Jessica Fore, a Victim of Domestic Violence, Is Indicted by The Presbyterian Church in America for Contempt Toward the Church and Its Leaders

"Some folks whispered and some folks talked, But everybody looked the other way… " Lyrics from Independence Day link.

 screen-shot-2016-09-30-at-6-43-14-pm

Recently, I was made aware of this situation by a long time TWW reader who has known Jessica since childhood. Jessica Fore, a documented survivor of domestic violence, has been indicted by the PCA (Presbyterian Church in America) for contempt toward the church and its leaders. I believe that this is a sad example of church abuse.

Jessica posted this on her blog under the title I Might Get Excommunicated For This. She has given me permission to reprint this in its entirety. I admire Jessica for standing up to the men in leadership at her church. She deserves a standing ovation for her willingness to subject herself to what I believe to be the cruel actions of the men in her church.

I corresponded with Jessica and am aware of the situation with the three unnamed individuals in her post. It is my opinion that the church and these individuals are acting in an unnecessary, abusive manner towards Jessica. In keeping with her wishes, I will not name names but if this keeps up, I am willing to document that absolutely shameless and downright stupid responses in this situation. Oh yeah, and I don't go to a PCA Church so the inquisition committee is out of luck with me.

I have made some minor changes to the pagination to fit our format and added subtitles.


I Might Get Excommunicated For This

I am a survivor of domestic violence, and I just got formally indicted by the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) for not cooperating with various instructions about speaking out regarding my experience of injustice surrounding abuse in the church.  Indictment is the first step in a disciplinary process that can lead to excommunication, and it’s meant to be employed only when someone is committing heinous sin.  My crime?  Holding this sign, among other things:

20160919_145206

Below is the indictment issued by Faith Presbyterian Church in Watkinsville, Georgia (with non-officers’ names redacted.)  My response follows.

jessica-fore-indictment-redacted

indictment-screenshot

September 22, 2016

To Whom It May Concern:

Jessica is a survivor of domestic violence.

This is in response to Faith Presbyterian Church’s formal indictment of me for “contempt toward the Church and its leaders,” dated September 12, 2016.  First, I will summarize the events leading up to the indictment to the best of my recollection:  I was hired as Faith’s worship leader in the fall of 2008.  I was married to an abusive spouse at the time.  My husband’s abuse escalated and became known in a dramatic way with copious evidence over the course of several months in 2009.  Audio recordings, photographic evidence, police reports, psychological evaluations, and eyewitness testimony by various elders and church members corroborated his abuse, lying, and criminal activity.

The church fired Jessica because she wouldn't live with her abusive husband.

Nevertheless, the church predicated me keeping my job on reconciling and cohabiting with him, and ultimately fired me for remaining separated.  I was already in a vulnerable financial situation and was plunged into poverty for the next three years.  Had it not been for the help of friends and family, I would have become homeless.

After I recovered, I confronted the Session about what it had done.  In 2013, after much arm twisting, the Session issued a public apology for its lack of “shepherding care” when I experienced a “series of extremely painful events.”  Abuse was not mentioned.  The Session never expressed repentance for firing me, never set the record straight with the congregation that I was a victim of domestic violence, and never pursued any kind of restitution.  I have seen no substantive change in the Session’s attitude toward abuse in the church.  I have not seen the Session deploy any new churchwide policies or leadership training that would improve the church’s response to abuse victims in the future.  On the contrary, as I have continued coping with the fallout from all of this, the Session has taken new adverse actions against me.

The Session affirmed her closest friends who shunned of Jessica.

 In 2014, the Session affirmed my closest friends shunning me in response to me trying to resolve a related grievance with them.

The Session had a counselor diagnose Jessica's mental status without interviewing her.

 In 2015, the Session brought a Licensed Professional Counselor, a church member, into a Session meeting to advise on my mental state and what was best for me in absentia, without my knowledge or consent, based on the testimony of the opposing parties in the grievance.  In 2015, the Session launched a formal disciplinary investigation into the grievance that consisted of having one called Session meeting with the opposing parties and then issuing written conclusions and directives at me.  

The Session told her she could not attend her Gospel Community Group from which derived support.

In 2016, the Session attempted to limit my fellowship in the church without due process by instructing me not to attend a Gospel Community Group which I had previously attended faithfully for several years.

Jessica attempted to notify the church of her situation and continued to attend her Gospel™ group.

After many patient attempts to address these issues privately, I sent an open letter to the whole church via email in July 2015 and a follow up letter in May 2016, and I escalated a formal complaint which is currently pending before the Georgia Foothills Presbytery.  I attended my Gospel Community Group and said that I would keep attending in defiance of the Session’s attempt to restrict me without due process.  In the last few months, I have kept a sign propped at my feet during worship which reads “Justice, not Abuse.”  The sign is my personal expression of lament in worship, and a visual reminder to everyone that these things are happening and the Session still hasn’t repented.  

The Session formally indicted her for not submitting to the elders.

So now the Session has decided to formally indict me, the first step in a process that can lead to excommunication, not in response to me committing any immoral act, but simply for not “submitting” to the elders.  Elders told me not to send my letter, not to attend my small group, and not to hold my sign; I did it anyway.  The Session issued the indictment on my birthday and appointed the attorney/elder who mediated my divorce to prosecute the charges.

Jessica responded in the following fashion.

Here is my response:  when I joined the church, I agreed to submit to its government and discipline as constrained by the Word of God and the PCA Book of Church Order.  The Session is in violation of both as delineated below and in my formal complaint before the Presbytery.  The Book of Church Order affirms individuals’ inalienable rights of private judgment on all matters which are not explicitly in violation of God’s law, and prohibits church leaders from making any additional laws to bind the conscience, as discussed in the following BCO Preliminary Principles:

  1.  God alone is Lord of the conscience and has left it free from any doctrines or commandments of men (a) which are in any respect contrary to the Word of God, or (b) which, in regard to matters of faith and worship, are not governed by the Word of God. Therefore, the rights of private judgment in all matters that respect religion are universal and inalienable.
  1.  All church power, whether exercised by the body in general, or by representation, is only ministerial and declarative since the Holy Scriptures are the only rule of faith and practice. No church judicatory may make laws to bind the conscience. 

Jessica defined this an act of conscience, not a sin.

In other words, the authority of elders is limited.  Elders don’t get to issue edicts to adults and punish noncompliance just because they’re elders.  If an elder instructs me to do something that is contrary to God’s word or unaddressed in God’s word but violates my conscience, neither God nor the BCO require me to submit to that.  The burden of proof is on the Session to show that a specific action (sending an open letter, saying I would attend a Gospel Community Group, or bringing my “Justice, not Abuse” sign to worship services) is a violation of the law of God according to Scripture in order to present it as an offense for church discipline (BCO 29-1.)  None of these actions violate God’s law; they’re just inconvenient for the Session.  My conscience requires me to bring issues of injustice surrounding abuse in the church into the open and to insist they be meaningfully addressed.  I believe God has called me to do this.  I will not allow what I’ve experienced to be shoved aside and buried in bureaucracy so that church leaders can maintain power and control.

Jessica discusses the purpose of church discipline: a subject near and dear to TWW.

The purpose of church discipline is to address gross unrepentant sin or immorality that endangers someone’s soul.  It’s not to exert control over conscionable behavior that you don’t like, put a woman in her place for challenging you, silence someone who is speaking up about injustice, or engage in whistleblower retribution when you are being held accountable for wrongdoing.  If what I’ve said about the Session in my open letters weren’t true, the church could indict me for lying.  If I were engaged in immorality, the church could indict me for that.  But since you know perfectly well that I’m telling the truth, and am a genuine Christian acting in good conscience, the strongest thing you’ve come up with to indict me for is not “submitting” to your control.  Spinning my noncompliance as a mortal sin against Jesus Christ is a petty, frivolous power play, and this whole situation is the most shameful failure of leadership I’ve ever personally witnessed in fifteen years of vocational ministry.

Jessica desires the following changes.

Jesus Christ is my Lord, and I will obey Him.  I am a sinner and far from perfect, but my conscience is clear before God on the essential points of this matter.  There are two ways the Session can get my sign out of the Sanctuary.  The first is a sea change pertaining to abuse in the church, with abject, unequivocal public repentance for the issues I’ve raised, accompanied by churchwide abuse and domestic violence training for all leaders.  This is how the Session should have responded to this whole situation long ago.  The second is a spurious excommunication with our whole community and the wider body of Christ watching, followed by appeals all the way up to PCA General Assembly.  I’m fine either way.  If you put me on trial, it will be the proudest moment of my life thus far, in the company of my heroes, and in the company of Christ.

Sincerely,

Jessica Fore, The Accused


Final comment from Dee

PCA-seriously??? This is how you spend your time? No wonder people are fleeing the church. TWW would recommend that all folks attending PCA churches think about what could happen to them if they irritate those anointed™ leaders. They heap abuse on the head of a woman who has already been abused. Shame on the PCA and shame on her friends for not wrapping their loving arms around her.

I hope this video makes Jessica laugh. Goodness knows there has been many tears.

 

Comments

Jessica Fore, a Victim of Domestic Violence, Is Indicted by The Presbyterian Church in America for Contempt Toward the Church and Its Leaders — 352 Comments

  1. I’m no lawyer, but it sounds like a wrongful termination lawsuit to me. The pain and suffering compensation should be ample.

  2. A whole bunch of other witches have Jessica’s back (from afar, at least), myself among them! Her courage is admirable, and her actins are justified!

  3. Nancy2 wrote:

    A whole bunch of other witches have Jessica’s back (from afar, at least), myself among them! Her courage is admirable, and her actins are justified!

    Actions, not actions. My fingers are faster than my brain.

  4. These leaders/elders are full of themselves. More abuse at a church that supports Calvinism. No surprise there.

  5. Kemi wrote:

    I’m no lawyer, but it sounds like a wrongful termination lawsuit to me. T

    I doubt there is such a as thing as “wrongful termination” when it comes to religious organizations. They can pretty much do what they want when it comes hiring/firing.

    She might have a better chance with a civil suit geared toward the leaders attempting and suceeding to smear her reputation. Surely they have board insurance. they usually do. They always protect themselves.

    I would first lodge a complaint against the counselor with the state. Malpractice.

    Unless that person is Nouthetic without a state license which is the normal in places like the PCA.

    Anyone who goes to work for a religious organization needs to understand how it works.

  6. It takes an incredible amount of courage to do what Jessica is doing. I hope others in her community also have her back.

    But for those who don’t speak up out of fear:

    Has anyone ever noticed that cowardice is in the vice lists in the Bible? (Rev 21:8)

  7. I hate it when authoritarian patriarchs drag twisted Scripture and Jesus’ name into their system of doing church without God.

    While authoritarian abuse happens in various church groups, those who call themselves by Calvin’s name are particularly making the news lately.

  8. The really sad thing is that the men involved would probably have no trouble looking you in the eye and saying, without flinching, that they’ve done nothing wrong. That’s certainly been my experience of spiritual abuse – the perpetrators seem convinced they are just carrying out the will of their god 🙁

  9. Brava, JESSICA, for claiming these statements and making your plight a matter of conscience before God:

    “The Book of Church Order affirms individuals’ inalienable rights of private judgment on all matters which are not explicitly in violation of God’s law, and prohibits church leaders from making any additional laws to bind the conscience, as discussed in the following BCO Preliminary Principles:

    God alone is Lord of the conscience and has left it free from any doctrines or commandments of men (a) which are in any respect contrary to the Word of God, or (b) which, in regard to matters of faith and worship, are not governed by the Word of God. Therefore, the rights of private judgment in all matters that respect religion are universal and inalienable.”

    This woman’s stand qualifies to enroll her in the honorable list of heroines of the faith. May God give her the peace and the strength to endure her trials.

  10. Living Liminal wrote:

    the perpetrators seem convinced they are just carrying out the will of their god

    The problem with deception is that you don’t know you are deceived because you are deceived. The Calvinist god wants to put folks into bondage who have been set free in Christ.

  11. I may have missed it but I wonder if her abusive husband going to get excommunicated or is he been restored by the wave of some magic wand. I do appreciate the fact that there is some appeal and “due process”. In most churches I have gone to you are told to get out and if you come back they will call the cops and have you hauled off in cuffs or the you are invisible treatment where no one will talk to you and walk right by you like you are no longer part of the collective. The physical intimidation at churches also happens but that is too painful for me to bring up right now. I feel very badly for you Jessica I hope the presbytery does the right thing. The losing your livelihood I personally believe to be an act of economic violence, which I have seen used by churches and a few true believer seminary professors who shall remain nameless. God bless Dee and Deb for giving people a voice.

  12. So, in Lig Duncan’s PCA, a woman who takes a sign into church needs to go. Also a woman who dared to attend a Presbytery meeting and objected to the Women’s restroom being appropriated for use by the male Presbyters. And a husband who refused to make his ill wife attend church needs to go.

    But Mahaney is OK with Lig, and Leithart and Meyers are OK with the PCA.

    Got it.

  13. The attorney who mediated her divorce is the elder (presumably not a Teaching Elder) is overseeing her prosecution? ??? ??? Conflict of interest?

    Once again, a woman with a sign and a woman who attends a Gospel Community Group needs to be excommunicated. Well, a Baptist like me got keyed out for raising inconvenient questions, so maybe it’s not so far-fetched in what passes for the conservative evangelical church. The god of Authority must have sacrifices.

  14. Max wrote:

    The problem with deception is that you don’t know you are deceived because you are deceived.

    Indeed. If you are blinded by deception you can’t see, and so you continue in the dark. The thing I really have a problem with is what happens when a victim actually speaks up and says to a bully/abuser, “Your behaviour is damaging me.” It seems that every time the response is to deny or downplay their pain and silence them. In my opinion, you have then *chosen* to remain blind.

  15. Gram3 wrote:

    The god of Authority must have sacrifices.

    New Calvinist young women are lining up across America like robots to offer themselves to their god. I don’t think Paul meant that when he wrote “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God–this is your true and proper worship” (Rom 12:1). These poor girls cannot exercise their spiritual gifts, offering them back to the Father as a sacrifice, in a patriarchal system of belief and practice. Sad.

  16. Darlene wrote:

    These leaders/elders are full of themselves. More abuse at a church that supports Calvinism. No surprise there.

    Well, once you get outside the Christianese Bubble, Calvinism = Thug Life.

  17. Obviously I lack the requisite genetic configuration to say this, but where is the wisdom among these men? And they are all men because PCA and because Lig’s study committee has is still working on the report which will justify the RulingWhichMustBeMade. But I digress.

    Assuming these facts, again for emphasis, where is the wisdom? If someone wants to bring a sign, just ignore it if she is not being disruptive or truly divisive (in contrast to divisive meaning she disagrees with the Powers.) Continue to minister to her, let her attend the Gospel Community Groups, for crying out loud. She is not an adultress, as far as we know. Tullian got a job from a PCA church for doing a lot more than holding up a sign or sending out emails. If she has a grievance, then hear her as you would like to be heard when you have a grievance.

    These men are showing foolishness rather than wisdom. And it looks like their overriding concern is that their AUTHORITY has been slighted. They look peevish and petulant and, frankly, immature if they do not know how to handle this situation without going nuclear on her. Makes me curious about how old these Elders are who want to Push Her Under Their Care.

  18. Proud of you, Jessica. True heroism is being willing to take a stand against one’s peers. Although, I guess, the fact these elders don’t realize they’re your peers is a large part of the problem.

  19. Gram3 wrote:

    These men are showing foolishness rather than wisdom. And it looks like their overriding concern is that their AUTHORITY has been slighted. They look peevish and petulant and, frankly, immature if they do not know how to handle this situation without going nuclear on her. Makes me curious about how old these Elders are who want to Push Her Under Their Care.

    What they are SHOWING is that the Men’s Club lacks a woman’s wisdom in these matters, and this is glaring, and it reflects back on the whole theology of mighty male head-ship. When the male headship runs aground this badly, yes, the thought comes to mind that these ‘boys’ are sadly way too immature for what they have taken on.
    And how dare they claim to be the voice of God in these matters when it is known that ‘God counts the tears of women’.

  20. Gram3 wrote:

    Tullian got a job from a PCA church for doing a lot more than holding up a sign or sending out emails.

    If it weren’t for double standards they’d have none at all. At least there are no women in charge, because that is the worst sin of all.

  21. Gram3 wrote:

    And it looks like their overriding concern is that their AUTHORITY has been slighted.

    I think her actual Sin is that she has embarrassed them. They now know (sort of) that they did wrong before but they are too proud to make it good and she wont just let it fade to black. Good for her.

  22. Kemi wrote:

    I’m no lawyer, but it sounds like a wrongful termination lawsuit to me. The pain and suffering compensation should be ample.

    Jessica has said on her blog that she is not interested in being compensated for wrongful dismissal. She only want the church to recognise and repent of the way it treats abuse victims. She wants the church to learn how better to respond to abuse so that other victims of abuse don’t suffer like she has.

  23. This is of interest to you if you live in the Washington, D.C. area. McLean Bible's New City Network which is the church planting arm, is promoting 9 Marks "Church Revitalization Conference."

    I wrote and asked since McLean Bible silently joined The Gospel Coalition is McLean Bible planning on joining 9 Marks? In addition McLean Bible's church planting network is planting an Acts 29 church in conjunction with Fellowship Memphis in Fairfax, Virginia. The pastor Kenji Adachi was the Pastoral Resident at Fellowship Memphis.

    If you are planting a church with New City Network you can attend that 9 Marks conference for free.

    https://wonderingeagle.wordpress.com/2016/09/30/why-is-mclean-bibles-new-city-network-promoting-9-marks-church-revitalization-conference/

  24. drstevej wrote:

    Here is an article I wrote for the Westminster Journal on Calvin and Church Discipline: http://www.drstevej.com/sinews.pdf
    It might be of interest as background on Reformed church discipline views.

    Why? Isn’t it clear that these church elders have misused church discipline? What sin has this woman committed?

  25. brian wrote:

    I may have missed it but I wonder if her abusive husband going to get excommunicated or is he been restored by the wave of some magic wand.

    My thoughts exaxtly. What did happen to the husband, or was he just exercising his male priviledge as the so-called head?

    I attended a PCA church during junior high and high school, and when I returned to the “heathen” Methodists, I realized that the people at the PCA church were only about appearances. Being a Christian was all about trying to out-holy one another. They could talk Christianity, but they really couldn’t do Christianity. Oh, and if you were a woman….

  26. dee wrote:

    @ Velour:
    Darn straight! She’s a witch!!!!

    “She turned me into a newt!
    ……….. I got better.”

