Who Is Rick Holland, the College Pastor Who Counseled Jane?

"I am standing outside the door to Rick’s office. I take a deep breath and feel confident that I am strong enough to do whatever it is that he asks me to do. I open the door and am shocked to see the stranger sitting there. I am starting to shake and sweat. Rick asks me to sit down by my rapist."

Excerpt from Do You See Me?

Excerpt from Do You See Me?

Rick Holland, his two sons and Al Mohler at James P. Boyce's grave (Tweet by Al Mohler)

Last week we shared the heartbreaking story of 'Jane', who was a student at The Master's College (now University) where John MacArthur serves as president. She describes the horrific experience of being raped by the friend of some students at The Master's Seminary that she knew. Here is the link to that post:

Jane's Traumatic Rape and Subsequent Mistreatment at John MacArthur’s ‘The Master’s College’ (now University)

An 'authority' who figures prominently in Jane's testimony is Rick Holland, who at the time was the College Pastor at Grace Community Church, which is affiliated with both The Master's University and The Master's Seminary. Here is the relevant part of her account involving Rick (see excerpt from our TWW post cited above).


My head is starting to clear now. I know I’ve been raped…

Jane finally made it back to her dorm room, and her head started to clear.  She went to the police, and they did a rape kit and questioned her. Then, she returned home to be with her family and the school told her she could return and they would help her with counseling. She was told to meet with Rick Holland, who was the college pastor at John MacArthur's church, which is affiliated with TMC and TMS. Rick interrogated her and asked some very inappropriate questions, such as:

Where did he touch you? Where else did he touch you? What exactly did he do? How long did he do that? What were you wearing? Are you dating him? Did he turn you on?

During his meeting with Jane, Rick Holland left the room to go and consult with John MacArthur. Then he came back with the ruling (see below):

Rick tells me that I need to be disciplined for doing drugs, drinking alcohol and almost dancing. He said the consequence for breaking the rules is that I will be kicked out of the college. He is angry at me for going to the police and the doctor. I should have let the church handle this without outside interference. He tells me not to tell anyone else, not my fellow classmates, not my teachers, not anyone at church.

“You are ruining that young man’s life!” He says.

He tells me I have to go to the police and drop the charges or I will be brought in front of the church to be disciplined. I don’t drop the charges. Not that it matters. The police interviewed my rapist and all the “friends” who were there and ruled it a “he-said, she-said” incident that can’t be proven either way.

After all of this happened, Jane finally got to go home with her parents for a few days. While there, she received a phone call from Rick Holland. He told Jane that in order for her to finish her senior year at TMC, she must agree to certain stipulations. He asked her to return campus and come to his office, which she agreed to do.

Here is the rest of Jane's testimony from Marci's Do You See Me Now? post.

I am standing outside the door to Rick’s office. I take a deep breath and feel confident that I am strong enough to do whatever it is that he asks me to do. I open the door and am shocked to see the stranger sitting there. I am starting to shake and sweat. Rick asks me to sit down by my rapist. Rick speaks for the rapist.

“He has admitted to everything he has done. He has acknowledged his sin and that this relationship was not consensual and he has repented. Look at him, he is crying.”

I don’t want to look at him but I do. I feel panicked sitting this close to him. I am wondering why I have to be present if it has become clear that I am innocent. Why wasn’t I immediately reinstated in school?

“Now it is your turn to apologize.”

I am not hearing right. I think that Rick Holland has just asked me to apologize to my rapist.

“Apologize for what?” I ask.

Rick says something about apologizing for the dress I was wearing at the bar and for drinking alcohol. He says I caused this young man to stumble, and he is incensed that I have not dropped the charges with the police. He says he has been talking to Joe and Sandra and my RD and they all say that my story keeps changing. I wonder why they are all allowed to talk about it but I am not. If I am to be reinstated in the school I must agree to weekly counseling with Rick and the stranger. I am told that the stranger and I have committed this sin together and therefore we must work through it together. I must agree to sit next to the stranger in church every week.

I don’t know where to begin. Do I start with the fact that I didn’t put that dress on or how my story isn’t changing, I am just remembering more things? I feel confused and angry. I am yelling. I hear more accusations coming out of Rick’s mouth. I am not submissive. I don’t trust the men that God has put over me. I am rebellious. He is angry and I cannot keep up with all of the attacks on my character that are flying out of his mouth. I am kicked out of school. I have less than twenty-four hours to get my things out of my room and get out. If I show up on campus, I will be arrested. They are changing my three years of earned college credits from A’s to F’s. I have flunked out of college.

It is 2008. I am still getting Facebook messages and emails from people I know at Master’s College calling me to repentance. They are rebuking me and quoting Scriptures about immorality and fornication. I know the narrative now. They have been told that I was sleeping around and was kicked out for drinking and carousing. They know my character and yet still assume it is true. Only one person from that whole community believes me—my roommate from Junior year.

It is 2017. I have told a few people over the years about what happened to me, but mostly I want to move on and live my life and forget. I can’t forget. I am trying to get my graduate degree, but on paper I failed three years of college and flunked out. I had to relive this nightmare trying to get my undergraduate Psychology degree, and now again applying for graduate school. Every time I work with rape victims, I relive my own trauma. I realize that I cannot move on until I bring this darkness into the light—even if it helps just one person—even if that person is me.

I am 32 years old and I am taking my life back. My name is Jane. Do you see me?


Some of you may be wondering… Who is Rick Holland? We will do our best to enlighten you and explain why we believe that what Jane shared in all likelihood is accurate.

Rick Holland, who spent 25 years at Grace Community Church, became Senior Pastor of Mission Road Bible Church in Prairie Village, Kansas just over six years ago. Here is his bio from the church website.

http://www.mrbckc.org/pastors

Rick failed to mention in his bio that he was very involved in putting together the Resolved conferences that took place from 2005 through 2012. He recorded a short video announcing his transition to Mission Road Bible Church and promoting the 2012 Resolved conference. When it became known that the Resolved conferences were coming to an end, I wrote a post entitled Resolved 2012 – That's a Wrap!

The featured speakers at the 2012 event included: John MacArthur, Al Mohler, Steve Lawson, C.J. Mahaney, Rick Holland, Jonathan Rourke and a few others. Some of them spoke at every single Resolved Conference. One of them was C.J. Mahaney.

