists I see who are into this morning stuff?
I’m always seeing them on TV talk about how you should take a cup off coffee and “spend some time in the Word with the LORD” – they always emphasize doing this stuff in the A.M.
I’m not a morning person, never have been.
I keep waiting for one of these guys to just once, advise Christians to pick any time of day they want, or choose the evening.
So many Christians are so cliched, they cannot even break away from the morning worship / “spend time with the Lord in the morning” (and it has to be with a cup of coffee!!) shtick.
Daisy wrote:
“On TBN.”
‘Nuff said.
Daisy wrote:
For people this insensitive, the only understanding they could ever have for those who are depressed is if they themselves have it happen to them. The full treatment: bell-jar depression that ‘descends’ on them and has to lived out second by second in a suffering so intense that physical pain would be preferable. I don’t wish that on anyone, no. But for some to have ’empathy’, if they could experience one episode of that utter hell, they would pack up their smug know-it-all preaching and throw it into the dumpster.
Even post-partum depression can be deeply painful. And many, many women going through the sharp hormonal changes following the delivery of a child will experience this misery, some so severely they will need medication and therapy. I had it after the birth of my third child. Unspeakable suffering. Of course people don’t ‘understand’ unless it happens to them, but they don’t have to make the suffering of others worse by their ignorance and callousness, no.
Lydia, Lea, and okrapod, your insights in this conversation have been particularly enjoyable (spiritually/intellectually, I mean). Thank you!
BeenThereDoneThat wrote:
And that sort of thinking did not help someone such as myself who was stuck in deep depression for many years.
I was a very sincere Christian. I was willing to look at any sin in my life, repent of it, and so on. And in spite of doing all that, the depression persisted anyway.
I had to read materials by Christian and Non-Christian psychologists who ultimately helped me ditch much of the depression.
The sort of world view you’re quoting from that site just does not work. If you are hurting bad enough -from depression or whatever it may be- you want results, and it won’t matter who or from where you get them, even if it’s from a *gasp* Bible-disbelieving atheist doctor.
@ Debi Calvet:
Thank you! That is nice hear now and then as encouragement.
Lydia wrote:
Chiming in late, but I think when this all first went down I decided he may be under a gag order. Don’t know if it’s true or not. Maybe I just like Trueman’s style at times, and want it to be true.
These men have to stop playing these good ole boy games and start actually calling people out by name. They’ve done that a bit with the trinity, but what about all the other nonsense?
Daisy wrote:
Wow.
I know I shouldn’t be shocked by this people anymore but still.
Debi Calvet wrote:
Thanks! How sweet. I always enjoy your thoughts as well.
Daisy wrote:
On Sunday mornings, News Channel 5 out of Nashville, TN airs Cornerstone Church services (Maury Davis, pastor – convicted of murder many years ago) after the news. Yesterday, I was busy in the kitchen when Davis’ show came on, so I didn’t quit what I was doing to change channels (our kitchen, living room, and dining area is all one big, open room).
Davis caught my attention when he started talking about marriage ……. male headship, woman submit, men make the decisions, husbands will be held accountable on judgement day for leading their wives and families……
Yes, this was Sunday, Sept. 11, 2016.
I want to ask Davis a myriad of questions:
“Does this mean that wives who obey their husbands get a free pass? After all, the weight of EVERYTHING falls on the husband. He is the one who will be held accountable…….not the wife.
Do women have souls? The way you talk, God gave Eve to Adam like a parent gives a child a puppy and holds the child accountable for training the puppy and making it mind.
If you had a wife who had committed that murder instead of you, would God hold you accountable for the murder?”
@ Daisy:
Speaking of Caroline Leaf.
I did a Google for “Caroline Leaf depression” and some of the things that turned up top of the list were videos by her with titles such as,
“Prayer Overcomes Depression – Dr. Caroline Leaf”
No. No it does not. Not for me, and not for a lot of other very sincere Christians I used to run into on support forums for Christians with depression (years ago).
One thing that adds to the pain of depression (which I personally don’t struggle with all too much as I once did) are Christians who tell you this very thing – if you just pray more, or have more faith, or toss yourself into charity work, you will be healed of depression.
None of that stuff works for most people who have depression.
It just makes you feel worse, when, after ten, twenty or more years of trying that Spiritual John Wayne approach, it does not work. You feel as though you are a failure.
Also, when you are in the thick of depression, you often feel as though God has left you and is very far away, and you are low on physical and mental energy. It is not easy to pray when you have depression. It’s also hard to concentrate on reading biblical passages.
Nancy2 wrote:
That is a good analogy.
Lea wrote:
AKA “Because She Got Uppity”.
Nancy2 wrote:
Anyone remember the James Dobson school of dog training?
(Hint: it involves the free use of a belt.)
Daisy wrote:
I keep wondering why they all have the same accent and dialect.
Like pronouncing “Lord” with multiple O’s and all caps.
Lydia wrote:
KYLE: But Dad, isn’t that Fascism?
KYLE’S DAD: No it isn’t, son. Because we don’t call it Fascism. Do you understand?
KYLE: Do you?
Gram3 wrote:
Easy to turn a blind eye when YOU’RE the One Personally Benefiting from the arrangement.
Daisy wrote:
True, this.
And these are among those times when this happens and we are not abandoned without the Comforter’s help:
” …. the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know how we ought to pray, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groans too deep for words.”
(Romans 8:26)
Daisy wrote:
The game’s called “Beat the System”.