  27. Bridget wrote:

    What sin has this woman committed?

    She didn’t submit to Male Authority. Therefore she is a Rebellious Woman, and as such must be shamed in the sight of all PCA parishioners. She is a warning to other uppity wommin of what happens when you don’t shut your mouth and fall in line with church discipline (sic).

  28. @ drstevej:
    Hi, I read all of this (btw, there’s a typo on line 2 of page 20) and it’s an interesting read. I’m not sure what your position is, but it’s made me more sure than ever that Calvin has completely misunderstood what Christianity is

  29. For those asking about the church’s response to my ex husband and whether he experienced discipline, the answer is no. He did some bad drug deals and was obliged to leave the state. The Session didn’t pursue charges against him because they didn’t want to deal with him– have him come back and face the court and so forth. I didn’t “press charges” (in terms of church court) for the same reason– I didn’t want to have any contact with him. I haven’t sought any kind of financial compensation or legal action against the church; I’ve just asked them to demonstrate real repentance, get their leaders trained on abuse and domestic violence, quit enabling/accomplishing the agendas of manipulators, that kind of thing. It’s not rocket science, and it sure seems like it would be easier to do the right thing than go this route. But if that’s what they want to pursue, I’ll gladly run it up the chain in the denomination to seek broader change for the other 60,000 women in the PCA who are likely affected by abuse in some way.

  30. Max wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:
    The god of Authority must have sacrifices.
    New Calvinist young women are lining up across America like robots to offer themselves to their god. I don’t think Paul meant that when he wrote “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God–this is your true and proper worship” (Rom 12:1). These poor girls cannot exercise their spiritual gifts, offering them back to the Father as a sacrifice, in a patriarchal system of belief and practice. Sad.

    Having done a *tour of duty* of a NeoCalvinist church, and been excommunicated and shunned on some trumped up charge by authoritarian pastors/elders who viciously punished anyone for having an iota of critical thinking skills (and none were cases of immorality) I knew many young, sincere, lovely Christian women at my ex-church. They went with the best of intentions, like I did, naively wanting community, to grow as a Christian, to serve.
    We were lied to. We weren’t lining up and we weren’t robots. We were victims of cunning men who used Thought Reform techniques on us.

    From therapist/author/pyschologist/Thought Reform & Cult Expert Steve Hassan
    https://www.freedomofmind.com/Info/BITE/bitemodel.php

    Steven Hassan’s BITE Model of Cult Mind Control
    Many people think of mind control as an ambiguous, mystical process that cannot be defined in concrete terms. In reality, mind control refers to a specific set of methods and techniques, such as hypnosis or thought- stopping, that influence how a person thinks, feels, and acts. Like many bodies of knowledge, it is not inherently good or evil. If mind control techniques are used to empower an individual to have more choice, and authority for his life remains within himself, the effects can be beneficial. For example, benevolent mind control can be used to help people quit smoking without affecting any other behavior. Mind control becomes destructive when the locus of control is external and it is used to undermine a person’s ability to think and act independently.

    As employed by the most destructive cults, mind control seeks nothing less than to disrupt an individual’s authentic identity and reconstruct it in the image of the cult leader. I developed the BITE model to help people determine whether or not a group is practicing destructive mind control. The BITE model helps people understand how cults suppress individual member’s uniqueness and creativity. BITE stands for the cult’s control of an individual’s Behavior, Intellect, Thoughts, and Emotions.

    It is important to understand that destructive mind control can be determined when the overall effect of these four components promotes dependency and obedience to some leader or cause. It is not necessary for every single item on the list to be present. Mindcontrolled cult members can live in their own apartments, have nine-to-five jobs, be married with children, and still be unable to think for themselves and act independently.

    We are all subject to influence from our parents, friends, teachers, co-workers… When this influence helps someone grow and maintain an internal locus of control, it is healthy. Influence which is used to keep people mindless and dependent is unhealthy. To download a PDF of the Influence Continuum graphic, click here.
    Destructive mind control is not just used by cults. Learn about the Human Trafficking BITE Model and the Terrorism BITE Model.

    The BITE Model
    I. Behavior Control
    II. Information Control
    III. Thought Control
    IV. Emotional Control
    Behavior Control

    1. Regulate individual’s physical reality
    2. Dictate where, how, and with whom the member lives and associates or isolates
    3. When, how and with whom the member has sex
    4. Control types of clothing and hairstyles
    5. Regulate diet – food and drink, hunger and/or fasting
    6. Manipulation and deprivation of sleep
    7. Financial exploitation, manipulation or dependence
    8. Restrict leisure, entertainment, vacation time
    9. Major time spent with group indoctrination and rituals and/or self indoctrination including the Internet
    10. Permission required for major decisions
    11. Thoughts, feelings, and activities (of self and others) reported to superiors
    12. Rewards and punishments used to modify behaviors, both positive and negative
    13. Discourage individualism, encourage group-think
    14. Impose rigid rules and regulations
    15. Instill dependency and obedience
    16. Threaten harm to family and friends
    17. Force individual to rape or be raped
    18. Instill dependency and obedience
    19. Encourage and engage in corporal punishment
    Information Control

    1. Deception:
    a. Deliberately withhold information
    b. Distort information to make it more acceptable
    c. Systematically lie to the cult member
    2. Minimize or discourage access to non-cult sources of information, including:
    a. Internet, TV, radio, books, articles, newspapers, magazines, other media
    b.Critical information
    c. Former members
    d. Keep members busy so they don’t have time to think and investigate
    e. Control through cell phone with texting, calls, internet tracking
    3. Compartmentalize information into Outsider vs. Insider doctrines
    a. Ensure that information is not freely accessible
    b.Control information at different levels and missions within group
    c. Allow only leadership to decide who needs to know what and when
    4. Encourage spying on other members
    a. Impose a buddy system to monitor and control member
    b.Report deviant thoughts, feelings and actions to leadership
    c. Ensure that individual behavior is monitored by group
    5. Extensive use of cult-generated information and propaganda, including:
    a. Newsletters, magazines, journals, audiotapes, videotapes, YouTube, movies and other media
    b.Misquoting statements or using them out of context from non-cult sources
    6. Unethical use of confession
    a. Information about sins used to disrupt and/or dissolve identity boundaries
    b. Withholding forgiveness or absolution
    c. Manipulation of memory, possible false memories
    Thought Control

    1. Require members to internalize the group’s doctrine as truth
    a. Adopting the group’s ‘map of reality’ as reality
    b. Instill black and white thinking
    c. Decide between good vs. evil
    d. Organize people into us vs. them (insiders vs. outsiders)
    2.Change person’s name and identity
    3. Use of loaded language and clichés which constrict knowledge, stop critical thoughts and reduce complexities into platitudinous buzz words
    4. Encourage only ‘good and proper’ thoughts
    5. Hypnotic techniques are used to alter mental states, undermine critical thinking and even to age regress the member
    6. Memories are manipulated and false memories are created
    7. Teaching thought-stopping techniques which shut down reality testing by stopping negative thoughts and allowing only positive thoughts, including:
    a. Denial, rationalization, justification, wishful thinking
    b. Chanting
    c. Meditating
    d. Praying
    e. Speaking in tongues
    f. Singing or humming
    8. Rejection of rational analysis, critical thinking, constructive criticism
    9. Forbid critical questions about leader, doctrine, or policy allowed
    10. Labeling alternative belief systems as illegitimate, evil, or not useful
    Emotional Control

    1. Manipulate and narrow the range of feelings – some emotions and/or needs are deemed as evil, wrong or selfish
    2. Teach emotion-stopping techniques to block feelings of homesickness, anger, doubt
    3. Make the person feel that problems are always their own fault, never the leader’s or the group’s fault
    4. Promote feelings of guilt or unworthiness, such as
    a. Identity guilt
    b. You are not living up to your potential
    c. Your family is deficient
    d. Your past is suspect
    e. Your affiliations are unwise
    f. Your thoughts, feelings, actions are irrelevant or selfish
    g. Social guilt
    h. Historical guilt
    5. Instill fear, such as fear of:
    a. Thinking independently
    b. The outside world
    c. Enemies
    d. Losing one’s salvation
    e. Leaving or being shunned by the group
    f. Other’s disapproval
    6. Extremes of emotional highs and lows – love bombing and praise one moment and then declaring you are horrible sinner
    7. Ritualistic and sometimes public confession of sins
    8. Phobia indoctrination: inculcating irrational fears about leaving the group or questioning the leader’s authority
    a. No happiness or fulfillment possible outside of the group
    b. Terrible consequences if you leave: hell, demon possession, incurable diseases, accidents, suicide, insanity, 10,000 reincarnations, etc.
    c. Shunning of those who leave; fear of being rejected by friends, peers, and family
    d. Never a legitimate reason to leave; those who leave are weak, undisciplined, unspiritual, worldly, brainwashed by family or counselor, or seduced by money, sex, or rock and roll
    e. Threats of harm to ex-member and family

  31. Looking back over that letter, I’m amazed at the sheer gaul of that church. My knee-jerk reaction would be to tell them what to do with their letter and their attitude.

  32. “charges Jessica Fore with contempt toward the Church and it elders”
    It is no sin to hold in contempt those who are contemptible.

  33. Did anyone notice the slogan at the page bottom of the indictment? “Loving god, loving each other. loving our neighbors.”

    If they had the least amount of self-awareness and -reflexion, not to mention common decency and common sense, they would realise the complete and utter contradiction between the content of the page and the slogan at the bottom. I’m not even talking about christian or any other kind of love here.

    So, yes. It’s just a slogan, not any kind of meaningful statement about the church.

  34. Lea wrote:

    If it weren’t for double standards

    “Women. You can’t trust women. They don’t understand the double standard.”
    -Al, a character in the TV series “Quantum Leap”

  35. Gram3 wrote:

    Obviously I lack the requisite genetic configuration to say this, but where is the wisdom among these men? And they are all men because PCA and because Lig’s study committee has is still working on the report which will justify the RulingWhichMustBeMade. But I digress.

    I believe their type of wisdom is described in this verse:

    Proverbs 26:12
    Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.

    This woman has more wisdom than all of these elders combined. They ought to be embarrassed of themselves.

  36. Dave wrote:

    @ drstevej:
    Hi, I read all of this (btw, there’s a typo on line 2 of page 20) and it’s an interesting read. I’m not sure what your position is, but it’s made me more sure than ever that Calvin has completely misunderstood what Christianity is

    I second that with the addition that I find Calvin repugnant.
    If Paul would not tolerate believers being his followers (as opposed to Christ’s) I am frankly mystified that anyone finds Calvin worth following. No offense intended, but really. He is a brutal man with a lust for power and authority.

  37. Is it the confrontation of their sin and the accusation of their inperfection that is bothersome to the elders? Is the denial of their inerrant judgment that really bothers them, or that anyone could question their role as rulers of their flock? Too many questions? Glad I am not a Presbyterian.

  38. Gram3 wrote:

    So, in Lig Duncan’s PCA, a woman who takes a sign into church needs to go. Also a woman who dared to attend a Presbytery meeting and objected to the Women’s restroom being appropriated for use by the male Presbyters. And a husband who refused to make his ill wife attend church needs to go.
    But Mahaney is OK with Lig, and Leithart and Meyers are OK with the PCA.
    Got it.

    The restroom incident and the sick wife took place in OPC not PCA.

  39. Bill M wrote:

    “charges Jessica Fore with contempt toward the Church and it elders”
    It is no sin to hold in contempt those who are contemptible.

    +1

  40. @ Bridget:
    I think there is a lot of willful blindness when it comes to Calvin, Geneva and punishments to control the state church population. Specifically by academics, sadly.

  41. @ Velour:
    Agree Velour. “Robot” was a strong word to use. It’s just that the whole of Calvinism, with its determinist God who allows no human choice, every step sovereignly controlled, and the eternal destiny of every person charted before they were ever born, paints a picture of robotic faith for those ensnared by it. The “BITE” model describes many New Calvinist ministries. God will judge “pastors” who use and abuse those, as you note, who come “with the best of intentions, naively wanting community, to grow as a Christian, to serve.”

  42. Max wrote:

    It’s just that the whole of Calvinism, with its determinist God who allows no human choice, every step sovereignly controlled, and the eternal destiny of every person charted before they were ever born, paints a picture of robotic faith for those ensnared by it.

    I was predestined to reject Calvinism. It’s not my fault.

  43. @ Jessica Fore:

    Thank you for sharing that information. I’m sorry for what you went through with your ex and for the awful treatment at your church. I hope your efforts bring some real change, at least in the PCA.

  44. Darlene wrote:

    These leaders/elders are full of themselves. More abuse at a church that supports Calvinism. No surprise there.

    My roomie is a big fan of Game of Thrones. When the High Sparrow was first making his bid for power in King’s Landing, he had a corps of Enforcers — young, restless, True Believers breaking heads left and right, in the name of changing the Faith of the Seven to root out corruption. My roomie described this “Faith Militant” as specifically-“CALVINIST Thugs”.

    I asked “Why specifically Calvinist?” He answered “Beating up everyone else in the name of your Morality while going for Power — that’s Calvinist!” Apparently on the outside, “Calvinist” has the secondary meaning of “Thuggery”.

  45. Lydia wrote:

    @ Bridget:
    I think there is a lot of willful blindness when it comes to Calvin, Geneva and punishments to control the state church population. Specifically by academics, sadly.

    To academics, everything is an Abstract Intellectual Exercise.

    “Global Thermonuclear War? Only a three-point-seven-eight Gigadeath Situation. Insignificant.”
    — actually heard this once from an Intellectual type SF litfan

  46. siteseer wrote:

    If Paul would not tolerate believers being his followers (as opposed to Christ’s) I am frankly mystified that anyone finds Calvin worth following. No offense intended, but really. He is a brutal man with a lust for power and authority.

    And lotsa Fanboys who want to be Just Like Him — on the Iron Throne in Geneva, decreeing Dogma Ex Cathedra against Servetus after Servetus.

  47. Gus wrote:

    Did anyone notice the slogan at the page bottom of the indictment? “Loving god, loving each other. loving our neighbors.”

    Remember the official name of North Korea?

    “The more adjectives about ‘Democracy’ there are in a country’s official name, the nastier a dictatorship it is.”
    — TV Tropes, “People’s Republic of Tyranny”

  48. Lydia wrote:

    She might have a better chance with a civil suit geared toward the leaders attempting and suceeding to smear her reputation. Surely they have board insurance. they usually do. They always protect themselves.

    Good idea.

  49. Max wrote:

    While authoritarian abuse happens in various church groups, those who call themselves by Calvin’s name are particularly making the news lately.

    It is due to the fact that these guys just love talking about discipline. They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.

  50. Darlene wrote:

    HUG: There is actually a Facebook site called ‘Reformed Thug Life.’
    https://www.facebook.com/ReformedThugLife/

    Why am I not surprised?

    Actually, I was thinking of the cover pic of the “Christian Liberty?” tile over at Sotieriology 101 when I came up with that one. Would have included a link but Sot 101 does not allow entry by links or give true URLs of its entries.

  51. Living Liminal wrote:

    the men involved would probably have no trouble looking you in the eye and saying, without flinching, that they’ve done nothing wrong.

    They can’t be wrong. They are anointed elders.

  52. Bridget wrote:

    Why? Isn’t it clear that these church elders have misused church discipline? What sin has this woman committed?

    She Uppity.

  53. brian wrote:

    I do appreciate the fact that there is some appeal and “due process”.

    I see two outcomes. Without publicity, I bet they would throw the book at her. The question is…what happens when they are being watched?

  54. Gram3 wrote:

    Once again, a woman with a sign and a woman who attends a Gospel Community Group needs to be excommunicated.

    But the sign hurt the feeling of the manly leaders.

  55. Jessica Fore wrote:

    But if that’s what they want to pursue, I’ll gladly run it up the chain in the denomination to seek broader change for the other 60,000 women in the PCA who are likely affected by abuse in some way.

    Good for you! Hopefully there will be some men with some common sense and some common decency, both of which are exceedingly rare in today’s world.

  56. I have no problem with Jessica Fore and her sign. Of course, I’m the woman who stands outside Mark Driscoll’s “church” ever Sunday, so I’m biased.

  57. Bill M wrote:

    “charges Jessica Fore with contempt toward the Church and it elders”
    It is no sin to hold in contempt those who are contemptible.

    Oh, how I love this! Jesus and John the Baptist had plenty of contempt for the contemptible religious vipers, so I think I would look in the mirror, if I were one of these men, and consider whether I resemble a serpent or a man indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

  58. Godith wrote:

    The restroom incident and the sick wife took place in OPC not PCA.

    Thanks for that correction. Bad news, though, since it means another conservative Presbie denomination has lost the plot. 🙁

  59. dee wrote:

    They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.

    Well, yes, for failing to attend Gathered Worship.

  60. dee wrote:

    But the sign hurt the feeling of the manly leaders.

    Yes, I see your point. She should have listened to Matt Chandler and made her “Justice Not Abuse” sign more sensitively. And winsomely. And deferentially.

  61. @ Godith:
    And I’m thankful to God that I didn’t have to be in a Southern California OPC church plant for long before they showed their doctrinal hand (hard-core Calvinism).

  62. dee wrote:

    They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.

    Years ago, my wife was a volunteer church secretary. In that capacity, she noted that the church membership list actually included members who were deceased. When she suggested removing them from the roll (thereby, reducing the total number of reported members), she was advised by church leaders to leave it alone – it would make them look bad in the denomination if membership declined. That got us to thinking … “How many of SBC’s 16 million members were actually dead, joined other church groups, or “done”?” Perhaps the ‘real’ SBC membership is 8 or 4 million! How dare a dead person to stop being an active Southern Baptist! We need to go to the cemetery and discipline him for that!

  63. dee wrote:

    Lydia wrote:
    She might have a better chance with a civil suit geared toward the leaders attempting and suceeding to smear her reputation. Surely they have board insurance. they usually do. They always protect themselves.
    Good idea.

    I know people are reluctant to sue and it is hard to find lawyers to take these things on contingency but I am more and more convinced it is the only way to deal with it. Some of these manly men should have to think twice before coveting “spiritual’ authority over others. The Discovery process and a monetary award would start the rethink process. Besides, we are not talking about “trivial” matters at all.

    It is too easy for them to wield power using OPM. It needs to be dangerous. The problem needs legal attention because Christians are not wise. They sign their trust over to these charlatans thinking they are trustworthy. People who deceive others need to pay for it.

  64. Max wrote:

    dee wrote:

    They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.