As an aside, it was at the final Resolved Conference that Mahaney did his scorecard during a panel discussion in which he brown-nosed John MacArthur and proclaimed that he believes Al Mohler is "the smartest man on the planet".

At the 2009 Resolved Conference, Rick Holland introduced C.J. Mahaney and recognized him for speaking at the conference five years in a row. During his talk Rick provided detailed information (in the video below) about how he sought out Mahaney. Rick's remarks about C.J. begin at the 1:45 mark.

Since the first Resolved Conference took place in the summer of 2005 and involved a great deal of planning, Rick Holland probably reached out to Mahaney in late 2004 / early 2005 (around the time that C.J.'s book Humility: True Greatness was published).

What is significant to us is that Rick Holland and C.J. Mahaney became good friends the year before Jane was raped. We'll get back to that…

When Dee and I had been blogging for just a short time, a former member of the church where C.J. Mahaney served as Senior Pastor (Covenant Life – CLC) reached out to us and wanted to meet. She was traveling through North Carolina, and we agreed to join her for lunch at the Billy Graham Library in Charlotte. It was an experience Dee and I will never forget. Pam informed us that her two year old daughter had been molested by a 15 year old male babysitter who was also a member of Covenant Life Church.

Fortunately, Pam quickly realized what had happened to her daughter and contacted the police. The pastors at CLC were not at all pleased that she had involved the authorities. That's not how these things were handled at their church. Everything was dealt with in house. At one point a meeting was held between the teenage molester and Pam's two year old daughter. The purpose of the meeting was reconciliation. Pam described how her toddler cowered under a chair during the extremely awkward meeting. We soon discovered that this was the modus operandi at Mahaney's church (CLC).

That sounded eerily similar to the actions Rick Holland took as College Pastor at Grace Community Church. Rick asked Jane to come to the church (without making her aware of what was about to take place). Jane was shown into Rick's office, and he requested that she sit beside her rapist! The purpose of the meeting was reconciliation, with both parties being asked to apologize. Did Rick Holland receive any coaching from C.J. Mahaney regarding this matter? After all, Rick has a tremendous amount of respect for C.J. back then and apparently still does.

After the eight-year run of Resolved, Rick Holland planned another conference called Anchored, which took place in 2014. And guess who was asked to come and speak… Take a look below.

The following year, Rick was invited to speak at Sovereign Grace Church in Louisville, where C.J. Mahaney serves as Senior Pastor. Todd Wilhelm published a post about Rick's appearance in Louisville entitled Rick Holland Joins the Hall of Shame. Please take the time to read this excellent article.

Here is an excerpt from Todd's post (see screen shot below):

https://thouarttheman.org/2015/04/18/rick-holland-joins-the-hall-of-shame/

An astute commenter, Dave A A, shared the following just as I was starting this post.

On Sunday the 24th, Rick Holland, who is accused of doing the unbiblical counseling in this case, sermonized at the church of Eric Davis, who wrote the 2 most recent Cripplegate articles. The sermon topic? A believer’s response to difficulty.

[sermon] Romans 5:3-5 A Believer’s Response to Difficulties

Seems to me a bit like a CJ sermon, but I can’t bear to listen to sermons online.

If anyone cares to listen and summarize, it may be interesting. Anyhoo– we can safely assume the Davis articles are the official response (likely the only response) of Holland since they’ve been together for the weekend.

BTW — not sure if anyone mentioned the 2nd Cripplegate article by Clint Archer, who likens incorrect addressing of sin in the church to John McEnroe temper tantrums. This is undoubtably an unofficial Graceless2U response to the accusations, just like the 1st “How to Kill Your Neighbor” one.

You can listen to Rick's message entitled A Believer's Response to Difficulties here.

Yesterday Eric Davis, who pastors the church where Rick just spoke, wrote a response to the "Do You See Me?" post, which was published on The Cripplegate website. For those not familiar with this blog (that is very closely affiliated with John MacArthur and The Master's Seminary), you might want to watch this video, which was featured on The Master's Seminary website.

Here is the crux of Eric's post: (see screen shot below)

http://thecripplegate.com/response-do-you-see-me/

I kept waiting for this 'former employee of TMU' to provide some information that would contradict Jane's version of what occurred, but all he shared were hollow words. And just today Eric Davis wrote another post entitled Smear Campaigns vs Soul Care. I am reminded of that quote from Hamlet, which I am altering just a tad… 

Eric [and others affiliated with TMU/TMS] doth protest too much, methinks.

Hopefully, you now have a better understanding of who Rick Holland is as well as whom he regards as his close friends. Given that his friendship with C.J. Mahaney began before the incident with Jane took place and knowing the hyper-control C.J. exercised in running CLC, it is extremely easy for us to imagine the scenarios described in Do You See Me?


Comments

Who Is Rick Holland, the College Pastor Who Counseled Jane? — 315 Comments

  1. So, Eric Davis, please give us the facts. Just saying that Jane’s account is inaccurate doesn’t show us what things are inaccuracies. If “some people” are presented unfairly, it is up to you to explain in what way and to tell us what is incorrect. Jane’s account has a lot of detail. It should be a simple matter for you to take her “inaccurate” details and tell us what the “demonstrably” true details are.

    We’ll be here to read your demonstrably fair and accurate detailed account.

  2. Looks like I’m the first commenter. Sometimes insomnia has its small trophies.
    There IS a trophy, right?
    (Maybe I should stop being goofy and try to fall asleep again!)

  3. Should you leave out names in the following sentence?
    “What is significant to us is that Rick Holland and C.J. Mahaney became good friends the year before ***** was raped.”

  4. Sorry not to be clearer. I used stars over her name so you could go back and see the exact sentence where it appears her real name was used. Also in the subsequent paragraph mentioned above.
    Thanks so much for everything you are doing and have done for Jane. I believe there is no motivation for these crooked institutions to change without having their actions exposed to the light.

  5. Second…

    Though I would be genuinely interested to hear Mr Davis’ version of events.

    In the previous post, Anonymous Grandma posted an excellent comment that amplifies the “trust but verify” principle. I wholeheartedly agree with every word of it, and rather than try to bask in reflected glory by discussing it, I commend her comment itself to the attention of Wartburgers (and visitors) who missed it.