    Years ago, my wife was a volunteer church secretary. In that capacity, she noted that the church membership list actually included members who were deceased. When she suggested removing them from the roll (thereby, reducing the total number of reported members), she was advised by church leaders to leave it alone – it would make them look bad in the denomination if membership declined. That got us to thinking … “How many of SBC’s 16 million members were actually dead, joined other church groups, or “done”?” Perhaps the ‘real’ SBC membership is 8 or 4 million! How dare a dead person to stop being an active Southern Baptist! We need to go to the cemetery and discipline him for that!

    Max: I believe you are right the actual number of Southern Baptist is a much lower number than the leaders want to reveal to those that continue to faithfully participate. It is shear dishonesty.

  65. dee wrote:

    @ Darlene:
    Yep! The female in the abuse situation gets double abused.

    They do not stand a chance as they will be judged by an all male “jury”.

  66. drstevej wrote:

    It might be of interest as background on Reformed church discipline views.

    I enjoyed reading your paper.

    I found this statement interesting.

    “Adulterers, fornicators, thieves, robbers, seditious persons, perjurers, false witnesses, and the rest of this sort, as well as the insolent (who when duly admonished of their lighter vices) mock God and His judgment.”

    As is the case today, Calvin starts off just fine with issues like adultery, thieves, etc. Then he mentions other sins which can be harder to define or even be used by authority driven men “the rest of this sort.” It is the inability to define what one should be disciplined for which is causing the trouble in today’s church as well as the church in Calvin’s day.

  67. Patriciamc wrote:

    I realized that the people at the PCA church were only about appearances. Being a Christian was all about trying to out-holy one another. They could talk Christianity, but they really couldn’t do Christianity. Oh, and if you were a woman….

    Good statement.

  68. Jessica Fore wrote:

    I’ve just asked them to demonstrate real repentance, get their leaders trained on abuse and domestic violence, quit enabling/accomplishing the agendas of manipulators, that kind of thing.

    Please keep us informed of the progress of this ridiculous nonsense that you are undergoing at the hands of the gospel™ leaders. We are willing to update as things happen. You have the backing of TWW.

  69. Gus wrote:

    Did anyone notice the slogan at the page bottom of the indictment? “Loving god, loving each other. loving our neighbors.”

    Good catch. It should be: loving to punish, loving to have trials, loving the witch trials….

  70. Mark wrote:

    Is it the confrontation of their sin and the accusation of their inperfection that is bothersome to the elders? Is the denial of their inerrant judgment that really bothers them, or that anyone could question their role as rulers of their flock?

    Well said.

  71. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    To academics, everything is an Abstract Intellectual Exercise.

    A guy named Dan carlin has a podcast I like called hardcore history and in one of them he was talking about how sometimes historians like to give credit to people like the Mongols for things like globilaztion and spreading this or that…when all they really were doing is running around murdering and torturing for their own benefit. There is almost a movement in some quarters to ignore the damage done in favor of finding these weird side benefits that were not the goal at all. In talking only about these things you ignore all the damage done and it’s not at all a balanced perspective.

  72. Gram3 wrote:

    Godith wrote:

    The restroom incident and the sick wife took place in OPC not PCA.

    Thanks for that correction. Bad news, though, since it means another conservative Presbie denomination has lost the plot.

    Unless the ‘plot’ was making sure they weren’t liberals or had women preachers! Which I think it mostly was…

  73. Thanks Dee! I’ll certainly keep you posted. I’m sitting on some additional stuff I haven’t released yet; that may be to come. @ dee:

  74. mot wrote:

    Max wrote:
    dee wrote:
    They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.
    Years ago, my wife was a volunteer church secretary. In that capacity, she noted that the church membership list actually included members who were deceased. When she suggested removing them from the roll (thereby, reducing the total number of reported members), she was advised by church leaders to leave it alone – it would make them look bad in the denomination if membership declined. That got us to thinking … “How many of SBC’s 16 million members were actually dead, joined other church groups, or “done”?” Perhaps the ‘real’ SBC membership is 8 or 4 million! How dare a dead person to stop being an active Southern Baptist! We need to go to the cemetery and discipline him for that!
    Max: I believe you are right the actual number of Southern Baptist is a much lower number than the leaders want to reveal to those that continue to faithfully participate. It is shear dishonesty.

    What is even further irony is that Dever was the point man on the issue of “cleaning up church roles” and calling it “church discipline” to get people aboard the church discipline train. It was a brilliant bait and switch tactic. There were many blog discussions, articles, etc. who can disagree with cleaning up church rolls? That is a no brained. From there it moved into serious church membership commitment such as “regenerate” church membership. And people did not analyze the meaning of that one. . And we now know the rest.

    These guys are more strategically patient than people can imagine. Think of all the people who voted in the motion at convention who had no idea of the real agenda behind it. It’s the old salesman trick. Get them agreeing on the obvious things then move closer to the close. Who wants to admit they were suckered?

    http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2008/june/next-big-southern-baptist-debate-purging-membership-rolls.html

    Before the motion, the amount of articles and posts on regenerate membership in those circles was huge. It was a campaign.

  75. dee wrote:

    loving to punish, loving to have trials, loving the witch trials…

    Loving our positions.
    Loving being superior.
    Loving being in control.
    Loving our self-righteousness.
    Loving a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.

  76. Gus wrote:

    Did anyone notice the slogan at the page bottom of the indictment? “Loving god, loving each other. loving our neighbors.”

    No I didn’t notice it, thanks for pointing it out. On top of being contemptible, they are taking God’s name in vain.

  77. Gram3 wrote:

    Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Global Thermonuclear War? Only a three-point-seven-eight Gigadeath Situation. Insignificant.

    Reminds me of the Walter Matthau (sp) character in Failsafe.

    To me it sounded more like Doctor Strangelove than Failsafe.

  78. Gus wrote:

    Did anyone notice the slogan at the page bottom of the indictment? “Loving god, loving each other. loving our neighbors.”

    “The more adjectives about Democracy there are in a country’s official name, the nastier a dictatorship it is.”
    — TV Tropes

  79. I’d like to know more about the church member at Jessica’s church who is a licensed counselor. What type of license?

    When I read this article about Jessica’s story it seems to me that this church member possibly violated the terms of their state-issued license and committed ethics violations.
    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.

  80. Max wrote:

    Agree Velour. “Robot” was a strong word to use.

    Stepford Women. Same meaning, but a little more….. uh, Complementarian. No offense to the women who have awakened.

  81. Gram3 wrote:

    Oh, how I love this! Jesus and John the Baptist had plenty of contempt for the contemptible religious vipers,

    Oh, but Gram3! You know that Jesus and John the Baptist were men. It’s a whole nutha ballgame when a woman takes a stand!

  82. dee wrote:

    Loren Haas wrote:
    “She turned me into a newt!
    ……….. I got better.”
    Are you sure?….

    Ha! Excuses, excuses?

  83. Bridget wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    Here is the Code of Ethics for Georgia therapists, social workers, etc. from their state’s licensing board.
    http://www.gamft.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/GA_Code_of_Ethics.pdf
    Isn’t this case taking place in Georgia? That’s what the state that was in the letter to Jessica from the Presbys.
    This is for licensed therapists. Do we know if the counselor who diagnosed Jessica (without speaking to her) was even a licensed therapist?

    The article states the person was licensed:

    “The Session had a counselor diagnose Jessica’s mental status without interviewing her.

    In 2015, the Session brought a Licensed Professional Counselor, a church member, into a Session meeting to advise on my mental state and what was best for me in absentia, without my knowledge or consent, based on the testimony of the opposing parties in the grievance.

  84. dee wrote:

    It is due to the fact that these guys just love talking about discipline. They’ll find reasons to discipline dead people in a cemetery.

    Dr. Steve’s article linked above makes it abundantly clear it was Calvin’s attitude, too.

    Though, we know Calvin did more than talk about it… he used his authority to commit murder.

    Calvin in later reflection on his return said, “I would
    never have accepted the ministry unless they had sworn to these two
    points: namely to uphold the Catechism and the discipline.”

    Discipline, discipline, discipline… why of all the things taught in the Bible does one seize upon this one? Where is the washing of feet? The turning of the other cheek? The being kind to one another, tender hearted? The gently correcting those in opposition, if by chance God may grant them repentance?

    There is a type of person who thinks that God needs him to set his house in order, that God cannot manage it himself. This, I believe, is the sin of Uzzah. And in doing so, they commit a great many other sins against God’s people.

    Calvin actually said the church could not continue without human discipline. Yet Christ said the gates of hell would not prevail against it.

  85. @ Velour:

    Jessia Fore, Could you please provide Dee and Deb with the name of the counselor who is licensed so their license can be checked with the state licensing agency.

  86. Velour wrote:

    The Session had a counselor diagnose Jessica’s mental status without interviewing her.
    In 2015, the Session brought a Licensed Professional Counselor, a church member, into a Session meeting to advise on my mental state and what was best for me in absentia, without my knowledge or consent, based on the testimony of the opposing parties in the grievance.

    Then the licensed counselor should lose his/her license over this I imagine. This counselor is a danger to anyone they counsel if this is how they counsel.

  87. Max wrote:

    @ Velour:
    Agree Velour. “Robot” was a strong word to use. It’s just that the whole of Calvinism, with its determinist God who allows no human choice, every step sovereignly controlled, and the eternal destiny of every person charted before they were ever born, paints a picture of robotic faith for those ensnared by it. The “BITE” model describes many New Calvinist ministries. God will judge “pastors” who use and abuse those, as you note, who come “with the best of intentions, naively wanting community, to grow as a Christian, to serve.”

    Thanks, Max.

    Yes, God will judge these abusive men.

  88. Bridget wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    The Session had a counselor diagnose Jessica’s mental status without interviewing her.
    In 2015, the Session brought a Licensed Professional Counselor, a church member, into a Session meeting to advise on my mental state and what was best for me in absentia, without my knowledge or consent, based on the testimony of the opposing parties in the grievance.
    Then the licensed counselor should lose his/her license over this I imagine. This counselor is a danger to anyone they counsel if this is how they counsel.

    That’s my thinking, Bridget.

  89. Bridget wrote:

    Then the licensed counselor should lose his/her license over this I imagine. This counselor is a danger to anyone they counsel if this is how they counsel.

    If the counselor is actually not licensed with the state then the elders should brought before their demons hierarchy for lying. I hope they know that a certificate from some Christian group is not licensing.

  90. Mara wrote:

    Loving our positions.
    Loving being superior.
    Loving being in control.
    Loving our self-righteousness.
    Loving a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.

    Loving respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the [churches] and places of honor at banquets…

  91. Janey wrote:

    This church has a lot in common with cult groups.

    Certain corners of the organized, institutional church (with a little “c”) certainly appear cultish such as the institution described in this piece, but the ‘real’ Church (big “C”) is alive well on planet earth! It is comprised of born-again, bought-by-the-blood of Jesus believers who are the genuine Body of Christ. Its members often try to operate within institutions, but increasing numbers are coming out from amongst them.

    Jesus came to redeem and work through individuals, not institutions. The institution we call church is OK if it is reaching the lost with the Gospel which saves ALL who hear, believe and turn in faith. Such churches equip the saints to do the work of the ministry (all believers have a part in ministry, all are priests). The real Church engages the Body of Christ in the Great Commission to reach others. Anything less than that is doing church without God and it will eventually take on cult-like characteristics, rather than Christlikeness. There is no room for Christian celebrities and authoritarian my-way-or-the-highway leaders in the real Church of the Living God.

  92. Velour wrote:

    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.

    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.

  93. Bridget wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    Then the licensed counselor should lose his/her license over this I imagine. This counselor is a danger to anyone they counsel if this is how they counsel.
    If the counselor is actually not licensed with the state then the elders should brought before their demons hierarchy for lying. I hope they know that a certificate from some Christian group is not licensing.

    And if the church member: a) is licensed by Georgia they should be brought up on disciplinary charges by the state for ethics violations; or b) if the person/church member is NOT licensed they should be brought up on criminal charges for “practicing without a license”.

  94. Bridget wrote:

    The Session had a counselor diagnose Jessica’s mental status without interviewing her.

    I do not believe that any licensed professional would ever diagnose someone without at *least* interviewing the person and much, much more. Perhaps they mean “certified” counselor which, as we have discovered, means nada.

  95. Jessica Fore wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.
    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.

    Glad you filed a complaint, Jessica, even if the state didn’t take action this time.
    The paper trail grows for the next complaint and for action the state can take.

    I filed an ethics charge against an attorney in my state (California) for ethics violations that were very serious in a case. The State Bar didn’t take action the first time. The second complaint they got, the State Bar’s attorneys took action and the California Supreme Court disbarred the attorney.

  96. @ Bridget:
    I really think the “counselor” brought in to advise the elders is their big legal Achilles heel.

    ” In 2015, the Session brought a Licensed Professional Counselor, a church member, into a Session meeting to advise on my mental state and what was best for me in absentia, without my knowledge or consent, based on the testimony of the opposing parties in the grievance. In 2015, the Session launched a formal disciplinary investigation into the grievance that consisted of having one called Session meeting with the opposing parties and then issuing written conclusions and directives at me. ”

    1. They positioned the counselor as a licensed credible source
    2. The counselor never met with or, more importantly,professionally evauluated the defendant yet gave an opinion
    3. It sounds like they based their disciplinary process on the counselors opinion.

    This is premeditated reputation assasination. And the church is free to share the counselirs conclusions as the churches conclusion (protecting the counselor) far and wide– at this point.

    It would be wise to release the counselor name to the public. If they are in practice, His/her counselees have a right to know about this malpractice.

  97. Jessica Fore wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.
    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.

    It was a huge ethics violation. He surely knew better.

  98. Max wrote:

    “How many of SBC’s 16 million members were actually dead, joined other church groups, or “done”?”

    A few years ago, I was looking at the website of the SBC in my small hometown where I was a member. Despite the fact that I graduated college, moved away, and had joined different churches over the years, my name was still listed as a member. Crazy.

  99. Lydia wrote:

    Jessica Fore wrote:
    Velour wrote:
    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.
    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.
    It was a huge ethics violation. He surely knew better.

    Yes, Lydia. He certainly knew better. No excuse for his legal of unprofessionalism and ethics violations.

  100. It is uncharitable to say, but I must confess I’m not disappointed by this action of the PCA – because I don’t expect much from Calvinists. The real tragedy is that the revolution of Christ, who railed against the abusive religious authorities of his day and has come to set us free from corrupt authorities, has been subverted by those who falsely claim His name to perpetuate the same old godless power strucures. Congratulations to Jessica Fore for refusing to be cowed, for standing up not only for herself but for other women who have been abandoned by the “shepherds” who have abrogated their mandate to care for “the least of these”.

    Somewhat OT: I was reading on the Istoria Ministries blog and noticed that commenter Robert was putting a lot of emphasis on rigid doctrinal litmus tests. Now, I’m a bit of a mixed bag of beliefs – I’d be considered pretty “liberal” on some matters (i.e. not a Chicago Statement infallibilist, pro-gay-marriage), yet I believe in the Incarnate, Crucified, and Resurrected One – even the Virgin Birth (though I honor those who disagree). I also know that Jesus told his disciples that they would be known as disciples by their LOVE for one another and that Jesus said “not all that say unto me ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter into the Kingdom of heaven, but WHOEVER DOES THE WILL OF MY FATHER”. Yet for some, still, doctrine trumps all. Reminds me of something else Jesus said: “For the sake of your own traditions you have nullified the Word of God”.

  101. Velour wrote:

    @ Velour:

    Jessia Fore, Could you please provide Dee and Deb with the name of the counselor who is licensed so their license can be checked with the state licensing agency.

    If they are licensed you could maybe lodge a complaint with the board.

  102. Velour wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    Jessica Fore wrote:
    Velour wrote:
    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.
    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.
    It was a huge ethics violation. He surely knew better.

    Yes, Lydia. He certainly knew better. No excuse for his legal of unprofessionalism and ethics violations.

    I used to be very lenient on such things. No more. Why? I learned the hard way that we have a responsibility to warn others that might hire these types.

    Seriously, he was not even using common sense.

    The counselor needs to come clean publicly since the PCA filed charges. People are very forgiving when such sincerely come clean and take the consequences.

  103. https://www.ccef.org/school/certificates

    Why would anyone who wants to be a professional bother with this nonsense? I have run across Powlisons name (CCEF big cheese) many times in connection with the Neo Cal movement.

    Now I am doubly confused. Was the counselor CCEF certified AND State Licensed?

    On another note about licensed counseling. A friend of mine works at a college in a student affairs sort of position. She has her master’s and needs to take the state licensure examination to be a counselor. The college told her not to because they would then have legal liability for all her advice to students.
    That is what got me to thinking….

  104. Nancy2 wrote:

    A whole bunch of other witches have Jessica’s back (from afar, at least), myself among them! Her courage is admirable, and her actins are justified!

    In another life and in an alternate universe I sojourned with a coven of forest crones. It was one of the best times I’ve ever spent in my long life. The things I learned from those women could fill a treatise…

  105. Muff Potter wrote:

    Nancy2 wrote:
    A whole bunch of other witches have Jessica’s back (from afar, at least), myself among them! Her courage is admirable, and her actins are justified!
    In another life and in an alternate universe I sojourned with a coven of forest crones. It was one of the best times I’ve ever spent in my long life. The things I learned from those women could fill a treatise…

    I will be conferred as a Tooth Fairy, with all of the rights and privileges conferred therein. They are, as we write, sewing together my gossamer wings and costume. I’ve always like a spiffy outfit and cold, hard cash.

  106. @ Gram3:
    “And it looks like their overriding concern is that their AUTHORITY has been slighted. They look peevish and petulant and, frankly, immature if they do not know how to handle this situation without going nuclear on her. Makes me curious about how old these Elders are who want to Push Her Under Their Care.”

    Yes, that’s exactly how it looks. That seems to be the only thing that can explain why one PCA church hired an adulterer who had betrayed his calling and church in almost every way imaginable while another PCA church is attempting to excommunicate a woman who survived domestic abuse (no thanks to the church). The former undoubtedly played the game the way the elders dictated that it be played, while the latter refuses to do so. Therefore, she must be silenced, marginalized and removed from the field of play.

  107. Babara Roberts wrote:

    Jessica has said on her blog that she is not interested in being compensated for wrongful dismissal. She only want the church to recognise and repent of the way it treats abuse victims. She wants the church to learn how better to respond to abuse so that other victims of abuse don’t suffer like she has.

    Sadly, I think the only way to get these abusive, patriarchal churches to change is to hit them where it hurts – their pocketbooks.

  108. Lydia wrote:

    On another note about licensed counseling. A friend of mine works at a college in a student affairs sort of position. She has her master’s and needs to take the state licensure examination to be a counselor. The college told her not to because they would then have legal liability for all her advice to students.

    Professional counseling either in academic settings or in agency settings or private practice is NOT about ‘giving advice’. Counseling is a ‘process’.

  109. Christiane wrote:

    Lydia wrote:

    On another note about licensed counseling. A friend of mine works at a college in a student affairs sort of position. She has her master’s and needs to take the state licensure examination to be a counselor. The college told her not to because they would then have legal liability for all her advice to students.

    Professional counseling either in academic settings or in agency settings or private practice is NOT about ‘giving advice’. Counseling is a ‘process’.

    this link helps to explain the difference between the counseling process and ‘giving advice’

    http://drkkolmes.com/2010/01/19/on-the-difference-between-therapy-and-giving-advice/

  110. Jessica Fore wrote:

    Velour wrote:

    I think if that person did that they should be reported to the state who should take action against them and their license.

    I did file a formal complaint with the licensing board. They investigated, but whatever was said/done in the Session meeting was careful and vague enough that they didn’t have enough evidence to take official action. However, they have kept the case on file for consideration if there are future complaints. The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.

    Are you saying that the counselor was state licensed and CCEF trained? Not all, probably very few CCEF counselors are state licensed as you need at least a four year degree or longer for some degrees.

    This is what CCEF’s website says:

    “What are the qualifications of CCEF counselors?
    CCEF counselors have formal training in both the Bible and counseling. Some have advanced degrees, although this is not a requirement. Most of our counselors are former students of CCEF and many have been acknowledged by their churches as gifted in counseling. Some are pastors, ordained elders, or leaders in their local churches. All counselors meet weekly for case consultation and prayer for their counselees and are involved monthly in continuing education.”

  111. Gram3 wrote:

    These men are showing foolishness rather than wisdom. And it looks like their overriding concern is that their AUTHORITY has been slighted. They look peevish and petulant and, frankly, immature if they do not know how to handle this situation without going nuclear on her. Makes me curious about how old these Elders are who want to Push Her Under Their Care.

    Here is something interesting. I searched for this church on the 9Marks church search. “CrossWay Fellowship Church” shows up at the same address as Faith Presbyterian (see http://www.faithstreet.com/church/crossway-fellowship-church-of-athens-watkinsville-ga). From the website: “Currently, the Lord has opened the door for us to meet at Faith Presbyterian Church in Watkinsville and adopt a non-traditional meeting time.”

    Faith Presbyterian is not listed as a 9Marks church, but it rents to one. Both churches are listed on the TGC list of churches. Additionally, the Faith Presbyterian library lists a huge number of 9Marks books.

    How is this related to authority? Check out the 9marks.org site right now. It’s top six articles are all on church authority. Authority is a big deal for these folks. Now that 9Marks shut down their comments section, they can freely pontificate about authority without having to deal with naysayers. Nice.

  112. Jessica Fore wrote:

    The counselor (CCEF trained of course) has left the church– I think he was roped into this as much as anybody.

    Roped into it? As in “against his will?” Sounds odd to me, especially in light of the fact that he has left the church. Has he bothered to contact you regarding the part he played in this abuse?

  113. @ Lydia:

    They give you a certificate, but YOU ARE NOT CERTIFIED!! They state this themselves. Insane.

    “DETAILS OF THE CERTIFICATE

    While CCEF is not an accredited institution, we do offer a robust certificate program. Certificates represent that a student has completed courses in our program. The School of Biblical Counseling awards three different certificates: Foundations of Biblical Counseling, Topics in Biblical Counseling, and Counseling Skills and Practice.
    Students who are working toward a certificate represent diverse backgrounds and ministry goals–they are pastors, youth ministers, counselors, small group leaders, laypeople, missionaries, business men and women, retirees, and more.
    Please note that CCEF is not a certifying agency. CCEF does not “certify” or “endorse” counselors who have completed one of our certificate programs. A significant part of any professional certification process is supervised counseling to observe if a student is appropriately applying what has been learned, along with periodic recertification requirements. At this time, CCEF only awards a certificate of completion from our organization, representing that students have completed coursework within that certificate.
    If you wish to refer to yourself as a “certified counselor” or “certified biblical counselor,” you should pursue certification through an organization that provides this type of certification. Some organizations will accept CCEF courses as part of their training requirement. Licensure as a professional counselor is offered through state agencies and typically requires a graduate degree from an accredited institution. Some of our students do go on to be licensed.”

  114. Bridget wrote:

    Topics in Biblical Counseling,

    I would be embarrassed to tell someone I have a ‘certificate’ in ‘topics’! Weird.

  115. Bridget wrote:

    Licensure as a professional counselor is offered through state agencies and typically requires a graduate degree from an accredited institution. Some of our students do go on to be licensed.”

    The state can and will revoke the license of any counselor who breaks with professional practice and ethics. The state, in this way, attempts to protect clients from abusive situations by unscrupulous practitioners. No licenses are given unless the recipient has the proper academic credentials for that level of licensing.

    I would say there are some extremely well-trained, well-educated clinical psychologist who are priests, rabbis, and ministers who are also properly licensed to practice,
    but from the degree of abuses and harm described by victims of neo-Cal situations, I would hesitate to think any licensed ministers would participate in such abusive situations.

    You would be much more likely to find licensed minister/counselors on the other end trying to assist victims of abuse rather than participating in that abuse, yes.

    The ‘helping’ nature of counseling brings it into that group of professions that hold to the ethic of ‘at least, do no harm’.

    The neo-Cal 9 Marks programs have yielded far too many victims of abuse to be the proper setting for ANY serious counseling with state-licensed professionals.

  116. Lea wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    Topics in Biblical Counseling,
    I would be embarrassed to tell someone I have a ‘certificate’ in ‘topics’! Weird.

    This is absurd –

    “Please note that CCEF is not a certifying agency. CCEF does not “certify” or “endorse” counselors who have completed one of our certificate programs.”

    Spend your money and your time training with us, CCEF, but we endorse nor certify anyone!! What a waste.

    What is also interesting is that the man who was at the forefront of this organization was also a lawyer I believe.

  117. @ Christiane:
    @ Christiane:
    One additional caveat: unscrupulous people sometimes claim credentials from ‘organizations’ that are bogus…. Velour tells of a pastor who claimed a doctorate but her investigation of him showed that he paid a diploma mill less than three hundred dollars for a ‘certificate’ that was worthless according to any valid standards.

    People really need to be careful in finding authoritative help ….. every professional person you encounter is happy to provide evidence of their credentials when asked, so check these out BEFORE you or your family seeks help from these people. And do your HOMEWORK: look up the accrediting agencies to see if they are REALLY respected.

    Steer clear of anyone who ‘gets offended if you do not trust them’. Professional people EXPECT to be asked about their credentials and are more than happy to provide them, because they worked hard to accomplish the requirements for these credentials.
    Protect yourselves, dear people. Take that responsibility seriously.

  118. @ Christiane:

    Yes. I am aware of all of this, but can we get out of the this is always and only a Neo-Cal problem? There is abuse, and has been abuse, in all forms of Christian Religion, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox included. It is also found in nonChristian religions.

    The other thing that bothers me is people quoting what the “official teachings” are of any certain denomination. It does not matter what the official teaching is, when we see continued abuse. Obviously, ministers, pastors, priests, etc. don’t always honor official teachings or, more likely, interpret them to their benefit.

  119. Bridget wrote:

    This is absurd –

    “Please note that CCEF is not a certifying agency. CCEF does not “certify” or “endorse” counselors who have completed one of our certificate programs.”

    You’re getting a certificate, but not a certification! Clear as mud 🙂

    IOW, please throw your money out the window in our general direction and in return we will give you…nothing official.

  120. Bridget wrote:

    The other thing that bothers me is people quoting what the “official teachings” are of any certain denomination. It does not matter what the official teaching is, when we see continued abuse.

    In any organization, you have the written rules and the unwritten ones and it is the unofficial ones that generally count. The official statements tend to be the massaged, lawyered version, sort of the like the employee handbook. But what does your boss really do? What does your pastor really do? What about your priest? There is the real story and it varies widely sometimes.

  121. Lea wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    This is absurd –
    “Please note that CCEF is not a certifying agency. CCEF does not “certify” or “endorse” counselors who have completed one of our certificate programs.”
    You’re getting a certificate, but not a certification! Clear as mud
    IOW, please throw your money out the window in our general direction and in return we will give you…nothing official.

    It would be laughable, right, except people are being revictimized and spiritually abused by many CCEF counselors. The heavy authoritarian church mixed with the CCEF counseling is a double dose of spiritual abuse for many. Sad.

  122. @ Bridget:
    There are standards in mainline Churches and most certainly there are ethical standards in Judaism. I think what you are speaking of is the ‘churches’ that OPENLY practice what is harmful to people as a part of their theology.

    Yes, there are rogue pastors, priests, and rabbis in the mainline religious communities, but they do NOT represent a fixed openly proclaimed practice that encourages the harm that they do. Those who participated in ‘covering up’ and hiding abusers were also guilty of rogue behavior and needed to be stopped.

    The mainline Churches and the main Jewish communities all advocate ethical behavior among those who serve in ministry.
    “Neo-Cals” …. just look at what they openly are doing to people as a part of their professed theology, and tell me you accept them as being in any way comparable to the mainline communities of faith.

    BRIDGET, I see the neo-Cal YRR’s as ‘rogue’. Why? Well, TWW is helping expose what they are actively doing to people. The abuse is seminal to the neo-Cal theology.

    God knows, there are rogue ministers, priests, rabbis, yes. But try to differentiate between whither the abuse comes from: is it a product of the Church/Synogogue teaching, or is it a person who has violated the trust placed in them by the faithful? This is important to do BECAUSE if the ‘teaching’ in the seminaries is at fault, innocent young men are being corrupted to go out and do harm. I think the neo-Cal theology is harmful in the expression of how it treats women and how it ‘disciplines’ and ‘controls’ the faithful.

    We disagree, I guess. But I appreciate your comment as a way for me to try to understand your thinking.

  123. What is it about such churches that just heap more & more pressure & pain onto those who’ve already been through so much? It is the very opposite of how Christ asked us to be.

  124. Lydia wrote:

    I would first lodge a complaint against the counselor with the state. Malpractice.

    This was first thought as well. There probably isn’t much of a case for wrongful termination but this seems to be a clear case of malpractice.

  125. Max wrote:

    That got us to thinking … “How many of SBC’s 16 million members were actually dead, joined other church groups, or “done”?” Perhaps the ‘real’ SBC membership is 8 or 4 million!

    I’ve heard that the actual number is around 5 to 7 million.

  126. Christiane wrote:

    I think what you are speaking of is the ‘churches’ that OPENLY practice what is harmful to people as a part of their theology.

    Which includes mainline churches as they practice hierarchy. Protestant churches are not the only churches that practice it.

  127. Christiane wrote:

    I think the neo-Cal theology is harmful in the expression of how it treats women and how it ‘disciplines’ and ‘controls’ the faithful.

    And I have seen this in the Catholic Church as well. No expression of Religion is exempt.

  128. Christiane wrote:

    I see the neo-Cal YRR’s as ‘rogue’. Why? Well, TWW is helping expose what they are actively doing to people. The abuse is seminal to the neo-Cal theology.

    Spot on!

    A sick theology begets sick behavior/actions. Vile, vile, vile churches/leadership.

    My sister and friends don’t even go to church and they repeatedly said that there was something wrong with NeoCalvinism that isn’t accepted by mainline denominations.

  129. Christiane wrote:

    “Neo-Cals” …. just look at what they openly are doing to people as a part of their professed theology, and tell me you accept them as being in any way comparable to the mainline communities of faith.

    BRIDGET, I see the neo-Cal YRR’s as ‘rogue’. Why? Well, TWW is helping expose what they are actively doing to people. The abuse is seminal to the neo-Cal theology.

    As I said up the thread, Calvinism begets Thuggery.

  130. Beakerj wrote:

    What is it about such churches that just heap more & more pressure & pain onto those who’ve already been through so much?

    RIGHTEOUSNESS and Moral/Spiritual Superiority.

  131. Beakerj wrote:

    What is it about such churches that just heap more & more pressure & pain onto those who’ve already been through so much? It is the very opposite of how Christ asked us to be.

    Because many “Christians” have turned churches into places to make money and become famous.

    There are Christians I really respect, but they are hardcore fans of shallow celebrity pastors. But the moment I or someone else has questioned their devotion to a certain pastor, they go completely on the attack. It’s the same type of rabid fandom I see from fans of a band or TV show. Completely cultural, and completely unbiblical.

  132. siteseer wrote:

    Mara wrote:

    Loving our positions.
    Loving being superior.
    Loving being in control.
    Loving our self-righteousness.
    Loving a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.

    Loving respectful greetings in the market places, and chief seats in the [churches] and places of honor at banquets…

    With long trumpets blowing before them…

  133. Hi BRIDGET

    I accept your opinion with respect, but I cannot agree. There were times in the Church when the service of all clergy, regardless of station or position was tested.

    During the time of the Black Death (the plague) in Europe, over 90% of all clergy died BECAUSE they were directly involved in ministering to and caring for the sick. They conducted the only medical care facilities available, they visited the sick, gave them the last rites. The deaths among the clergy were not limited to the deacons or the monks and the nuns, but were seen among the bishops also.
    When the leader of a ‘denomination’ is called ‘the servant of the servants of God’, you have a triangle with the point at the bottom supporting the weight of the rest of the triangle in support of it. You won’t find this among those cults where the pastor does not find it convenient to visit the sick or perform funerals, but leaves these sacred responsibilities to his deacons.

    I think I know the difference. And I’m glad for it. From time to time, a cardinal will be asked to resign for pompous behavior or ‘bling’ display of abuse of funds. Not so among the cults where ‘prosperity’ is worshiped. So there ARE differences in what is publicly valued. Yeah, I’m glad for those differences.

    You want to see the Church’s ‘treatment’ of women as the SAME as the neo-Cal 9 Marks folks????? Go read ‘Mulieris Dignetatem’, and check out the list of the Doctors of the Church, and also examine the plans for a conference the pope is organizing to open dialogue concerning re-activating the position of women deacons in the Church.

    You tell me you are knowledgeable about the Church, having been raised in it, but I think there is much you are not aware of when you make certain broad statements. I hope my references will help you get up to speed if you want to engage in conversation about this topic of comparison and contrasting the place of women in Church as opposed to how they are treated by entities developing now into cults.

  134. Christiane wrote:

    re-activating the position of women deacons in the Church.

    My church has women in all positions and they are calvinist (not neo, though). There really is something else at play here that I think you are missing.

    The Catholic church has done many good and many evil things over time. All organizations have issues. The catholic church is a huge hierarchy, so it is very easy for them to shuffle around evil priests and keep quiet. Your local independent baptist is a church of one, so it is very easy to keep a bad pastor in power and kick out parishioners. Both problems, different manifestations.

  135. Lea wrote:

    All organizations have issues.

    All organizations may have some rogue members.
    Some organizations ARE rogue.

    Good to know the difference.

  136. Christiane wrote:

    All organizations may have some rogue members.

    A handful of priests who are abusers would be ‘some rogue members’. When the hierarchy of the church is well aware of that and moving them around to protect the church itself? The organization has gone rogue. No matter what the rulebook technically says.

  137. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    RIGHTEOUSNESS and Moral/Spiritual Superiority.

    All backed up by the Bible of course. And if you (generic you) don’t fall in line with what they promulgate, well then, you don’t believe the Bible…

  138. Lea wrote:

    When the hierarchy of the church is well aware of that and moving them around to protect the church itself?

    The hierarchy involved in that are also ‘rogue’, but that hierarchy involves a small number in comparison to the whole hierarchy of the faith. There is NO excuse for these people, none. Any ‘cover up’ is wrong and is NOT the policy of the Church.

    You have likely watched that great film on Netflix ‘Spotlight’ which Catholics also have watched. The Vatican does not see the film as anti-Catholic. So, the emphasis is on facing what happened and openly dealing with it in a straight-forward way.

    “Jesuit Father Hans Zollner, a member of the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, told Vatican Radio many bishops had urged others to see the film and “take seriously its central message, which is that the Catholic Church can and must be transparent, just and committed to fighting abuse, and it must ensure it never happens again.”
    Catholic leaders cannot think clerical sexual abuse will go away if they don’t talk about it, Father Zollner said. “I think this is one of the central messages of the film.””

    LEA, if the Church had attacked the film, your comment would have some meaning for me, but the Church upheld the message of the film as just and helpful to the future of the Church as instruction in prevention of future abuses and cover-ups.

    LEA, remember that there are ‘leaders’ in the Church who are ‘servants’. My priest, Father Bryan, works himself sick for the sake of the parish, and everyone knows it. He is on-call twenty-four/seven and will come in an emergency to hospital, jail, or wherever need be. I don’t recognize these same qualities in ‘churches’ where the ‘leader’ persecutes people, is ‘too busy’ to visit the sick, or to conduct a funeral ….. there are some MAJOR differences rooted deeply within the theologies of various faith communities that are reflected in how people are treated by their ‘leaders’. My advice is to pay attention to the theology and what flows from it as to whether the people are ‘lorded over’ or ‘served’. I do.

  139. Christiane wrote:

    You tell me you are knowledgeable about the Church,

    Are you speaking of Christ’s Church or the Catholic church? The Church means the universal Church to most people here, not just the Catholic church.

    You seem to have no problem speaking about the many denominations that are discussed on TWW. Are you completely studied on all their various teachings and doctrines? I never claimed to know all the Catholic teachings. What I said was:

    Bridget wrote:

    Yess. We do. You give certain religious denom’s a pass on their hierarchy and I do not.

    I don’t believe this is a broad statement, simply a true one.

    Christiane wrote:

    I hope my references will help you get up to speed if you want to engage in conversation about this topic of comparison and contrasting the place of women in Church

    Really, Christine? I have to read up on Catholic theology to engage in conversation? Have you read Grudem’s tomes on womanhood and manhood? Piper’s books? CBMWs writings? Denny Burke’s writings? Al Mohler’s?

    I guess I can no longer engage in conversation on this topic if I don’t do as instructed by you . . . . gee whiz. You are leaving the same impression with me that reformed pastors did when trying to converse with them.

    I really don’t think anyone needs a degree in a certain theology to understand that hierarchy in the Church universal is a bad thing for men and women. Men ruling over men, men ruling over women, women ruling over men, and women ruling over women is all bad theology, no matter what the denomination.

  140. Christiane wrote:

    You won’t find this among those cults where the pastor does not find it convenient to visit the sick or perform funerals, but leaves these sacred responsibilities to his deacons.