    I am prepared to believe that the college and its representatives in this case believed they meant well. For that matter, at the far extreme, it is possible that the whole story presented to Deebs was inaccurate, that although the rape did indeed happen, the college in fact immediately reported the perpetrator to the police etc etc. I’m not sure Mr Davis is claiming that much.

    There is a very well-established pattern of events in cases like this, though, with thoroughly documented historical precedents. Derogatory terms used throughout the history of the english language for women with multiple sexual partners have rarely, if ever, had male equivalents. And it is not just a problem with institutionalised christian religion; Jimmy Savile pursued his targets in a secular context, and the cultures and individuals that sheltered and enabled him did not claim authorisation from the Bible.

    It could be that TMU is being unfairly stereotyped as just another of those when in fact their actions were radically and fundamentally different in their support of the victim. It could be, for instance, that Jane was never asked to apologise to her attacker – in other words, that TMU does not subscribe to that school of thought. I’d need to see evidence for that, though.

  6. If it was not for Dee, Deb, Michael at PP (who I actually consider my pastor from afar), Julie Anne at spiritual sounding board and of course my students I would have walked away from the Christian religion a very long time ago. I need to add one other name but I still don’t know why He would even care, but He does all the time and that would be Jesus the Lord of Lights. It was not their spiritual insights, their theological musings, or their preaching ability though I think they would all make fine or are fine preachers. It was their boots on the ground approach to dealing with wounded souls. Note all of these people go out to where the hurt is and meet it head on. That is what keeps me hungering for the Bread of Life.

    As for the professional class in the evang industry, Shame on you, grow up.

  7. I am the “Steve” that Todd indicates has had contact with Rick Holland both on the phone and via email.

    One of the worse things I have heard about Rick Holland is that (according to Todd) Rick Holland hasn’t read the documents that Brent compiled that showed C.J. Mahaney’s sin and hypocrisy though from what i have seen Rick Holland is quite quick to defend C.J. Mahaney. One would expect more of a Berean approach from a leader but apparently not with Rick Holland. One should know that someone like Mahaney can put on “mask” when he short term visits with other leaders and that just might not be Mahaney’s real character.

    Rick Holland’s apparent refusal to read the documents and study for himself sounds like to me someone who perhaps possibly being so impressed by C.J. Mahaney’s “gifted” speaking skill and thus would rather live in ignorance. If Rick Holland chose to read the documents he might have to make some hard choices and Rick Holland’s perfect world might just shatter. I am sure it is much more convenient for Rick Holland to live in ignorance rather than have to deal with the “sin in the camp” that exists with C.J. Mahaney.

    It also could be that Rick having his own sin such as what Rick allegedly did to “Jane” Rick Holland is reluctant to want to start throwing stones at others. Who knows what other at best questionable actions Rick Holland has done that he doesn’t want brought to light? I also imagine that these institutions have become many of these leaders “gods” and thus protect these institutions at any cost even if it means covering up a rape.

    I commented on the past blog post that I had emailed Rick Holland and sent one follow up email but so far still haven’t heard back. That is still the case and I don’t expect a response.

  8. This was a comment that was posted (by someone else) on TWW original blog post about this issue:

    Alison Swihart UNITED STATES on Mon Sep 25, 2017 at 01:03 PM said:
    Rick Holland is a pastor at Mission Road Bible Church in Prairie Village, Kansas. This does not surprise me, as over the last 20 years or so, MRBC has systematically removed all women from any form of leadership (including working with children), and demanding total submission to its pastor. I was just talking about MRBC last night with a friend, and talking about what some of their bizarre behavior involved. Beware, my friends who attend this church.

    I am reposting this since this blog post is specifically about Rick Holland. I find this especially sad the removal of all women “from any form of leadership (including working with children).” I could understand (based on their beliefs) not having women in higher positions but not going anywhere to this extreme.

    It doesn’t suprise me Alison indicating Rick Holland and the other pastors demand total submission. Maybe they claim they are “god’s anointed” and questioning them is “touching god’s anointed?” Maybe they even like to quote the rebellion is as “witchcraft.” Both teachings IMO are twisting of scripture.

  9. “I kept waiting for this ‘former employee of TMU’ to provide some information that would contradict Jane’s version of what occurred, but all he shared were hollow words. And just today Eric Davis wrote another post entitled Smear Campaigns vs Soul Care”

    You’re not the only one wondering how they can say Jane is a liar. I don’t see any evidence on the part of Davis or TMU. All he’s doing is putting stumbling blocks in front of Jane’s post, so that people will assume she’s a bad girl and question everything in her testimony. Even the “Smear Campaigns vs Soul Care” post is filled with questions that are meant to cause a person to doubt themselves and their beliefs (thus enabling unwarranted guilt to take over, convincing people that their legitimate questions and concerns -as well as their own discernment- are sinful and wrong…

    Much like accusing someone of rape…

    I myself have a hard time reading many Christian blogs because I feel that guilt and emotions are often played up more and make many victims feel worse. (For example: I’ve been so selfish, I’ve only been thinking about myself, how could I make those judgements about someone else?, maybe I was provoking him/her?, I’m not perfect, I shouldn’t point my finger, the path of Christianity is suffering, so maybe I’m just complaining about the struggle, maybe this is all part of my struggle.)

  10. Sorry, I have not read the above comments yet. I will do that next after I post this, unashamedly by the way.

    Rick Holland abused this woman all over again. He is almost as deviant as the rapist (who confessed the truth.)

    The Bible speaks this to Jane’s situation: “Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” ESV

    John 3:20 “Anyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come into the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.” NASB

    1 Timothy 6:3-5 “If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teachings which accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit, he knows nothing; he has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions, and wrangling among men who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.” ESV

    To those pastors who claim god’s authority (church leadership networks) on all things in this life, Jesus sees you and He knows your hearts equally as He knows the hearts of the lower laity. Nothing is hidden from our LORD Jesus Christ, absolutely nothing.

    And one of the greatest smear campaigns that I have had the privilege of reading is this;

    “You brood of vipers! how can you speak good when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgement, men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justifies, and by your words you will be condemned.” Matthew 12:34-37

    ……Rick Holland (have never heard of him before) has the rapist in the same room as his victim as a “means of counseling?” Would he do this to his own daughter, if he has one? Would he “counsel” her in the same manner as he did Jane? Or would his methodology be completely different because its his own flesh and blood he is dealing with?

    I find it disturbing how the “self righteous” call out those with whom they desire to silence as “self righteous,” for now the double edged sword is destroying their own pseudo Christian empires they have built with their own hands and mouths.

    Perhaps we are witnessing a case of “Pride goes before the fall.”

  11. These men remind me of Islamist. Who else is fixated with submission? Muhammad; a child raping, child marrying, pedophile.

    I have known since I was a little girl that many Christians do not think rape is a jail-worthy offense, but not kissing male bottom is heinous in their pro-rapist minds.

    Hate the rape victim, even if it is a baby, love the rapist. I wonder if these men asked the two-year-old what she was wearing? These men are too stupid to be anywhere around children or babies.

  12. What is the obsession over doctorates with this crowd (and, ironically, with the IFB-ers too)? MacArthur has two honorary doctorates but no earned one. And Holland has an earned doctor of ministry and is working on his Ph.D.; is there a justifiable need for a Ph.D. at his church? This crowd (9M, TGC, etc.) seems more interested in the appearance of their intellect than the depth of their grace and love.

  13. Paul D. wrote:

    Seems to me Rick Holland should go to prison as an accomplice to rape.

    “TOUCH NOT MINE ANOINTED!”
    — Benny Hinn’s favorite clobber verse when he gets caught

  14. Sam wrote:

    You’re not the only one wondering how they can say Jane is a liar. I don’t see any evidence on the part of Davis or TMU. All he’s doing is putting stumbling blocks in front of Jane’s post, so that people will assume she’s a bad girl and question everything in her testimony.

    Well, the classic defense against a rape charge is to smear the victim as a lying and labeling her as a 'W' (edited by moderator) 

  15. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Derogatory terms used throughout the history of the english language for women with multiple sexual partners have rarely, if ever, had male equivalents.

    Like “Big Stud”, “Real Man”, and (fist-pump) “HEY, BEAVIS! HE SCORED! HEH-HUH! HEH-HUH! HEH-HUH!”?

  16. Sam wrote:

    I myself have a hard time reading many Christian blogs because I feel that guilt and emotions are often played up more and make many victims feel worse.

    A lot of being Christian(TM) these days is just Guilt Manipulation.

  17. Rick Holland’s nouethic counseling of Jane is beyond the realms of what degreed counselors (psychologists and psychiatrists) would ever do. This puts the victim into trauma each and every time they are exposed to this. PTSD again and again. Even on the crime shows on tv, they never do this. Where does the law state that churches and colleges can handle violent crimes such as rapes themselves and not report it to the police? This is a mandatory law. This whole situation of the way Jane was treated is wrong on so many aspects. I’m sure there is a statistic somewhere that shows the percentage of rape victims that commit suicide each year. People like Rick Holland will have to answer for this someday. It won’t be pretty either. I for one won’t feel sorry for him either.

  18. Karen wrote:

    ……Rick Holland (have never heard of him before) has the rapist in the same room as his victim as a “means of counseling?” Would he do this to his own daughter, if he has one? Would he “counsel” her in the same manner as he did Jane? Or would his methodology be completely different because its his own flesh and blood he is dealing with?

    Excellent observation. Rick has three sons and no daughters.

  19. Rick Holland and C.J. Mahaney are birds of a feather…

    Church leaders who don’t care about victims and try to hide crimes against them are disqualified as shepherds. They are wolves.

    Mahaney Overview

    C.J. Mahaney was one of the defendants in a child sexual abuse lawsuit filed by 11 victims. The lawsuit listed 200 incidents, many with horrible graphic detail, mentioning names, locations, and description of sexual abuse. Mahaney is alleged to have covered up their behavior for more than 20 years.

    Of the 9 defendants, several have already gone through the legal system, so there was no doubt child sexual abuse took place.

    Samples of the Allegations

    Read paragraphs 109, 75-77, 51, 128, 138 & 173 of the lawsuit to get the flavor of it. It is quite shocking: http://is.gd/8P1knZ

    There is a systemic problem in authoritarian organizations: They cover up crime and blame victims.

    In my opinion, these people are not safe leaders and the churches that hire them are not safe either.

  20. Guest wrote:

    These men remind me of Islamist. Who else is fixated with submission? Muhammad;

    "Man, then, according to verse 7, "is the image and glory of God," but look at verse 7 again. Here comes the other part. "But the woman is–" not the glory of God but what? "The glory of man." Not even a definite article there. "Woman is glory of man." In other words–listen to this–in other words, the woman was made to manifest man's authority and man's will as man was made to manifest God's authority.

    The woman is the vice regent who rules in the stead or who carries out man's wish, as man is the vice regent who carries out God's wish. That's why, you see, I Corinthians 14 says, "If a woman needs to know something, tell her to go–" Where? Ask whom? Her husband, because man is the sun, and woman is the moon. "She shines not so much with the direct light of God but that derived from man."

    Listen, men, that is a grave responsibility. A woman's deepest and greatest spiritual resource is a man. A man. Vital." ~~~~ John MacArthur

  21. He also approvingly quoted Doug Wilson in an article.

    I kept waiting for this ‘former employee of TMU’ to provide some information that would contradict Jane’s version of what occurred, but all he shared were hollow words.

    It’s all gossip. That’s all they have. A ‘fuller’ picture? If we ever heard it, I think we would still be appalled because we don’t think like them.

  22. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    @ Nancy2 (aka Kevlar):
    From https://www.gty.org/library/sermons-library/1845/the-role-of-the-godly-woman
    Question: do MacArthur and his minions believe there is no communication between God and women???

    Yes. Unless God is directing her to obey her husband. Seriously!

    Years ago, some analyzed several of McArthurs sermons and it is down right bizarre what he teaches. I consider him a false teacher much in the fashion of a Bruce Ware or Grudem.

  23. With regard to Eric Davis and his impression of matters, one must realize that to a person steeped in this demonic, misogynistic mindset, calling the victim into the room when you already sneaked her rapist in ahead of time to confront her, watching as she shakes and breaks down, and then demanding that she apologize to the one who violated her, this would be considered a noble course of action. They’d consider themselves to be bringing about godly reconciliation and reminding the brutalized woman that she, too, is a sinner and that all of this must have come about for some good reason and that the tearful rapist next to her was perhaps the very servant of God to humble her and show her how she’d been asking for it. Further, when she refused to agree to this interpretation of events, here she was a lowly woman objecting to the male authority over her, and at that point, even if what they spread thereafter were total lies (the accusations of her being a bar-hopping, drug-abusing slut), even to-the-hilt slander is totally justified for the sake of the reputation of Mr. Holland and MacArthur, God’s Chosen Ones, and TMU and GCC, His chosen institutions.