    Well, let me interject a bit here.

    First, in a denomination which does not have sacraments there is no ‘sacred’ thing that would require an ordained minister to visit the sick in order to do. Any of the staff could do it just as well (give encouragement and pray) and many times they might well do it much better.

    Secondly, here in my town there was a really ancient catholic nun who visited the sick in the hospitals on behalf of St. L’s Catholic Church. I never met her but I heard that she was a favorite of the hospital personnel, and I know that this was said in a writeup in the local newspaper when she retired just prior to her death. She had a ministry to the sick and the families and the personnel and was known outside her particular church.

    i do not think it would be wise to insist that the visiting of the sick would require ordained clergy except for what used to be called last rites and then of course only in denoms which do that.

    And from a personal viewpoint from my prior years in health care, some pastors don’t need to get anywhere near the hospital until they learn how to conduct themselves.

  141. Beakerj wrote:

    What is it about such churches that just heap more & more pressure & pain onto those who’ve already been through so much? It is the very opposite of how Christ asked us to be.

    Probably starts with a warped view of God.

  142. okrapod wrote:

    First, in a denomination which does not have sacraments there is no ‘sacred’ thing that would require an ordained minister to visit the sick in order to do.

    I do realize that visiting and praying with the sick is seen differently, but STILL I always am happy to see a minister visiting in hospital, and they do go around sometimes and speak to others than just the one or two they came to see.

    I remember spending the night in the emergency room of our main hospital where my father was waiting to be admitted, and seeing a minister with a Scottish accent spend time listening to a man that the police had brought in who was obviously mentally disturbed . . .

    the minister was PRESENT to that poor man with such compassion and patience . . . he spent several hours with the man who was strapped to a gurney in the overcrowded hallway of the ER, standing there at a late hour of the night just being present to the man, and did not leave him until some medications that had been given for sedation took effect, and the poor man finally slept.

    I don’t know WHAT denomination that minister belonged to, because in those circumstances, it didn’t matter.
    What mattered was that for a time, someone came along side one of the more fragile people in our city and was kind to him. OKRAPOD, if there is not something ‘sacred’ in what happened there, then I guess I don’t understand ‘sacred’ in the same way Protestants do.

    The sacred Scriptures call for the sick to be annointed and prayed over. But I think what I saw in that hospital was a kind of compassionate loving-kindness that was its own prayer and strong witness to Christ Who comes to be present with us in our suffering.

  143. Living Liminal wrote:

    dee wrote:
    They can’t be wrong. They are anointed elders.
    Silly me… how could I forget that “truth”

    I think it’s Max who says that today’s breed of elders ‘is more annoying than anointed.’

  144. @ Bridget: the counselor has CCEF listed on his professional website as one of his affiliations, but not the only one. He’s definitely licensed. I imagine he was smart enough not to use actual diagnostic language, or to swear the Session to secrecy if he did. The evidence that I have consists of an email exchange between the opposing party in the grievance and the Session indicating that the purpose of their sessions with the counselor was to advice on my mental state and what was best for me, Session minutes naming the counselor and saying that he reported on his consultations with a couple, an email exchange between me and the Senior Pastor the day of that Session meeting where, not knowing what was going on, I happened to ask to attend the meeting (which is open to members) and he told me no because the “guest list and agenda were full,” and then the counselor’s confirming reaction when I confronted him about it. I don’t know what he actually said in the meeting and there’s not enough of a paper trail for the licensing board to take formal action.

  145. @ Jessica Fore:

    This counselor should never have done what he did, nor the session. How can they do such things with you not even there to defend yourself? You are brave for staying on to provoke change. Be careful that you aren’t further harmed.

  146. @ Gram3:

    “If someone wants to bring a sign, just ignore it if she is not being disruptive or truly divisive”
    +++++++++++

    in one of my previous churches, a cross-dresser attended for a while (in a sleeveless sheath dress, heels, earrings, make-up, hairy & sinewy & muscular arms, shoulders, and calves). He behaved very normally, was very polite. as a group we made the decision to overlook these things which were not typical of the environment, and just be friendly and treat him as we would anyone else. Befriend him, invite him to this or that, etc. i was very proud of my church at that moment.

    this is not a perfect analogy — while sitting with a provocative sign at church is not typical, it’s not counter-cultural. Under the circumstances, it’s quite understandable. Yes, why couldn’t they have just let it be, and conducted the service as per usual?

    their egos made this too hard to do. I’m sure their ego, fear & insecurity, & guilty consciences were all wrapped up in the series of their choices and actions all along, making it all impossible to face. her poster required them to face their sorry selves. not enough humility, spine, courage, balls to be able to do that. so they did the convenient thing — make her disappear.

    it’s worse than the cowardice of running away from one’s problems. it’s cowardice + self-centeredness + cruelty.

  147. Christiane wrote:

    then I guess I don’t understand ‘sacred’ in the same way Protestants do

    I do think there is a difference between catholicism and protestantism here. Certainly the use of the words sacred and holy and blessed and saint are used differently, and certain ideas about places and spaces contain some differences. And to my knowledge most protestants do not think in terms of veneration of anybody. We do not usually say ‘sacred scripture’ for example but I never heard anybody think it was wrong to say that.

    I think that the whole idea of differences between clergy and laity are different, but here again I do not know how catholics ‘feel’ at some level since I have never been there and done that, so for sure I do not understand the use of sacred in the same way you do.

    One example, and I do not even know if this is related to the conversation, but perhaps so. In one circumstance when a family member of mine was having surgery and their pastor came to the hospital, their pastor and I waited in the waiting room while the parents went back to the recovery room and we talked. I knew him more or less from previous contact. He was in a heap of difficulty-bivocational with loss of his secular job and approaching possible church split over gay marriage-none of it anything he had done. Anyhow, the parents came out and the pastor stood to leave but he wanted us all to form a little circle and hold hands and pray. Except that something happened-the Spirit?-and I said let me pray. So I prayed for all four of the p(s): patient, personnel, parents and in this case the preacher. Right there, slap in the pediatric surgery waiting room at the university hospital, and goodness knows what the other denizens of that place thought. But no, there was nothing particularly sacred about it, because prayer is what everybody does-not just preachers, and the man needed prayed for. And because God is present in a lot more than just in designated behaviors like prayer. I don’t think the fact that the preacher came to the hospital or the fact that old lady doc prayed for him was any more sacred than the fact that the surgeon had operated on the baby. I think this attitude is probably very protestant, but I don’t know for sure.

    For a great many protestants there is no concept of the pastor (ordained clergy) as priest or of his having priestly functions. For a lot of protestants we are all priests in one sense and nobody is a priest in the catholic sense. The margins between sacred and not then get blurred for persons and places and behaviors and ideas and such.

  148. Dee.
    “@PCAByFaith Does GA know that church member/licensed counselor possibly commiting ethics violations? http://www.gamft.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/GA_Code_of_Ethics.pdf

    Was wondering how long it would take for someone to ask this. Has any party involved contact the Georgia Board yet?

    Next. What does an attorney who “mediated” a divorce mean? This would seem to immediately generate a lot of legal and ethical questions. Was she a client?

  149. @ Muff Potter:

    “In another life and in an alternate universe I sojourned with a coven of forest crones. It was one of the best times I’ve ever spent in my long life. The things I learned from those women could fill a treatise…”
    +++++++++++++

    i have to hear about this one.

  150. nathan priddis wrote:

    Dee.
    “@PCAByFaith Does GA know that church member/licensed counselor possibly commiting ethics violations? http://www.gamft.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/GA_Code_of_Ethics.pdf
    Was wondering how long it would take for someone to ask this. Has any party involved contact the Georgia Board yet?
    Next. What does an attorney who “mediated” a divorce mean? This would seem to immediately generate a lot of legal and ethical questions. Was she a client?

    That was my Tweet (MtnShepherdess) about the GA church, the counselor, and the law.
    Jessica Fore posted up the thread that she did file with the licensing board about the
    counselor. They didn’t have enough, apparently, to take action. (If I were them, I’d issue subpoenas and put people under oath as to what transpired in that meeting. Oh well. They have it on file for this guy’s next screw up.)

    In law there are mediated divorces where people try to mediate their differences. Before any final papers are signed, including Settlement Agreements, each spouse is supposed to see their own attorney to advocate for them/check paperwork.

    You can ask free legal questions of attorneys across the United States on Avvo.com

  151. Christiane wrote:

    The hierarchy involved in that are also ‘rogue’, but that hierarchy involves a small number in comparison to the whole hierarchy of the faith. There is NO excuse for these people, none. Any ‘cover up’ is wrong and is NOT the policy of the Church.

    Smalk number? Not according to what happened. Thousands up the Priestley chain globally turned a blind eye. I think you have bought the propaganda. It was long term inherent culture of systemic abuse. It was the rotren culture. Period.

    Had they not been so cleverly moved around for so long, perhaps many more would have gone to prison where they belonged.

  152. Christiane wrote:

    During the time of the Black Death (the plague) in Europe, over 90% of all clergy died BECAUSE they were directly involved in ministering to and caring for the sick. T

    While the “leaders” they obeyed living in splendor fled to the country.

  153. okrapod wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    then I guess I don’t understand ‘sacred’ in the same way Protestants do

    I do think there is a difference between catholicism and protestantism here. Certainly the use of the words sacred and holy and blessed and saint are used differently, and certain ideas about places and spaces contain some differences. And to my knowledge most protestants do not think in terms of veneration of anybody. We do not usually say ‘sacred scripture’ for example but I never heard anybody think it was wrong to say that.

    I think that the whole idea of differences between clergy and laity are different, but here again I do not know how catholics ‘feel’ at some level since I have never been there and done that, so for sure I do not understand the use of sacred in the same way you do.

    One example, and I do not even know if this is related to the conversation, but perhaps so. In one circumstance when a family member of mine was having surgery and their pastor came to the hospital, their pastor and I waited in the waiting room while the parents went back to the recovery room and we talked. I knew him more or less from previous contact. He was in a heap of difficulty-bivocational with loss of his secular job and approaching possible church split over gay marriage-none of it anything he had done. Anyhow, the parents came out and the pastor stood to leave but he wanted us all to form a little circle and hold hands and pray. Except that something happened-the Spirit?-and I said let me pray. So I prayed for all four of the p(s): patient, personnel, parents and in this case the preacher. Right there, slap in the pediatric surgery waiting room at the university hospital, and goodness knows what the other denizens of that place thought. But no, there was nothing particularly sacred about it, because prayer is what everybody does-not just preachers, and the man needed prayed for. And because God is present in a lot more than just in designated behaviors like prayer. I don’t think the fact that the preacher came to the hospital or the fact that old lady doc prayed for him was any more sacred than the fact that the surgeon had operated on the baby. I think this attitude is probably very protestant, but I don’t know for sure.

    For a great many protestants there is no concept of the pastor (ordained clergy) as priest or of his having priestly functions. For a lot of protestants we are all priests in one sense and nobody is a priest in the catholic sense. The margins between sacred and not then get blurred for persons and places and behaviors and ideas and such.

    I think ‘YES’ Holy Spirit. And to me, what you describe was a sacred moment by the very fact of your inspiration to pray and that they all accepted this.

    I see ‘sacred’ in the small things.
    We take too much for granted. I stopped doing that long ago.

    Your prayer in that hospital was a ‘blessing’, for the participants, for the patient, and for you who were touched to offer it.

    Maybe even ‘prayer’ is seen differently among us. I’m beginning to understand that is a possibility.

  154. Christiane wrote:

    And I’m glad for it. From time to time, a cardinal will be asked to resign for pompous behavior or ‘bling’ display of abuse of funds. Not so among the cults where ‘prosperity’ is worshiped. So there ARE differences in what is publicly valued. Yeah, I’m glad for those differences.

    Come on. They are given a nice living even when they resign as “Cardinals”. Or you were told that and they were sent somewhere else.

    You don’t turn a over 1000 year old corrupt institution around in 20 years.

  155. Bridget wrote:

    This counselor should never have done what he did, nor the session. How can they do such things with you not even there to defend yourself?

    It makes sense for the session to do that if they are looking for psychological and spiritual cover for what they want to do. I do not know the particulars of this case personally, but that’s the way some organizations *solve* their people problems that are complex and sticky. The interesting thing is that the presbytery will be the ones to act on this first. They know the Teaching Elder(s) whose qualifications they have certified. Could be interesting.

  156. nathan priddis wrote:

    What does an attorney who “mediated” a divorce mean?

    Some states require mediation at various stages. I assume this was an attorney who was appointed by the court or agreed-upon by the attorneys for both sides. He would have inside information of various kinds on both parties, and ISTM that participating in the process against either of those parties in another venue would be an ethical conflict.

  157. Gram3 wrote:

    It makes sense for the session to do that if they are looking for psychological and spiritual cover for what they want to do. I do not know the particulars of this case personally, but that’s the way some organizations *solve* their people problems that are complex and sticky.

    Well, from this end, it looks like a classic example of spiritual.abuse!

  158. Lydia wrote:

    Smalk number? Not according to what happened. Thousands up the Priestley chain globally turned a blind eye. I think you have bought the propaganda. It was long term inherent culture of systemic abuse. It was the rotren culture. Period.

    Had they not been so cleverly moved around for so long, perhaps many more would have gone to prison where they belonged.

    They’re still pouring money into defeating the removal of statute of limitations on child sexual abuse. And wow, the comments on some of those news articles. I hate to say it but a lot of them have still not accepted the fact that child sexual abuse is a real thing and not just a vendetta against priests. Demoralizing to read.

  159. Lydia wrote:

    https://www.ccef.org/school/certificates
    Why would anyone who wants to be a professional bother with this nonsense? I have run across Powlisons name (CCEF big cheese) many times in connection with the Neo Cal movement.

    What a waste of time and money. The certificate doesn’t qualify a person to legitimately practice counseling in any place of employment. They don’t even do observations and follow up on the student who has taken their courses to find out if they are even competent to counsel anyone. Here’s an excerpt from that page:

    “CCEF does not “certify” or “endorse” counselors who have completed one of our certificate programs. A significant part of any professional certification process is supervised counseling to observe if a student is appropriately applying what has been learned, along with periodic recertification requirements. At this time, CCEF only awards a certificate of completion from our organization, representing that students have completed coursework within that certificate.”

    In effect, CCEF is admitting that they are not professionals in their field. Further, if this counselor who *diagnosed* Jessica Fore only had a certificate from CCEF, then he was not even qualified to give such a diagnoses. And by all that has been said thus far, his actions in *diagnosing* Jessica reveal a total lack of understanding of such a process. In doing what he did, it reveals just how uneducated and unprofessional he really is. A counselor who has obtained a graduate degree from an accredited institution and is licensed by the state, would most certainly know that diagnosing a person without ever personally interviewing with them and assessing their condition is utter foolishness. This sort of “biblical” counseling does more damage than good.

  160. elastigirl wrote:

    @ Muff Potter:
    “In another life and in an alternate universe I sojourned with a coven of forest crones. It was one of the best times I’ve ever spent in my long life. The things I learned from those women could fill a treatise…”
    +++++++++++++
    i have to hear about this one.

    I hung out with some spiritually minded, thought provoking hippies. Does that count? 😉

  161. In reading all the comments, up thread it was said that this counselor that diagnosed Jessica Fore was licensed by the state. All the more he knew what he had done in giving such a diagnosis without interviewing and assessing her mental condition is an ethical (if not criminal as well) violation. Surely Jessica must have recourse from the law in some capacity. A civil suit against the counselor and the church might be an effective way to go, albeit costly.

  162. The indictment letter looks so familiar. Pious creeps who actually think they are doing God’s will by crafting such an abusive letter.

    I laughed when I saw the PCA footer on the stationary:

    “Loving God. Loving People. Loving Neighbors.”

    Yeah, right.

  163. I misquoted the footer:

    “Loving God. Loving each other. Loving our neighbor.”

    If that is “love” – and no doubt the pious authors of the letter DO think they are “loving” Jessica by sending her this letter – then leave me out. You have to be demented to think this is “love”.

  164. I haven’t read all of the comments yet but thought I’d throw this in.

    I am very outspoken on my blogs and elsewhere about domestic violence and about abuse in churches, having been a longtime member of Sovereign Grace Ministries.

    I have been a member of a small PCA congregation for six years.

    A woman in my church whose husband was abusing her and their children first separated from her husband five years ago after yet another incident. She called an elder the next morning. He and his wife came immediately and spent hours with her and the children, then followed up by communicating strongly with her husband when she felt she couldn’t speak with him in the days that followed. They and the pastor and youth pastor (who is also a professional counselor) remained supportive of her, which eventually caused her husband to leave the church. (They had already offered to make him stop sitting near her or to even stop coming at all but she had declined.) Though the elder at one point questioned whether divorce was necessary, he was quick to assure her it was always her decision. After a discussion meeting to which she brought a friend (who is a pastor’s wife and an advocate for DV victims) all three of these men agreed she had clear Biblical grounds for divorce. When she did file for divorce, they were all very positive and encouraging toward her, noting that this was a “good culmination of a long process.”

    This is my little corner of the PCA. I am hoping that as those like Jessica continue to speak up, this will be how it is across the board through the whole denomination. Jessica’s session is way out of bounds. I am curious to see how this plays out up through the presbytery. I hope they act in her favor and that it sets a strong precedent for all the others.

    I will continue to lift my voice with hers.

  165. @ Virginia Knowles:

    This is great. This is the church. I do hope she still reported the abuse to the civil authorities. That pattern of legal documentation is important for many reasons.

  166. Bridget wrote:

    Well, from this end, it looks like a classic example of spiritual.abuse!

    I agree, and I hope some wisdom is brought to bear soon.

  167. Gram3 wrote:

    Bridget wrote:
    Well, from this end, it looks like a classic example of spiritual.abuse!
    I agree, and I hope some wisdom is brought to bear soon.

    Honestly, I don’t even understand what their reasoning was for firing her from her job. Is she unqualified to be involved in worship because her husband was a lowlife? She didn’t do anything wrong. Why take away her only source of income because of something completely out of her control? Seems downright evil and cruel. Not unlike what happened to Marquis and her son.

    It is evil masquerading as Christian.

  168. It seems as if her divorce was the only reason. Until people get past “Divorce is not the answer” and get to “Divorce is sometimes the *only* answer” we are going to continue to see this. They think they are upholding a high view of marriage, but they are really doing just the opposite, IMO. They are upholding the *status* of being married for life but have totally missed the actual point and meaning of marriage. An abuser has broken the covenant of marriage (using their terminology.) Therefore, the civil action is beside the point if the marriage vows have already been violated and nullified by the abuser.