    Why, it was all for the greater good and the glory of the Lord. Anyway, have to crack a few eggs to make a good omelette, don’t you? And anyway, only a vile, dissolute woman would dare question Holland and talk back in the first place, so she deserved what she got—hey, they let her off easy – 2,000 years ago they’d have stoned her to death on the college square in front of the whole student body and who’d have tried to stop them? (except, ahem, Jesus)

    Of course, Eric can’t come out and say all that, because those of us on a lower spiritual plain than people like MacArthur, Holland, Davis, Mahaney can’t be expected to comprehend the Deep Magic that turns evil actions into good deeds for God’s Chosen Ones. So he slams about hollering over how we don’t know the whole story while never telling us a single detail of it. Well, I think I just told you the whole story and why he can’t explain a single detail of it.

  24. @ Janey:

    Thanks for bringing up the lawsuit, which was thrown out on technicalities such as the statute of limitations running out (it definitely worked in SGM churches’ favor for victims NOT to go to the police at the time of the crime) and filing in the wrong jurisdiction.

    And let’s not forget that Grant Layman, C.J. Mahaney’s brother-in-law who served as a pastor at CLC for many years, testified UNDER OATH in the Nate Morales trial that the pastors at CLC did in fact know about cases of sex abuse in their church and chose NOT to notify the proper authorities.

    In my estimation, this is the most damning evidence against Mahaney.

    BTW, Grant Layman did the right thing and got out of the ministry – something his BIL should have done a long time ago.

  25. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I am prepared to believe that the college and its representatives in this case believed they meant well.

    I think their entire mindset on women in general and this topic in particular is so completely wrong that they are incapable of seeing how it looks to normal people who are not in their world. Everything they say just reinforces my belief that this happened, pretty close to the way it was presented. Because that is their worldview! They’re not the first to act this way, and they won’t be the last.

  26. Just because a man has a daughter does not make him smart about women or means he loves any woman. My father had daughters and hated women and little girls with a bloody passion. When I was thirteen he tried to convince me rape was not that big of a deal.

  27. Deb, I called Rick Holland's office and left a message before I posted Jane's story. He did not respond. His allegation of someone not giving them a chance to respond prior to the post is codswallop!

    Also, I have called many, many offices in years of doing these posts, I have only received a few return calls. I believe that TMU would NEVER have responded to a phone call prior to the posting of the blog. I think they are just mad they didn't have time to call the lawyers to give them a heads up.

  28. Tree wrote:

    There IS a trophy, right?

    Email me your address and will will send you the official TWW gift – a bag of Cheetos – the snack of bloggers who live in their mothers' basements.

  29. Tree wrote:

    We’ll be here to read your demonstrably fair and accurate detailed account.

    Not only that but we might post it.

  30. Law Prof wrote:

    So he slams about hollering over how we don’t know the whole story while never telling us a single detail of it.

    Incredible that he expects us to believe him – I guess because he's a pastor? And pastors NEVER EVER LIE, right???

  31. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    A woman's deepest and greatest spiritual resource is a man. A man. Vital." ~~~~ John MacArthur

    These pro-rapist misogynistic men have the same stench to them as pro-rapist misogynistic cult leader Warren Jeffs. I do believe John MacArthur is head of his own men-who-are-scared-of-women cult. Everything that turns John MacArthur on would make the man who sexually terrorized me as a child giddy. Child rapists and other rapists look at what these men peddle and say, "I can get on board with that." This dumb slop is music to a rapist's ears.

  32. The worship of CJ Mahaney and his ways was very strong, even by highly uneducated men. I remember years ago listening to an audio of 4 men discussing complementarianism. If memory serves, the men were: CJ, Mark Dever, Randy Stinson, and Don Carson.

    Keep in mind, CJ never went to college or seminary – no schooling, yet he had a large following with all of the churches at SGM, conferences, being on boards of organizations (TGC, etc).

    In this audio, CJ relayed how they do things at his church. I believe it was adding a clause in their membership agreement saying that in order to be a member, a prospective member must agree to complementarianism. In other words, they would not be accepting any new members who disagreed with complementarianism. (Ya know, that secondary doctrinal issue.)

    All of the men were very excited to hear this. One even said they were going to look into revising their membership policy. All this to say, CJ was very influential, even to men who were highly educated and should have been able to apply critical thinking skills.

  33. Guest wrote:

    Just because a man has a daughter does not make him smart about women or means he loves any woman.

    This is true. I tend to dislike ‘what if she were your daughter’ comments, although I get where they are coming from. They are trying to form an emotional connection between the treatment and a person that the pastor actually (theoretically) loves. But this doesn’t work if they think of women more as property, which many do, which leads to ‘if this were my daughter I would [insert theoretical manly display of macho violence here]. And it certainly doesn’t work if they are terrible abusive people, as you mention. And it doesn’t work if they generically blame women for these encounters, as many do.

    This only works with good and decent men who have been led astray by false teaching. And then only sometimes.

  34. @ Lea:
    My point being…you shouldn’t care about a woman because she ‘belongs’ to you in some way – you should care about her because she is a person.

  35. Julie Anne wrote:

    All this to say, CJ was very influential, even to men who were highly educated and should have been able to apply critical thinking skills.

    I have to say, the closest I’ve gotten to being disappointed in someone for their views on this is Dever. Granted, it was a long time ago, but I did think he was legitimately smart. But to keep such company, write and believe such things? Sigh. Oh well.

  36. @ Lea:

    Well, indeed. You’ll notice I didn’t say “it looks as though they did the right thing”. Even if they “meant well”, they are still woefully ignorant and need educating.

  37. If someone raped me, I should never have to see him again, hear his vile voice again, or see his odious face again. I should not have to pity him, coddle him, or have to try and make him feel better about raping me.

    That is what these men want, they want the rape victim to try and make the rapist feel better about having raped her.

  38. Ok so . . . I don’t really need any “guilt by association” with C.J Mahaney to identify the monolithic control methods endemic to the Neo Calvinist juggernaut of destruction. Over the last decade we have heard way too many similar stories to Jane’s to ignore the coincidence of attitude, method, and manipulation attributed to Mr. Holland.

    Look, i can appreciate being cautious in condemning a man to the charge of rape merely because a woman makes the accusation. We are treading down a very dangerous path in american culture, leaning towards criminalizing all Male sexuality, so due diligence on the truth of the matter is crucial. But when there is NO dispute over the charge of rape and the “counseling” goal seems to focus on church damage control . . . yea . . . that is what i have no patience with.

  39. Julie Anne wrote:

    All of the men were very excited to hear this. One even said they were going to look into revising their membership policy. All this to say, CJ was very influential, even to men who were highly educated and should have been able to apply critical thinking skills.

    Perhaps those men did use critical thinking skills. If they have NPD or inferiority complexes, that would be the perfect excuse to prove their God ordained superiority, on paper, to ………. some people.

  40. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Lea:

    Well, indeed. You’ll notice I didn’t say “it looks as though they did the right thing”. Even if they “meant well”, they are still woefully ignorant and need educating.

    I did notice that yes 🙂

    I completely agree with you. Just wanted to put my two cents in. I think they literally can’t see what everyone else sees. They are too indoctrinated. They are groupthinking the heck out of this thing, and they’re getting it wrong.

  41. John Immel wrote:

    Look, i can appreciate being cautious in condemning a man to the charge of rape merely because a woman makes the accusation.

    If this man who was charged didn’t attend the college, they had no reason to adjudicate this criminal case at all. And yet, they decided to step in and kick the victim out. IF they had simply said we don’t know what happened, but we are supporting you regardless emotionally that would have been ok.

    He said/she said is a dodge. Nothing they did was right. Period.

  42. dee wrote:

    I think they are just mad they didn’t have time to call the lawyers to give them a heads up.

    It seems they did eventually get to their lawyers, though, since both of their statements have now disappeared
    . . .

  43. John Immel wrote:

    Look, i can appreciate being cautious in condemning a man to the charge of rape merely because a woman makes the accusation. We are treading down a very dangerous path in american culture, leaning towards criminalizing all Male sexuality, so due diligence on the truth of the matter is crucial. But when there is NO dispute over the charge of rape and the “counseling” goal seems to focus on church damage control . . . yea . . . that is what i have no patience with.

    But in this case, he confessed:

    I am standing outside the door to Rick’s office. I take a deep breath and feel confident that I am strong enough to do whatever it is that he asks me to do. I open the door and am shocked to see the stranger sitting there. I am starting to shake and sweat. Rick asks me to sit down by my rapist. Rick speaks for the rapist.

    “He has admitted to everything he has done. He has acknowledged his sin and that this relationship was not consensual and he has repented. Look at him, he is crying.”

    So, then the question is: why was she expelled when he confessed?

  44. Julie Anne wrote:

    So, then the question is: why was she expelled when he confessed?

    Because she was mean to Rick (ie, ‘unsubmissive’), by not agreeing with everything he said, sounds like.

    All of this is a dodge as I said. They didn’t need to find fault on the rape charge. They went after her for other stuff related and kicked her out and I don’t think any amount of ‘here is the truth’ coming from them will explain that in a way that isn’t heinous.

  45. <Tuning-fork alert>

    By which I mean, it’s not a stuck record but an attempt to create a resonance… anyway.

    Forgiveness

    I think I’ve read, on one post or another dealing with this specific case, that forgiveness is for the benefit of the victim. That is, for Jane to forgive her attacker is for her benefit, not his.

    Technically, that is true. And if it were enabled, and done, properly, then it would benefit Jane.

    But forgiveness can never be demanded. To arrange, on one’s own authority, a meeting between Jane and her attacker without her knowledge (never mind her authorisation) and instruct her to forgive him and apologise on her own part, would be the act of a meddlesome fool, playing with serious matters far beyond his authority.

    Forgiveness is a God-ordained thing – thinking about it, I’d even go so far as to call it a sacrament – in the full knowledge of how loaded that term is. But God has not established forgiveness so that the rich, the powerful, the contented or the establishment-sponsored can return things smoothly back to a comfortable normality.

  46. …and he has repented. Look at him, he is crying.

    Oh, and when will these men learn that you cannot see repentance – only its fruit (or lack of it)?

    How can one be a “doctor” of anything credible and think that crying is repentance?

  47. @ Julie Anne:

    Great question! And the answer is inherent in the doctrine. All sin is morally equivalent (sort of) therefore the rapist and the rapee are at the root no different. And this is the disaster inherent to the Reformation doctrine. It turns morality and justice into a travesty. I’ve been saying this for over a decade. Rick Holland and CJ and the host of other Reformed theology officianado’s act the same because the “logic” is consistent. Jane was going to be victimized over and over the moment she joined the college because implicit to the doctrine is the abolition of moral innocents.

  48. John Immel wrote:

    Look, i can appreciate being cautious in condemning a man to the charge of rape merely because a woman makes the accusation.

    Uh, John, he confessed.

  49. John Immel wrote:

    @ Julie Anne:
    Great question! And the answer is inherent in the doctrine. All sin is morally equivalent (sort of) therefore the rapist and the rapee are at the root no different. And this is the disaster inherent to the Reformation doctrine. It turns morality and justice into a travesty. I’ve been saying this for over a decade. Rick Holland and CJ and the host of other Reformed theology officianado’s act the same because the “logic” is consistent. Jane was going to be victimized over and over the moment she joined the college because implicit to the doctrine is the abolition of moral innocents.

    On this point, we agree.

  50. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    and think that crying is repentance

    I like that the first hand account describes Jane as yelling. I would most likely be in shock and probably just leave, or annoyingly cry.

    But my response as a detached observing to this 'look at him he is crying' thing would be along the lines of maybe we should give him something to cry about [insert obscenities]. Because WT# (ed.).

  51. Deb wrote:

    Julie Anne wrote: So, then the question is: why was she expelled when he confessed? That’s the million dollar question!

    And if he confessed, why didn't Rick Holland march him down to the police station to turn himself in and obtain justice for Jane??