  169. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    A woman in my church whose husband was abusing her and their children … the pastor and youth pastor (who is also a professional counselor) remained supportive of her, which eventually caused her husband to leave the church

    Given the history of abuse, shouldn’t her husband have been tossed out of the church rather than choosing to leave on his own? It seems to me that men in PCA ranks, and other patriarchal systems, are given too much privilege over women in matters such as this.

  170. Burwell wrote:

    I’ve heard that the actual number is around 5 to 7 million.

    And only a handful of those Southern Baptists have got enough spiritual sense to be concerned about the proliferation of New Calvinism within its ranks! Shift in belief and drift in practice in this once-great evangelisitc denomination appears OK with the pew, as long as you don’t mess with their potlucks and other social functions.

  171. Max wrote:

    Given the history of abuse, shouldn’t her husband have been tossed out of the church rather than choosing to leave on his own?

    That’s what I was wondering.

  172. Gram3 wrote:

    It seems as if her divorce was the only reason. Until people get past “Divorce is not the answer” and get to “Divorce is sometimes the *only* answer” we are going to continue to see this. They think they are upholding a high view of marriage, but they are really doing just the opposite, IMO. They are upholding the *status* of being married for life but have totally missed the actual point and meaning of marriage. An abuser has broken the covenant of marriage (using their terminology.) Therefore, the civil action is beside the point if the marriage vows have already been violated and nullified by the abuser.

    Good catch! The tyranny of the better instead of the best. All too common. I am too used to hearing that from those “elder circles” that one can miss the bigger problem. Questioning whether divorce should be an option was totally inappropriate, not helpful to a victim or the children and we need to keep on pointing that out.

  173. Max wrote:

    It seems to me that men in PCA ranks, and other patriarchal systems, are given too much privilege over women in matters such as this.

    That’s what it is: privilege and and its related entitlement mentality that they bring into the church and read the Bible through the lenses of this mentality – and then they say that it’s egalitarianism that is based on the worldly culture! They clearly don’t know history.

  174. Elizabeth Lee wrote:

    Despite the fact that I graduated college, moved away, and had joined different churches over the years, my name was still listed as a member.

    Southern Baptists have this thing they call a “letter” which confirms your membership in a church. You are not officially dememberized (a new word!) unless you “move your letter” by request. Your name will remain on that church roll for decades unless you ask them to “Move it!”. That practice is a contributing factor to the greatly inflated numbers reported in SBC; there aren’t really 16 million Southern Baptists as commonly reported. The actual number is more like 5-7 million as noted by Burwell upstream in the comments … but most of those could not be considered serious churchgoers. SBC has fallen on bad times because of apathy in the pews and powerless pulpits. It’s denominational gift of evangelism has been forfeited … and New Calvinists are walking all over it!

  175. @ Max:

    Max, for her own reasons, the woman felt that it would be best that he have the freedom to stay if he wished, as long as he didn’t cause trouble. The church leaders left that to her discretion.

  176. Okay, this is just my opinion, but if you’re being abused by your spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend, don’t call the church. Call the police. Whom do you call if someone’s murdered? Abuse is a legal matter. Call the church afterwards if you want, but let the police handle a matter that’s their jurisdiction.

    I’d step off my soapbox if I hadn’t left it at home.

  177. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    @ Lydia:
    Yes, the civil authorities were involved.

    Good! All too often, women just let the church handle things, and it doesn’t always go well.

  178. @ Max:
    Many Non SBC Mega churches do this too but without recognizing the member letter process from other churches. So, if you ever joined —you are a member in perpetuity. And they don’t mind a bit in case you want to donate online.

    Which brings me to one of those forensic 9 Marks questions. If you are on the roll of a non denominational mega church that never purges can you still join a 9 Marks church? (Hee Hee. Just kidding)

  179. Max wrote:

    It’s denominational gift of evangelism has been forfeited

    This gift of evangelism represented the heart of a whole community of faith. Its passing will affect the whole Church.

  180. @ Virginia Knowles:

    I would just caution that statistical history proves the most dangerous time in an abused spouses life is when they decide to leave. I am glad she has people who will help her, though.

  181. Christiane wrote:

    This gift of evangelism represented the heart of a whole community of faith. Its passing will affect the whole Church.

    No doubt about it! And one of the greatest impacts will be on the foreign mission field. I have a cousin who was an SBC missionary in South Africa for over 20 years. He speaks fondly of the close alliance he and his family had with missionaries of other faiths, including pentecostals. They shared a common goal … to take the precious Gospel of Christ to ALL people. The Calvinist predestined elect mumbo-jumbo gospel is not good tidings that brings great joy to ALL people.

  182. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    The church leaders left that to her discretion.

    Leaders need to lead. Allowing this sorry excuse of a man to still access the church was potentially exposing other church members to his wicked acts. Paul chastised church leaders who did not exercise good leadership when it came to church members exhibiting lost behavior: “It is your plain duty to put away from yourselves that wicked person” (1 Cor 5). There are many men in church who would benefit from getting kicked out … they need a wake-up call – it might just lead to repentance and salvation. We put way too much faith in Christian counseling these days to calm evil-doers down, rather than casting them out! You can’t effectively counsel a lost person with Christian precepts – they don’t get it.

  183. siteseer wrote:

    They’re still pouring money into defeating the removal of statute of limitations on child sexual abuse. And wow, the comments on some of those news articles. I hate to say it but a lot of them have still not accepted the fact that child sexual abuse is a real thing and not just a vendetta against priests. Demoralizing to read.

    If you are speaking about that idiot Bill Donohue of the rogue ‘Catholic League’, I can tell you that he is at war with the Vatican. The Pope removed his right-wing buddy, Cardinal Burke (a notorious misogynist), and Bill Donohue went berserk when Francis also said the Church should apologize to LGBT folks for its failure to minister to them.

    Bill Donohue has more in common with the fundamentalist/evangelical far right devotees of the Republican Right. He doesn’t represent post Vatican II Catholicism’s spirit. He has NO authority in the Church. His organization is NOT related to the Vatican.

    Donohue is someone to ‘get sick’ about: his pursuit of limitations of the age at which victims can sue those who ‘covered up’ their abuse …. this IS a disgusting denial of justice for the victims. Nothing about Donohue and the Catholic League can be defended on any topic of misogyny, or homophobia, or attacks on victims of abuse. Donohue and his ilk are rogue. And everyone was thrilled to see the last of Cardinal Burke, a right-wing idealogue who lost his first love and entered into the alt-right insanity. Good on Francis for dumping him. End of rant.

  184. Patriciamc wrote:

    but if you’re being abused by your spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend, don’t call the church.

    I agree totally. The reality is, sadly, that even extreme verbal and emotional abuse probably will not result in an arrest. Even when children are severely abused verbally and emotionally, CPS will not take action until there is physical or sexual abuse that cannot be ignored, something I learned from some mandated reporters in my extended family. If a man is abused, he is out of luck if the experience of some dear friends is any indication. The police, courts, and church do not get virtue points or PC points for protecting men and their children when the abuser is a female. I do not know what the solution is for civil authorities, but the church must do better than this for everyone who is abused.

  185. @ Patriciamc:
    I was assuming you meant all types of abuse, and that may not be what you meant, so my apologies if I misunderstood. Call the police, regardless!

    IMO, even if Jessica Fore’s abuse was not physical, her marriage ended when her husband decided not to be a husband to her. He abandoned her just as much as if he took off to Tahiti with another woman.

  186. Christiane wrote:

    If you are speaking about that idiot Bill Donohue of the rogue ‘Catholic League’, I can tell you that he is at war with the Vatican.

    Are you saying none of the money is coming from the Catholic church? Can Catholics know that none of their tithes and offerings are going to support lobbyists working to defeat sex abuse legislation?

  187. Gram3 wrote:

    . I do not know what the solution is for civil authorities, but the church must do better than this for everyone who is abused.

    I think we have tried in some ways by making divorce easier, financial equality for women, etc. Not long ago a non-working wife with no resources did not have access to her husband’s bank account unless he gave her permission. IOW, it was not considered joint property. A husband could die and leave his money to his sons bypassing his wife all together. It was not that unusual.

    But none of this addresses the psychological problems of dealing with abuse. And from what I have seen with court-ordered Counseling in these situations it is often even more of a disaster but quite the moneymaker for people affiliated with the courts. This usually doesn’t happen unless kids are involved anyway.

    Sadly, church is not about developing in wisdom, character, etc and affirming individual human value. These days many churches can’t even tell good from evil.

  188. Gram3 wrote:

    The reality is, sadly, that even extreme verbal and emotional abuse probably will not result in an arrest.

    These types of abuse usually escalate in both frequency and intensity and eventually to physical I think. The victim should be fully aware of that possibility.

  189. I don’t know if this has been posted, but I find it of great interest given the topic of male power and control. More about the Duke University program at the link.

    Deconstructing masculinity’: Duke Men’s Project aims to facilitate discussions of male privilege and patriarchy

    The Women’s Center is launching a new initiative focused on redefining masculinity for Duke men.

    The Duke Men’s Project is a nine-week long, storytelling-based program starting Wednesday that aims to discuss masculinity, feminism and intersectionality. It hopes to “create a space of brotherhood fellowship dedicated to interrogating male privilege and patriarchy,” according to its Facebook page.

    http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2016/09/deconstructing-masculinity-duke-mens-project-aims-to-facilitate-discussions-of-male-privilege-and-patriarchy

  190. @ Christiane:

    Christiane, I checked back a few articles I’d read some time ago and there are just long lists of “This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards” so, no, not at this time.

  191. Tom R wrote:

    “Loving God. Loving each other. Loving our neighbor.”

    If that is “love” – and no doubt the pious authors of the letter DO think they are “loving” Jessica by sending her this letter – then leave me out. You have to be demented to think this is “love”.

    I am still trying to come to grips with the way love gets redefined in church- I have seen that a person’s concept of love will adapt to follow their concept of God’s love. The way it gets defined in church can sometimes be so contrary to our natural intuitions.

  192. The gender wars are getting old. Why can’t we just be who we are without having to denigrate one gender in order to build up the other. This is also an interesting article: https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2016/09/23/effeminism-and-the-war-on-boys/.

    As a white, straight, Christian, cis-gender male, I am assumed to be a bigoted, racist misogynist until I take extraordinary steps to prove that I am not. And even then it will never be enough to satisfy those not like me because of all the privileges extended to me through the luck of having been born this way. This insanity has to stop. I long for the day when we can respect and value other humans without having to worry about labels.

  193. Victorious wrote:

    I don’t know if this has been posted, but I find it of great interest given the topic of male power and control. More about the Duke University program at the link.

    My last comment above was meant to be a response to this one, but I forgot to link it to your comment.

  194. Gram3 wrote:

    I do not know what the solution is for civil authorities, but the church must do better than this for everyone who is abused.

    I think it depends on where you are in the country, what state and jurisdiction. I am in California in an urban area (Silicon Valley) where there is a lot of training and it is taken very seriously at all levels. Additionally, child endangerment charges are added to those who commit domestic violence when children are present.

  195. In response to earlier questions…

    There are many reasons why an abused wife would not want to have her husband publicly rebuked by the church, and would rather have it handled more discretely –

    1. Public humiliation can make a man more angry, volatile, and dangerous, as well as less likely to cooperate with divorce proceedings.

    2. Courts in some states frown on what could be perceived as one parent publicly disparaging another. This can affect custody rulings.

    3. She does not wish to upset or embarrass her children.

    4. She does not want to risk her husband losing his job when her family depends on child support.

    5. He presents no risk to other church members.

  196. @ Ken F:

    Ken, your birth, due to no choice of your own automatically places you in white privilege. It matters not how you have conducted yourself as a citizen –you are pronounced guilty. The Chinese had a similar view of the educated during the cultural revolution.

    It’s the lefts version of Calvinism.

    If we are ever able to judge individual character and effort apart from some group identity, it will be a step in the right direction. We are going backwards.

  197. @ Ken F:

    “And even then it will never be enough to satisfy those not like me because of all the privileges extended to me through the luck of having been born this way. This insanity has to stop. I long for the day when we can respect and value other humans without having to worry about labels.”
    ++++++++++++

    I understand. but look at it this way — it is so very recent that people with ‘minority orientations’ (guess i can use the descriptor) are begininning to be acknowledged by society at large as human beings, and not freaks who have to hide for their own safety. it’s so new.

    perhaps it’s like someone held hostage, who is now free — once out of those circumstances they are confronted with a lot to process:

    the pain, the injustice, the cruelty, the fear, why it happened, why it continued for so long, the anger of having being so cruelly mistreated, the elation of being set free, joy, hope for a better future…

    and the emotional complexity that even their longed-for freedom is still fraught with the consequences of the cruel mistreatment. they are not unscathed. and many ‘majorities’ are still cold and/or hostile to them.

    i’d say give them a big portion of grace, and patience. and appreciation of the fact that your, my ‘majority orientation’ means that our lives have been exempt from the kind of hardship and rejection which they have had to face.

    (i’m trying not to sound lectury)

  198. Lydia wrote:

    @ Virginia Knowles:

    I would just caution that statistical history proves the most dangerous time in an abused spouses life is when they decide to leave. I am glad she has people who will help her, though.

    I would say that is actually a good reason to leave it to her discretion. Maybe she thought his being thrown out of the church would be more dangerous to her? I don’t know.

  199. @ Lydia:

    “If we are ever able to judge individual character and effort apart from some group identity, it will be a step in the right direction. We are going backwards.”
    +++++++++++++++

    I don’t see it as backwards, I see it as processing towards equilibrium.

  200. @ Ken F:

    sorry, ken… in my comment just above, i saw ‘cis-gendered’ and my mind went to the sexual orientation label, sexual equality. but i can see you were referring to gender labels. but perhaps what i was trying to convey is still relevant.

    gender equality is such a hot issue these days. i believe it will become more and more of the norm, and some day it will all quiet down and perhaps be a non-issue.

    to be ‘judged not by the [gender of one’s appearance] but the content of one’s character’ is a lofty dream. maybe some day we’ll get there, but certainly awareness of inequities and efforts to counter them are better than the previous status quo. so in this sense, i consider things progress.

    it’s complex, though.

    you’re a good guy. i have to think that it won’t take long for people who make false assumptions about you to recognize your good character and to chill out.

  201. elastigirl wrote:

    my ‘majority orientation’ means that our lives have been exempt from the kind of hardship and rejection which they have had to face

    This is is a questionable assumption at best. Putting “white” people into a box is no better than putting “non-white” people in boxes. It’s all bad.

  202. @ elastigirl:
    Don’t you think most of the culture is way ahead in gender equality? An interesting indicator are female college enrollments in professions like medical, legal, etc. They have begun to outpace males.

    Its the church dragging us back in time.

  203. Ken F wrote:

    The gender wars are getting old. Why can’t we just be who we are without having to denigrate one gender in order to build up the other.

    Sign me up. Mutual respect, kindness, and honor would go a long way toward reducing the battle of the sexes and also bad behavior by both sexes, IMO, and hopefully the micromanaging that goes on in the supposed pursuit of equality. Showing my age…

  204. Velour wrote:

    Additionally, child endangerment charges are added to those who commit domestic violence when children are present.

    Thanks for that good information.

  205. Lydia wrote:

    We are going backwards.

    I think that is true in many ways, sadly. Certain people profit in various ways by emphasizing our differences rather than what we have in common. Also there is value attached to being The Victim or the Victim Advocate. I am *not* saying that victims should be silenced or that they should not have advocates. I am referring to those who cynically profit from grievances with no real concern for addressing the actual problems because their revenue stream depends on representing or being perpetual victims. Divide and conquer is an old strategy because it is an effective strategy.

  206. Gram3 wrote:

    Velour wrote:
    Additionally, child endangerment charges are added to those who commit domestic violence when children are present.
    Thanks for that good information.

    Welcome.

  207. @ Ken F:

    “Putting “white” people into a box is no better than putting “non-white” people in boxes. It’s all bad.”
    +++++++++++++++++

    I don’t want to put any people group in any box. There are distinctives about people groups, though. And distinctives in the life experiences of different people groups in place and time.

    Considering race, and speaking from the realm of observation and experience, i remember going to a restaurant with my friend from Kenya, along with my parents. I am caucasian, as are my parents. She was clearly treated differently than i and my parents were. We were consistently given preference and priority. Subtle things, but keenly felt. It made me very sad.

    I as a parent have a less complex set of worries for my kids than do my african american friends.

  208. Gram3 wrote:

    I think that is true in many ways, sadly. Certain people profit in various ways by emphasizing our differences rather than what we have in common. Also there is value attached to being The Victim or the Victim Advocate. I am *not* saying that victims should be silenced or that they should not have advocates. I am referring to those who cynically profit from grievances with no real concern for addressing the actual problems because their revenue stream depends on representing or being perpetual victims. Divide and conquer is an old strategy because it is an effective strategy.

    I’ve posted this before, but it’s worth re-posting for this thread: http://www.lynneforrest.com/articles/2008/06/the-faces-of-victim/#victim. The current system seems bent on keeping everyone dancing on the victim triangle. There seems to be little to no public support to get people off the triangle.

  209. @ Lydia:

    i’m just speaking about how a ‘majority person’ might respond in the moment should they feel accused as guilty by association for being majority. I know what this feels like, i don’t like it, i don’t feel it’s fair, but then I reason out the advantages i’ve had and let it go.

  210. Gram3 wrote:

    Divide and conquer is an old strategy because it is an effective strategy.

    Bingo. It is one reason I just can’t bring myself to do group affiliations anymore. Groups of all stripes are becoming increasingly narrow and agenda driven which scares me. Maybe there is hope. My kids seem to enjoy having friends from all walks of life and interests. Cracks me up that my artsy one has STEM Pakistani school friends who help her with math over FaceTime. They became friends in study hall last year discussing how their respective religions have Abraham in common. :o)

  211. elastigirl wrote:

    I know what this feels like, i don’t like it, i don’t feel it’s fair, but then I reason out the advantages i’ve had and let it go.

    I think that’s a healthy way to deal with it on a one on one level probably.

    The problem is when negative stereotypes get systemized and people are penalized for what they might be, rather than what they are.

  212. @ elastigirl:
    Being around the whole public college and gov realm, I can tell you the opportunities our society lays out are ten fold for certain groups. I think this is a good thing but not enough take advantage of them.

  213. elastigirl wrote:

    i remember going to a restaurant with my friend from Kenya, along with my parents. I am caucasian, as are my parents. She was clearly treated differently than i and my parents were. We were consistently given preference and priority. Subtle things, but keenly felt. It made me very sad.
    I as a parent have a less complex set of worries for my kids than do my african american friends.