  52. @ Bridget:

    Jane's testimony seemed to indicate that John MacArthur was calling the shots in this situation. I would love to know what he and Rick Holland discussed on the matter.

  53. @ Bridget:

    i know . . . right? The answer is of course, that the leaders of the Neo Cal movement really believe that the church government should supplant all secular civil government. This is Calvin 101.

  54. Bridget wrote:

    And if he confessed, why didn’t Rick Holland march him down to the police station to turn himself in and obtain justice for Jane??

    It might have ‘ruined his life’. He was ‘sorry’ but he wasn’t, you know, That sorry!

    But running a girl out of school doesn’t ruin her life somehow. Raping her doesn’t. Trashing her reputation doesn’t.

  55. John Immel wrote:

    Jane was going to be victimized over and over the moment she joined the college because implicit to the doctrine is the abolition of moral innocents.

    Bingo. There ARE no moral innocents in the doctrine.

  56. Lea wrote:

    Julie Anne wrote:

    So, then the question is: why was she expelled when he confessed?

    Because she was mean to Rick (ie, ‘unsubmissive’), by not agreeing with everything he said, sounds like.

    All of this is a dodge as I said. They didn’t need to find fault on the rape charge. They went after her for other stuff related and kicked her out and I don’t think any amount of ‘here is the truth’ coming from them will explain that in a way that isn’t heinous.

    I thought it was because she did not go along with their process of discipline.

  57. @ Lydia:

    On another note, isn't all this similar to what they did to Karen Hinckley at the Village? They did not get the opportunity to kick her out, she left, but wasn't the process made clear she had to adhere to their discipline to be a member in good standing (or whatever they call it)?

    It's all the same type thing. Control.

  58. John Immel wrote:

    All sin is morally equivalent (sort of) therefore the rapist and the rapee are at the root no different.

    If God sees the difference between intentional and unintentional sin, why can’t we?
    (Lev. 5. Num. 5, Num 30)

    Surely there is a difference between someone stealing a ballpoint pen from their place of employment and murdering a co-worker on his way home from work.

    Rape is a very serious crime committed against an individual that is deserving of imprisonment.

  59. @ Victorious:

    Based on Jane's testimony, her rapist was a smooth operator. I am concerned that there may be other victims.

    I'm left wondering whether he is/was a member of Grace Community Church?

  60. I’m shocked to see so many of the quick reactions to this story.

    The institution has not provided a concrete defense nor has the victim made a fact-based accusation that can be double checked. All that they both have is their respective sides of the story.
    It’s a classic tale of he-said-she-said. In the place of cold hard facts I would think that cooler heads should prevail and wait to pass judgment.

    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.

    This runaway groupthink is like watching a train wreck unfold. I should count it very much a blessing that many of you are not judges who sit on courts and rule on these matters. One of our country’s fundamental beliefs is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. When did we flip the script?

    If the victim’s story is true there are serious problems and far reaching ramifications here. If it is not, you all should be ashamed for rushing to judgment. A trend that is too common these days and the damage it causes is devastating.

    I must give my disclaimer: I personally know many people involved in this story. They are hard-working, fair, honest, and good people by anyone’s standard. They wake up everyday and try to do the right thing – not unlike you and I. They are not being treated fairly. I am an alumnus of TMU, I’ve seen first hand some of its short comings – it’s not a perfect place (what place is?) but it’s filled with countless good, fair and honest people. Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.

    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.

  61. Eric Davis’s response is very general and not specific. Thus, it could mean anything.

    Two observations.

    First, I don’t know how Mr. Davis could have first hand information about whether Jane was called into a meeting with her rapist. Mr. Davis would only know what he had been told.

    And, because of the general nature of his comments, it’s not clear he is trying to deny that. To me, that event – having a victim meet with a rapist, is inexcusable. I want to know if Mr. Davis claims THAT did not happen.

    Of course, we will never know his opinion because he won’t be specific.

    Second, I believe that WW called TMU and related parties to get comments before the story was posted, and they refused to speak.

    Now through their friends, the allegations are denied in general terms.

    This is a tactic.

    This reminds me a lot of Mahaney.

    Mahaney denies things generally, assures Dr. Mohler and Mark Dever that what is being said is not true. And Mahaney encourages Mohler and Dever to go out and provide cover for him. They do so out of friendship.

    But Mahaney never actually walks through what happened. Never gives an accounting, so to speak. Says he can’t do that for legal reasons.

    So, it’s not just the original offensive counseling that follows a familiar approach, it’s the public response when they get exposed for such awful practices. The response also follows a familiar pattern.

    Eric Davis’ writings on this topic follow the pattern of how former errors are addressed in these circles.

  62. Bridget wrote:

    why didn’t Rick Holland march him down to the police station to turn himself in and obtain justice for Jane??

    Here is what I think might have happened. Jane reported it before they school got to her. The police had his name from the police report and questioned him.He said it was a he/she said situation and that they had consensual sex. The school knew she had reported it and didn’t believe the guy had done it. They wanted to make this go away.

    I may be wrong but I bet it will come off. this way. “We knew she reported it without telling us, bless her little heart, so we didn’t think we have to do anything. “

  63. Julie Anne wrote:

    So, then the question is: why was she expelled when he confessed?

    They will say he confessed to consensual sex. He wasn’t a part of the school. He was part of GCC and since he confessed, he was *repentant.* (Shades of Karen Hinkley) She, however, was kicked out because she went dancing, drank alcohol and had sex against school policy.

    Yes, I know this scenario is ridiculous. I have to admit I have been having fits of giggles over the *sin of ballroom dancing.” Yep- one Cha Cha and you are out!

  64. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.
    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.

    “This story”? A large number of victims have since come forward with similar stories, many who name the same people and are using their real names. There isn’t just one story here anymore.

    “All the facts” huh? So why is Eric Davis writing such horrible things on his blog if he is such a good person? Why do Grace people feel so entitled to be horrible people on the internet and then claim that everyone else is the bad guy in the story? I have only seen two Grace/TMU affilated people say graceful, godly things in this situation. Even the one decent statement that TMU made was removed. The Grace/TMU people have made themselves as degenerate by their own words just as much as they claim Jane is, and I’m sorry, if you want to believe that everybody is a worm, fine, but then don’t get mad about it only when you claim it’s everybody else.

    I think you are probably just a troll like the rest because you all say the exact same things and never acknowledge all the other things that have come out since.