    Yes.

    My African-American friends who are parents always warn their children: about how to dress to be out in public, do their hair, not to congregate with groups of people, not to go to malls with groups of kids, and on and on. Long list. It could end very badly for a child of color in a variety of settings, and the parents know it.

  214. siteseer wrote:

    a lot of them have still not accepted the fact that child sexual abuse is a real thing and not just a vendetta against priests.

    Gosh, doesn’t that apply to so many other categories of abuse in so many churches?

  215. @ Darlene:

    “I hung out with some spiritually minded, thought provoking hippies. Does that count? ”
    ++++++++++

    well, sure. really, the most fascinating, most memorable & significant things in life are experiences with people. people are great!

  216. @ Virginia Knowles:
    Thanks for clarifying things, Virginia. You provide good considerations for such situations. There are so many folks who have been impacted by this man, including church leaders and other members who have responded in various ways to hurting members in the church family.

  217. @ Lydia:

    “Don’t you think most of the culture is way ahead in gender equality? An interesting indicator are female college enrollments in professions like medical, legal, etc. They have begun to outpace males.

    Its the church dragging us back in time.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++

    oh my gosh, entirely. it’s one of the main reasons i roll my eyes at church culture and can no longer take any it seriously.

    from reading portions of “Half The Sky”, relevant articles, news pieces, documentaries, & my own observation of people and society it is clear to me that female equality & opportunity is the path to community success, econonic success, business success (aside from the fact it is morally right). It seems clear to many world leaders in various fields, as well.

    it is equally clear to me that outposts of christian culture which continue in this Female Subordination For God! belief and program are going to become ever more irrelevant and the justified butt of jokes.

    NOTE TO PASTORS, CHURCH LEADERS, AND CHURCH ATTENDERS: you didn’t really do your due diligence on this subject, did you. just sort of took what the big name professional christians put out there for your consumption and accepted it.

    you need to stop doing that.

  218. siteseer wrote:

    Christiane, I checked back a few articles I’d read some time ago and there are just long lists of “This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards” so, no, not at this time.

    Thanks for responding. Do you remember where it was that removed the articles you HAD read?

  219. siteseer wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    If you are speaking about that idiot Bill Donohue of the rogue ‘Catholic League’, I can tell you that he is at war with the Vatican.

    Are you saying none of the money is coming from the Catholic church? Can Catholics know that none of their tithes and offerings are going to support lobbyists working to defeat sex abuse legislation?

    My thought is that because of the horrific nature of victim abuse, any KNOWING supported effort to cover it up or prevent justice for victims is so egregiously and morally wrong that it would be a matter for confession as a sin. At any level where a person consciously decides to support evil, there is no other description for that than ‘sin’.

    I do know that it is the goal of the Church to seek justice FOR victims. I do know that people like Donohue and his ilk are not on board with that goal.

    There is no place in the Church for justification of what was done, for its cover-up, or for the prevention of justice to victims. Francis is committed to doing what is right. If people like Donohue and his followers oppose Francis, I am not surprised by that. Donohue is more at home with the alt-right than with the ethics and morality of Catholic social justice any day.

  220. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    In response to earlier questions…

    There are many reasons why an abused wife would not want to have her husband publicly rebuked by the church, and would rather have it handled more discretely –

    1. Public humiliation can make a man more angry, volatile, and dangerous, as well as less likely to cooperate with divorce proceedings.

    2. Courts in some states frown on what could be perceived as one parent publicly disparaging another. This can affect custody rulings.

    3. She does not wish to upset or embarrass her children.

    4. She does not want to risk her husband losing his job when her family depends on child support.

    5. He presents no risk to other church members.

    Very thoughtful comment. I see little in ‘public’ humiliation to be considered a way for Christians to treat anyone, considering that Our Lord’s crucifixion was itself intended also to be a public humiliation.

    If we have in our faith no other way to confront those who do wrong than to use the methods of this world, I fear we have missed something important in the gospels about righting wrong. Our Lord offered us a better way and the sensitivity of your comment shows an understanding of this truth.

  221. At an IBC we attended many years ago, public humiliation was used and the person subject to thus humiliation lasted committed suicide, leaving a wife and two daughters ages 7 and 10. I still have nightmares of that whole terrible situation.

  222. Ken F wrote:

    The current system seems bent on keeping everyone dancing on the victim triangle. There seems to be little to no public support to get people off the triangle.

    If people actually got off the triangle, there’d be no more doublepluswarmfeelies for the Morally Superior Rescuers!

  223. Lydia wrote:

    Ken, your birth, due to no choice of your own automatically places you in white privilege. It matters not how you have conducted yourself as a citizen –you are pronounced guilty. The Chinese had a similar view of the educated during the cultural revolution.

    It’s the lefts version of Calvinism.

    Thuggery and all.

  224. Gram3 wrote:

    The police, courts, and church do not get virtue points or PC points for protecting men and their children when the abuser is a female.

    Yet another push for Complementariamism Uber Alles — self-defense for the men!

  225. Christiane wrote:

    If you are speaking about that idiot Bill Donohue of the rogue ‘Catholic League’, I can tell you that he is at war with the Vatican. The Pope removed his right-wing buddy, Cardinal Burke (a notorious misogynist), and Bill Donohue went berserk when Francis also said the Church should apologize to LGBT folks for its failure to minister to them.

    Bill Donohue has more in common with the fundamentalist/evangelical far right devotees of the Republican Right. He doesn’t represent post Vatican II Catholicism’s spirit. He has NO authority in the Church. His organization is NOT related to the Vatican.

    Lunatic Fringe with Tridentine Latin Mass and Rosaries?

  226. Max wrote:

    The Calvinist predestined elect mumbo-jumbo gospel is not good tidings that brings great joy to ALL people.

    It does to the (self-proclaimed) Predestined Elect, and that’s all that matters.

  227. Tom R wrote:

    I laughed when I saw the PCA footer on the stationary:

    “Loving God. Loving People. Loving Neighbors.”

    war is peace
    freedom is slavery
    ignorance is strength

  228. Darlene wrote:

    What a waste of time and money. The certificate doesn’t qualify a person to legitimately practice counseling in any place of employment. They don’t even do observations and follow up on the student who has taken their courses to find out if they are even competent to counsel anyone.

    So it’s like an Honorary Doctorate from My Pastor BFF’s Bible College?

  229. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Lunatic Fringe with Tridentine Latin Mass and Rosaries?

    Lunatic fringe with alt-right hard-core misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, etc.
    Glad to see this group get kicked to the curb by Francis. They are a bad lot for sure.

  230. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Max wrote:

    The Calvinist predestined elect mumbo-jumbo gospel is not good tidings that brings great joy to ALL people.

    It does to the (self-proclaimed) Predestined Elect, and that’s all that matters.

    What is most troubling about this crowd is the unrestrained joy they manage to express over their thoughts of the hellish demise of everyone else. What a herd of goats hollering ‘Lord, Lord’, without a grain of empathy or compassion for those they see as their inferiors. They draw to themselves a following, though …. bullies, wife-abusers, power-seekers, greedy leader$hip, misogynists, and male idolators. In short, goat city.

  231. Leslie wrote:

    At an IBC we attended many years ago, public humiliation was used and the person subject to thus humiliation lasted committed suicide, leaving a wife and two daughters ages 7 and 10. I still have nightmares of that whole terrible situation.

    What a horrible experience for you. That looks like a dreadful group, not at all Christian. So warped.
    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/johnshore/2013/11/the-foul-toxicity-of-the-8-million-strong-independent-fundamental-baptists-headed-by-bob-jones-university/

  232. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    Max, she had her reasons why this was better for her family, and the leaders were responsively honoring her wishes.

    So true! The victim in the circumstance should be given great respect in dealing with their own situation. Some of these situations are quite volatile and dangerous until things are worked out often involving restraining orders, etc.

  233. Ken F wrote:

    Why can’t we just be who we are without having to denigrate one gender in order to build up the other.

    We don’t need to denigrate one gender to build up another. Some people do it, but they dont have to. They choose to do it. I have seen it on this blog, maybe you have as well. I also know that people who have been abused and associate that with a certain gender, often go through a period of anger when they say denigrating things. Hopefully they get past that stage.

  234. Would kissing the elder’s signet rings help assuage the risk of excommunication? This appears to be what they figuratively and maybe literally crave.

  235. Bridget wrote:

    We don’t need to denigrate one gender to build up another. Some people do it, but they dont have to. They choose to do it. I have seen it on this blog, maybe you have as well. I also know that people who have been abused and associate that with a certain gender, often go through a period of anger when they say denigrating things. Hopefully they get past that stage.

    Well, I’m going to go out on a limb here. Personally, I’ve never seen either gender as a whole denigrated on this blog (most definitely not this blog). Now, a time or two, I’ve pointed out the historical fact that women as a whole have been discriminated against throughout history, and I think only those who are ignorant of history would deny this. But put-downs of men in general (or women), no I’ve never seen that. Isn’t this, though, exactly how people are silenced so they won’t speak up against injustice? For example, if you’re a woman and you speak up, then you’re angry and bitter (and therefore we should discount your experience???), you hate men, you’re a liberal, a feminist, a lesbian, and frankly, your probably don’t wear makeup and you most certainly don’t shave your legs! (I definitely do both.) Some might call this emotional black-mail. Now, as for what this college did with men, yeah, that was extremely bad, as bad as those colleges that have sessions berating whites. Two wrongs do not make a right. As for denigrating one gender, I think it’s our beloved comps and the usual suspects on that side that do that.

  236. Leslie wrote:

    At an IBC we attended many years ago, public humiliation was used and the person subject to thus humiliation lasted committed suicide, leaving a wife and two daughters ages 7 and 10. I still have nightmares of that whole terrible situation.

    That is heartbreaking, I’m so sorry.

  237. Christiane wrote:

    My thought is that because of the horrific nature of victim abuse, any KNOWING supported effort to cover it up or prevent justice for victims is so egregiously and morally wrong that it would be a matter for confession as a sin. At any level where a person consciously decides to support evil, there is no other description for that than ‘sin’.

    I do know that it is the goal of the Church to seek justice FOR victims. I do know that people like Donohue and his ilk are not on board with that goal.

    There is no place in the Church for justification of what was done, for its cover-up, or for the prevention of justice to victims. Francis is committed to doing what is right. If people like Donohue and his followers oppose Francis, I am not surprised by that. Donohue is more at home with the alt-right than with the ethics and morality of Catholic social justice any day.

    I am not referring to Donohue, I am referring to the money coming from the Catholic church itself, to support lobbying efforts to defeat efforts to remove the statute of limitations. These monies are included with monies to lobby for other causes so as to hide the amounts but it’s been estimated to be in the millions. Are the tithes of caring Catholics going to support that?

  238. Friend wrote:

    Gosh, doesn’t that apply to so many other categories of abuse in so many churches?

    Absolutely, it does. To all, as far as I have seen. And needs to change.

  239. @ siteseer:
    I have previously asked you for a link. I am requesting your sources of information so that I may examine them. What I have found recently is that when I check into where people are getting their info, I find SOMETIMES that there is a problem with the source. Not to say that is what this is in your present concern, no. But it helps to understand where you are coming from.

  240. siteseer wrote:

    @ Christiane:

    Christiane, I checked back a few articles I’d read some time ago and there are just long lists of “This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards” so, no, not at this time.

    I am referring to this previous request.
    If you have no clue, that makes an end to it.

    In the world of blogging, when you come across people who start a comment with ‘are you saying that ….’, it works for good to give the maximum amount of credibility to that person’s point of view as possible, but also to find out where they have been reading and getting their information. Blogging is not the optimum form of communication, but it can work better at times with additional clarification, when that clarification is provided.

  241. siteseer wrote:

    Leslie wrote:
    At an IBC we attended many years ago, public humiliation was used and the person subject to thus humiliation lasted committed suicide, leaving a wife and two daughters ages 7 and 10. I still have nightmares of that whole terrible situation.
    That is heartbreaking, I’m so sorry.

    Me too. I’m sorry.

  242. Looks like the discussion is going down another rabbit trail, and it makes me sad for Jessica Fore, who is probably following the comments. 🙁

  243. Oh wow.

    So, not only is this church down the road from me, but my wife knows Jessica (Jessica was her discipleship leader in college). I’ve been aware of her story, but hadn’t realized the church had gotten so nasty with her.

    From everything I’ve heard from my wife, Jessica is a very strong, courageous woman.

  244. Bridget wrote:

    Honestly, I don’t even understand what their reasoning was for firing her from her job.

    I lost my job as a worship leader when I told the church I was planning/considering divorce.

    Divorce is a big no-no at churches; it doesn’t really matter why.

    I didn’t even have a problem with it at the time. I believed I deserved to lose my job (fortunately, it was just part-time for me) 🙁

  245. I saw our former youth pastor in the grocery store yesterday and asked questions about PCA church structure from national level down. He says it is not much top down. No one at the top – neither convention moderator nor stated clerk – has much positional power at all. Nearly everything happens only in local congregation. Most people, including myself, don’t even know their names.

    This is in sharp contrast to SGM, where it was all about CJ Mahaney and the other leaders, and the whole sexist, abuse perpetuating manipulation culture crapola started at the top and flowed down all over the unwashed masses.

    I am going to do a little research and find what efforts are currently underway to address DV issues in the PCA denomination. This is something that should be addressed at the national conference and through other avenues in the meantime.

    I am also going to write an email to my own pastors and elders and see what can be done in their circles of influence and beyond. I had a brief conversation with one of the elders a couple of weeks ago about Jessica Fore’s case and another one, and he was responsive.

  246. The PCA, according to aforementioned youth pastor, was designed to be more congregational from the beginning. The PCUSA is more hierarchical.

    So I think it is more on a case by case situation with less recourse up the official chain of authority.

    Which means change may be most effective by educating as many individual pastors/elders as possible and imploring them to continue the discussion with the other pastors/elders they know.

  247. Also, I wish this thread had not turned toward bashing the Reformed denominations. I see a lot of stereotypes written here that do not characterize the sweet grace I have seen in my years as a PCA member. The PCA church has been a very safe place for me.

  248. @ Virginia Knowles:

    I had an excellent experience with multiple PCA churches. When I left my church during the divorce, the (PCA) church I went to was supportive, allowed me space, and really helped me recover my faith. The pastor of the church I went to after that, also PCA, listened to my story and said “that’s emotional abuse, and I believe you had every Biblical right to divorce”. That meant the world to me.

    I’ve also heard some horror stories about some PCA churches, and it hits home that Jessica’s church is so close. I’d be certain that the pastor who told me that knows her pastors (I no longer go to that church to ask).

  249. Just Googled.

    http://religionnews.com/2014/06/20/denomination-confronts-child-sexual-abuse-positive-step-forward/

    Boz Tchividjian has reported that the PCA took a strong stand on child sexual abuse and domestic violence at their 2014 national meeting. He spoke there and helped word the statement.

    So again, I think the issue getting the word out among the pastors AND putting some power into the existing structure to officially address the issue. Maybe they need policy guidelines? I don’t know the status of this.

  250. Hasn’t Jessica said she is trying to get her local congregation to comply with the existing PCA policy? Their national policy is not the problem. It is the local out working. So it is not “the PCA” excommunicating her, but a non-compliant session in her congregation. The lines of authority need to be more effective to enforce policy on this kind of issue in the local churches.

  251. @ Jeff S:
    You can still ask, Jeff!

    I continued conversation with the pastors of the SGM church l left six years ago. I strongly stated my concerns about all kinds of abuse issues and they listened – even the new senior pastor who came in later. They left SGM eventually.

    Like Jessica, I sent an email to all I personally knew in the congregation. I expressed my concerns about SGM and CJ Mahaney. This was when he supposedly stepped down, a year after we left. The pastors weren’t too happy about that, but I think it made a difference.

  252. It is sad that Jessica’s church is treating her this way. But not because it’s Presbyterian, but because that it is a church at all. We’ve seen this happen time after time in all main stream denominations. Some of the churches get away from what the national policy of their particular denomination is. They form their own rules. I don’t understand and I never will why these men of God treat people this way. All we can do is pray for Jessica and those we know like Jessica that have gone thru things like this at their churches. So Jessica, you have another friend in Texas. Praying for a solution my friend.

  253. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    Also, I wish this thread had not turned toward bashing the Reformed denominations. I see a lot of stereotypes written here that do not characterize the sweet grace I have seen in my years as a PCA member. The PCA church has been a very safe place for me.

    I think you might have misunderstood. The responses are from comments promoting denominations as something they have a pattern of proving over years, they aren’t.

    Individual churches can be another thing entirely.

    As an ecample, An acquaintance of mine left her CBF church where she worked because a pastor, a female btw, violated her confidentiality on a very personal matter. She has been Youth pastor at a PCA for several years now and loves that church.

  254. Lydia wrote:

    Individual churches can be another thing entirely.

    Yes. I think I was trying to make that point above, but it got derailed. Reformed isn’t the issue either as there are reformed denoms that are very safe. PCA seems hit or miss, from the stories I’ve seen.

  255. Jeff S wrote:

    I lost my job as a worship leader when I told the church I was planning/considering divorce.
    Divorce is a big no-no at churches; it doesn’t really matter why.
    I didn’t even have a problem with it at the time. I believed I deserved to lose my job (fortunately, it was just part-time for me)

    I remember that happened to you. It was wrong, IMHO. Each divorce situation is unique and should be evaluated on the individual circumstances. It is not simply black and white like so many churches want it to be.

  256. @ Bridget:

    Oh yes, it was wrong. I was so deep in the fog at the time it just seemed reasonable.

    I wasn’t looking for the church to defend me. I was looking for it to judge me. I felt like I deserved judgement 🙁

  257. Jeff S wrote:

    From everything I’ve heard from my wife, Jessica is a very strong, courageous woman.

    It appears to be still true, it takes a lot of courage to stand alone facing up to the institutional machine. Even when 100% correct doubts still filter in. I wish those who know the situation up close would take a break from their self justification and have the ability to simply admire her strength and then muster some courage themselves to do the right thing.

  258. Jeff S wrote:

    I wasn’t looking for the church to defend me. I was looking for it to judge me. I felt like I deserved judgement

    That is so sad. I’m sorry they didn’t do better anyway.

  259. Lea wrote:

    Jeff S wrote:
    I wasn’t looking for the church to defend me. I was looking for it to judge me. I felt like I deserved judgement
    That is so sad. I’m sorry they didn’t do better anyway.

    Thank you. Of course, that belief largely came from the church, so it’s really no surprise.

    That is the insidious thing about what many churches teach about marriage and suffering. We’ll assume that we deserve it when it comes.

    I’m glad I’ve gotten free from that.

  260. Jeff S wrote:

    I wasn’t looking for the church to defend me. I was looking for it to judge me. I felt like I deserved judgement

    Curious thing, these feelings of culpability and guilt. I’ve observed that it’s a very human thing to want to blame one’s self even when there is no legitimate blame to be assigned. It seems to cross all boundaries of religion and creed too, some sects even capitalizing on it as further leverage with which to manipulate their adherents.

  261. TWW is so one sided in most of its posted issues. This is one of them. I would like to hear from the other side though I doubt that will happen.

    Lot’s of people are passing judgement and throwing around scripture like there’s a surplus of justification on Jessica’s side. I don’t know what the whole truth is…but I’d like to know. Anyone out there from this church who can prove it like to chime in?

  262. Thomas

    We are often one sided because we find instances in which we believe abuse has occurred and write about it. However, if you read our blog for awhile, yo uwill find we have no problem with discipline for adultery, embezzelment, and other serious issues. This is ust one silly use of disciplining with which we disagree. Also, anyone can comment here, even those who disagree with us. So, call them up and get them to chime away!

  263. Two sides to EVERY story. This girl is brilliant absolutely brilliant. I pray for the truth……the REAL truth to be revealed.

  264. Thomas Beckit wrote:

    Lot’s of people are passing judgement and throwing around scripture like there’s a surplus of justification on Jessica’s side.

    What does she need justification for?

    Why are there even “sides”?

    Do you think there’s a possibility that she wasn’t abused?

    Assuming you believe that she was abused, do you think there is any information that could make it OK that her church fired her for being unwilling to cohabitate with an abuser.

    For you, this may be some remote issue of deciding between sides. For Jessica, this is an issue of trying to survive being a victim through no fault of her own, and having the church take steps to increase her suffering through the experience.

    The only “side” here should have been Jessica’s, and all God fearing people should desire justice for the vulnerable and oppressed.

  265. @ Thomas Beckit:

    I don’t really understand your comment. The church leadership indictment is in the post. That is their version of events, right? . We are looking at Jessica’s side. Seeking truth in all things matters. It is no easy endeavor. It requires transparency, honesty, etc.

    In this particular instance, we have an unnamed “professional” licensed counselor who never met with Jessica YET pronounced to the leaders his “professional” opinion on her.

  266. Thomas Beckit wrote:

    TWW is so one sided in most of its posted issues.

    I agree with that! Just stop for a moment and consider why that is the case. There is a differential between the session of a church and a member of that church. The big one we are seeing here is the ability of one party to control much of the information flow to the congregation and to other parties beyond. We are also seeing that there is a lack of transparency in the process on the part of the elders. The elders can excommunicate a member, and in the process, destroy his/her reputation in that congregation because the reflexive response of pewpeons is to side with the strong horse lest the same fate befall them. There is precious little real accountability for the actions of the elders. Sure, she might be able to appeal their decision, but much of the damage would have been done.

    When it comes to TWW posts and comments, what you are seeing is an attempt to correct those differentials and to pursue justice and mercy for the victims of various kinds of abuse perpetrated or condoned by the church or its leadership. Isn’t that a worthy work? I think it is and is in keeping with our Lord’s own actions WRT religious leaders.

    Another purpose of places like TWW is to serve as a warning to future abusers that their misdeeds may not go undiscovered because they cannot unilaterally silence the victims by various means. Isn’t prevention of future abuse a worthy work?

    Yet another purpose that places like TWW serves is to examine abusive systems which are hailed as Biblical by leaders. Dismantling abusive doctrinal systems will also prevent future abuse *and* will also help victims of these systems heal as their experiences are validated by the experiences of others. Isn’t promoting the healing of victims and exposing abusive systems a worthy work?

  267. Lydia wrote:

    I don’t really understand your comment

    Shorter Thomas: If we had all the facts we would probably see that it was the woman’s fault.

  268. Gram3 wrote:

    Yet another purpose that places like TWW serves is to examine abusive systems which are hailed as Biblical by leaders.

    I think all of these little case studies are some sort of root cause analysis for churches, should they choose to pay attention. Where did this go wrong? Where did the system break down and what can we do to fix it in the future? They also serves as warnings for members of the congregation where these things may go wrong so they aren’t blindsided.

  269. Lea wrote:

    I think all of these little case studies are some sort of root cause analysis for churches, should they choose to pay attention. Where did this go wrong? Where did the system break down and what can we do to fix it in the future?

    If only they could be seen that way.

    Instead, they see them as attacks.

  270. dee wrote:

    Gram3 wrote:

    Once again, a woman with a sign and a woman who attends a Gospel Community Group needs to be excommunicated.

    But the sign hurt the feeling of the manly leaders.

    The sign implies that the woman has been abused, not shepherded by those she is not supposed to trouble because they are watching over her soul.

    It does not fit with the official message and agenda and thus must be stamped out.

  271. @ Lea:
    9 Marx was listening. Their response was to encourage their psstir/elder followers to be more benevolent dictators’. :o)

  272. Deb wrote:

    Looks like the discussion is going down another rabbit trail, and it makes me sad for Jessica Fore, who is probably following the comments.

    My question after reading the OP is while educating “leaders” about abuse is well and good, why stop there? Why not offer that training to everyone?

  273. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    The PCA, according to aforementioned youth pastor, was designed to be more congregational from the beginning. The PCUSA is more hierarchical.

    So I think it is more on a case by case situation with less recourse up the official chain of authority.

    Which means change may be most effective by educating as many individual pastors/elders as possible and imploring them to continue the discussion with the other pastors/elders they know.

    The PCA is a spectrum that ranges from rigid patriarchal churches on one end to “liberal” churches that may (gasp) allow women some roles in the church besides cooking up the food for potlucks, running the nursery, and making sure meals get provided for families with a newborn baby or someone in the hospital.

  274. @ Refugee:
    Not meaning to besmirch the entire denomination; as someone said earlier, there is a wide variation between the character and practice of individual PCA churches.

  275. @ Refugee:

    Educating everyone is good, but leaders with power have the ability to make a victims life hell in their ignorance.

    For example, firing them and removing their ability to make a living.

  276. Thomas Beckit wrote:

    I would like to hear from the other side though I doubt that will happen.

    Your comment is very close to the “you don’t have all he facts” gambit. I reject the claim that we are unable to render an opinion based on what has been presented. I have been only reading here for 18 months yet in that time I have seen this claim made on many occasions, even claiming inside information they didn’t divulge. In the final judgement it was clear, there was no alternate narrative and the claims we didn’t have all the facts was just an attempt to shut down the discussion so the wrongdoers could continue.

    If there are errors in Jessica’s story anyone with access to another narrative is free to post such information here. That I also doubt this will happen is that I don’t think there is a reasonable explanation. Finally, in the past the institutions could simply grind up someone like Jessica without any accountability, sites like TWW give them a voice.

  277. Bill M wrote:

    Thomas Beckit wrote:

    I would like to hear from the other side though I doubt that will happen.

    Your comment is very close to the “you don’t have all he facts” gambit.

    I might add that Thomas Beckit was murdered because he dared oppose those in power, specifically King Henry. Unless your real name is Beckit, I do not think you do justice to his name using it here.

  278. Bill M wrote:

    If there are errors in Jessica’s story anyone with access to another narrative is free to post such information here.

    I think a good rule of thumb is when ‘insiders’ come by and post vague ‘you don’t know all the facts’ comments there is either nothing else to know or they are just trying to shut you up. If they post specifics (which I have actually never seen happen, fancy that, then maybe we will learn something new. Generally not, though.

  279. Lea wrote:

    If they post specifics (which I have actually never seen happen, fancy that, then maybe we will learn something new. Generally not, though.

    Agreed, the deebs have always done their homework and have accordingly earned my trust. I still reserve the right to trust but verify.

  280. @ Refugee:
    Refugee wrote:

    Virginia Knowles wrote:

    The PCA, according to aforementioned youth pastor, was designed to be more congregational from the beginning. The PCUSA is more hierarchical.

    So I think it is more on a case by case situation with less recourse up the official chain of authority.

    Which means change may be most effective by educating as many individual pastors/elders as possible and imploring them to continue the discussion with the other pastors/elders they know.

    The PCA is a spectrum that ranges from rigid patriarchal churches on one end to “liberal” churches that may (gasp) allow women some roles in the church besides cooking up the food for potlucks, running the nursery, and making sure meals get provided for families with a newborn baby or someone in the hospital.

    Agreed! The PCA does not officially ordain deaconesses, but some, like ours, elect unordained deaconesses who function just like the deacons. All adult members were on the list eligible for nomination, including divorced and separated women.

  281. Virginia Knowles wrote:

    @ Refugee:
    Refuger’s quote started here in my reply above

    The PCA is a spectrum that ranges from rigid patriarchal churches on one end to “liberal” churches that may (gasp) allow women some roles in the church besides cooking up the food for potlucks, running the nursery, and making sure meals get provided for families with a newborn baby or someone in the hospital.

    My response was this…
    Agreed! The PCA does not officially ordain deaconesses, but some, like ours, elect unordained deaconesses who function just like the deacons. All adult members were on the list eligible for nomination, including divorced and separated women.

  282. Patriciamc wrote:

    Looking back over that letter, I’m amazed at the sheer gaul of that church. My knee-jerk reaction would be to tell them what to do with their letter and their attitude.

    Yeah, same here. It’s not like the PCA makes any claims to be the One True Church or anything. They are one option among thousands. If I were a member there, I’d just tell them to take a hike and then take one myself — to a different church. Who needs these clods with their self-appointed “authority”?

  283. siteseer wrote:

    Christiane wrote:

    My thought is that because of the horrific nature of victim abuse, any KNOWING supported effort to cover it up or prevent justice for victims is so egregiously and morally wrong that it would be a matter for confession as a sin. At any level where a person consciously decides to support evil, there is no other description for that than ‘sin’.

    I do know that it is the goal of the Church to seek justice FOR victims. I do know that people like Donohue and his ilk are not on board with that goal.

    There is no place in the Church for justification of what was done, for its cover-up, or for the prevention of justice to victims. Francis is committed to doing what is right. If people like Donohue and his followers oppose Francis, I am not surprised by that. Donohue is more at home with the alt-right than with the ethics and morality of Catholic social justice any day.

    I am not referring to Donohue, I am referring to the money coming from the Catholic church itself, to support lobbying efforts to defeat efforts to remove the statute of limitations. These monies are included with monies to lobby for other causes so as to hide the amounts but it’s been estimated to be in the millions. Are the tithes of caring Catholics going to support that?

    Oh great. More Catholic-bashing. Some people never let up…and as Christiane says, sources would be nice. Rabbit trail indeed. Outta here for now.

  284. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    Who needs these clods with their self-appointed “authority”?

    I don’t get how they come by that ‘authority’ as they have no belief in the apostolic succession (?)

  285. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    Oh great. More Catholic-bashing. Some people never let up…and as Christiane says, sources would be nice. Rabbit trail indeed. Outta here for now.

    Bashing?
    I hadn’t noticed. 🙂

  286. siteseer wrote:

    I am not referring to Donohue, I am referring to the money coming from the Catholic church itself, to support lobbying efforts to defeat efforts to remove the statute of limitations. These monies are included with monies to lobby for other causes so as to hide the amounts but it’s been estimated to be in the millions. Are the tithes of caring Catholics going to support that?

    Is this what you are referring to?

    Catholic Church spent millions fighting NY bill that would allow sex abuse victims to sue attackers
    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/catholic-church-spends-millions-fighting-ny-bill-that-would-allow-sex-abuse-victims-to-sue-attackers/

    (Which comes via a left wing site that is generally hostile towards faith or people of faith, but most of their reporting I’ve seen is accurate, regardless.)

  287. @ Daisy:

    There was a fight about this in Guam recently as well, though I don’t know the details. But someone was fighting against it.

  288. Leslie wrote:

    At an IBC we attended many years ago, public humiliation was used and the person subject to thus humiliation lasted committed suicide, leaving a wife and two daughters ages 7 and 10. I still have nightmares of that whole terrible situation.

    This is truly awful. I hope the instigators of this abuse are haunted by their actions, for their sake. There are some who view suicide as murder on the same level as homicide. So a church would refuse a Christian burial for the person committing suicide and may even blackball the family of the suicide victim, and the loss is even worsened by a further cycle of abuse. I know because my brother officiated over a suicide victims funeral and ministered to his shunned family. This haunts me because my brother told me about this tragedy and how a church abused the suicide victim and family.

  289. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    siteseer wrote:
    Christiane wrote:
    My thought is that because of the horrific nature of victim abuse, any KNOWING supported effort to cover it up or prevent justice for victims is so egregiously and morally wrong that it would be a matter for confession as a sin. At any level where a person consciously decides to support evil, there is no other description for that than ‘sin’.
    I do know that it is the goal of the Church to seek justice FOR victims. I do know that people like Donohue and his ilk are not on board with that goal.
    There is no place in the Church for justification of what was done, for its cover-up, or for the prevention of justice to victims. Francis is committed to doing what is right. If people like Donohue and his followers oppose Francis, I am not surprised by that. Donohue is more at home with the alt-right than with the ethics and morality of Catholic social justice any day.
    I am not referring to Donohue, I am referring to the money coming from the Catholic church itself, to support lobbying efforts to defeat efforts to remove the statute of limitations. These monies are included with monies to lobby for other causes so as to hide the amounts but it’s been estimated to be in the millions. Are the tithes of caring Catholics going to support that?
    Oh great. More Catholic-bashing. Some people never let up…and as Christiane says, sources would be nice. Rabbit trail indeed. Outta here for now.

    This is not bashing. It is asking a simple question about where the money from the Catholic church is going to.

  290. Does anyone care to hear the other side of this story? I applaud fighting injustice but until you hear from all parties, I find this just too judgmental for any Christian. You only know what you’ve been told my the accused. Maybe you should the rest of it. Just saying!

  291. Bridget wrote:

    This is not bashing. It is asking a simple question about where the money from the Catholic church is going to.

    Look in the Discussion Section, out of respect for Deb and Jessica, and I will post how a typical parish income is divided up and for what.

    Bashing is what it is. Honest questions are what they are. There IS and always has been a profound difference between ‘bashing’ and ‘honesty’ among people with good will. 🙂

  292. Christiane wrote:

    Bashing is what it is. Honest questions are what they are. There IS and always has been a profound difference between ‘bashing’ and ‘honesty’ among people with good will.

    I do not understand what you are trying to say here.

  293. dee wrote:

    @ River Harmony:
    If you know the other side, please feel free to tell it.

    Because “I find this just too judgmental for any Christian. You only know what you’ve been told my the accused. Maybe you should the rest of it. Just saying!” is something we’ve heard over and over and over from the enablers and defenders of abusers, from the panting lapdogs of the corrupt.

  294. Bridget wrote:

    This is not bashing. It is asking a simple question about where the money from the Catholic church is going to.

    My parish publishes its budget and gives us an update from the pulpit once or twice every year. It’s the main time the pastor (as opposed to guest speakers announcing actual fundraisers) talks about money.

  295. Christiane wrote:

    Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:
    Who needs these clods with their self-appointed “authority”?
    I don’t get how they come by that ‘authority’ as they have no belief in the apostolic succession (?)

    Who needs Apostolic Succession when God Himself has ordained you Head Apostle?

  296. Bill M wrote:

    Bill M wrote:

    Thomas Beckit wrote:

    I would like to hear from the other side though I doubt that will happen.
    Your comment is very close to the “you don’t have all he facts” gambit.

    I might add that Thomas Beckit was murdered because he dared oppose those in power, specifically King Henry. Unless your real name is Beckit, I do not think you do justice to his name using it here.

    It was a little more complicated than that. Thomas a Becket (NOT “Beckit”) was a longtime friend and drinking buddy of King Henry; the King made him Archbishop of Canterbury (Primate of England) figuring ol’ Tom would let Henry have his way. Well, Tom took his new job seriously enough to oppose Henry on an important issue of the time and the two butted heads.

    Until a drunk King Henry yelled “WILL NOBODY RID ME OF THIS TROUBLESOME PRIEST?” and four knights took it as a hit contract and decided to get into the King’s favor. When they confronted Thomas in the cathedral (in front of the altar, bearing weapons), Thomas tried to talk them down and defuse the situation and had almost succeeded when one of the knights figured “Go for It!” and the cutting started.

    The uproar over the murder nearly wrecked King Henry and assured the Church would win in the dispute. In addition, King Henry lost his closest friend Thomas, the only man in his court who he could be sure wasn’t just another yes-man flattering him for favor. With Thomas dead (by King Henry’s unintentional order), there was NOBODY left who the king could actually trust.

  297. Catholic Gate-Crasher wrote:

    Oh great. More Catholic-bashing. Some people never let up…and as Christiane says, sources would be nice. Rabbit trail indeed. Outta here for now.

    I am hurt by this. I did not bash anyone but merely asked a question. I forget now how the subject got started but there was no animosity intended.

    The evangelicals on this site are honest about the shortcomings of our denominations, in fact we lay them quite bare. I think it is only fair that those of other denominations be honest as well.

    Daisy wrote:

    Is this what you are referring to?

    Catholic Church spent millions fighting NY bill that would allow sex abuse victims to sue attackers
    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/catholic-church-spends-millions-fighting-ny-bill-that-would-allow-sex-abuse-victims-to-sue-attackers/

    I do remember reading that article, Daisy. I read a lot of news articles so it is hard sometimes to remember what all I read where, but I did a quick look at my history and found a few others-

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/courtney-m-soliday/catholic-church-speaks-ou_b_10168928.html

    http://www.businessinsider.com/r-as-pope-visit-nears-us-sex-victims-say-church-remains-obstacle-to-justice-2015-9

    http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/06/catholic_church_lobbied_against_ny_law_for_victims_of_child_sex_abuse.html

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/catholic-church-fights-clergy-child-sex-abuse-measures

    Christiane wrote:

    Bashing is what it is. Honest questions are what they are. There IS and always has been a profound difference between ‘bashing’ and ‘honesty’ among people with good will.

    Thank you, Christiane, I was asking an honest question in good will. If I was Catholic I would want to know if any of my tithes and offerings were being put into this. I don’t know why it was taken as bashing but if we can’t speak about this, which is being covered by mainstream media, without it being considered bashing, then that is a lot like the evangelical problems we discuss here.

  298. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    It was a little more complicated than that.

    I assent to the spelling correction but the details of the story do not change my statement, Becket was killed because of his opposition to the King. Agreed, it was not Henry’s intention, but it was an indication of the thuggery that goes on within the realms of the high and mighty.