  65. Help me understand the logic TMS/TMU, and GCC use to justify their viciousness and entitlement to attack other brothers and sisters in Christ, and even victims of a violent crime.

    Do they believe —

    — They have the One True Faith, so they are entitled to attack all others? (Inquisition)

    — God needs them to defend Him, so they are God’s chosen hatchet men? (God’s hit squad)

    — Bad things happen to bad people, so people have no right to complain about bad treatment because some how they deserve it? Therefore no compassion … ever.

    — No one is entitled to justice and human rights because all are “totally depraved” and have no right to demand fairness or restitution? (Similar to what John Immel wrote in an earlier comment.)

  66. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    Guest wrote:
    These men remind me of Islamist. Who else is fixated with submission? Muhammad;
    “Man, then, according to verse 7, “is the image and glory of God,” but look at verse 7 again. Here comes the other part. “But the woman is–” not the glory of God but what? “The glory of man.” Not even a definite article there. “Woman is glory of man.” In other words–listen to this–in other words, the woman was made to manifest man’s authority and man’s will as man was made to manifest God’s authority.
    The woman is the vice regent who rules in the stead or who carries out man’s wish, as man is the vice regent who carries out God’s wish. That’s why, you see, I Corinthians 14 says, “If a woman needs to know something, tell her to go–” Where? Ask whom? Her husband, because man is the sun, and woman is the moon. “She shines not so much with the direct light of God but that derived from man.”
    Listen, men, that is a grave responsibility. A woman’s deepest and greatest spiritual resource is a man. A man. Vital.” ~~~~ John MacArthur

    THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, dear Nancy2, for posting actual quotes from MacArthur’s teachings. I was going to comment, before reading your post, that I think it would be beneficial to read what these MacArthurites actually believe about women. Here we have it straight from the horse’s (John MacArthur himself) mouth. By the way, what do women without husbands do in this scenario? What do women with atheist, agnostic, non-Christian husbands do?

  67. dee wrote:

    I may be wrong but I bet it will come off. this way. “We knew she reported it without telling us, bless her little heart, so we didn’t think we have to do anything. “

    And then JMac, Rick, and all the other MenaGAWD can sing “Holy, Holy, Holy” to themselves in the mirror.

  68. Deb wrote:

    @ Victorious:
    Based on Jane’s testimony, her rapist was a smooth operator.

    Successful Serial Rapists usually are.

    Like pedos, not only do they groom their victims, but also groom third party authority figures as allies in case anything goes down.

    I’m left wondering whether he is/was a member of Grace Community Church?

    The part about him “dressing her” after drugging her makes me think he’s VERY familiar with Christianese Holiness shtick and Virgin/Ho Dichotomy and was setting Jane up as the patsy (dressing like a harlot! almost dancing!) to take the fall.

  69. Lea wrote:

    I completely agree with you. Just wanted to put my two cents in. I think they literally can’t see what everyone else sees. They are too indoctrinated. They are groupthinking the heck out of this thing, and they’re getting it wrong.

    As morning drive-time radio described North Korea, “That whole country runs on Delusion”.

  70. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.

    Experiential biases? LOLOL!

  71. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    One of our country’s fundamental beliefs is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. When did we flip the script?

    We are not in court. Many of us have seen long time patterns of behavior from this group that lead us to believe Jane. And their doctrine fits perfectly with her version.

    I get that you are a fellow traveler. I am not.

  72. Lea wrote:

    Guest wrote:
    Just because a man has a daughter does not make him smart about women or means he loves any woman.
    This is true. I tend to dislike ‘what if she were your daughter’ comments, although I get where they are coming from. They are trying to form an emotional connection between the treatment and a person that the pastor actually (theoretically) loves. But this doesn’t work if they think of women more as property, which many do, which leads to ‘if this were my daughter I would [insert theoretical manly display of macho violence here]. And it certainly doesn’t work if they are terrible abusive people, as you mention. And it doesn’t work if they generically blame women for these encounters, as many do.
    This only works with good and decent men who have been led astray by false teaching. And then only sometimes.

    For the record, I ran away (happily and with great joy) from a conservative Baptist church where our family (including daughters) sat amongst a rapist for over a year. A YEAR! Let me repeat myself….A WHOLE YEAR! Since I choose not to kiss up to pastors, the leadership, or those who deem themselves as highly spiritual mothers and fathers (yes, this is what many love to call themselves….these are Trinity Broadcasting Network worshipers), I am not in the inner circle of church dealings. I had no idea that my daughters were involved in a church youth group where the rapist attended on a weekly basis. And I was not observant in wondering why that beautiful young lady quit going to church….I did not put two and two together as I should have and didn’t have a clue as to the brainwashing and conditioning that was going on. Red flags in my soul should have been addressed when I heard of several church board members, deacons and deaconesses, bad-mouthing the character of the victim’s parents, the victim herself, and their family as a whole.

    Another words, there was plenty of hate going around from the “leadership” and I want to vomit at that word right now! I was being conditioned to hate that family as much as the leadership did and like a dummy, I did not have a clue. I did some work for this family and found them to be loving Jesus, and loving life…..until the rape happened and was covered up by the leadership, fact being, the rapist was the son of the church board president and a favored family of the charismatic pastor. So it’s no wonder the victim and her family were coerced into hiding the rape and going along with the pastor and the good ole boys and girls that were the yes men and women.

    So when I read of facts surrounding the rape of women, in this case a high school girl, I often think of how I would handle the situation if it were one of my daughters. Would it be easy for me to be filled with “joy” at the sight of seeing my daughters’ rapist every Sunday morning, or would my heart be broken, angered (a mindfully righteous anger- Psalm 4), or completely disappointed and unwilling to trust church leadership ever again?

    I have literally witnessed how church folks, especially the ones who claim to know a jesus figure better than the rest of us, treat the victim, the victim’s family, and the reputation of the family within the community. I label this “anti-Christ” treatment and it is appalling…..no, beyond appalling….it is wicked and it is evil.

    ’nuff said.

  73. dee wrote:

    She, however, was kicked out because she went dancing

    Gotta correct ya here, Dee — “almost dancing”, “almost dancing” = sin!

  74. @ Darlene:
    There’s more. JMac has had plenty to say about women. He even twists his words do praise into a glorification of slavery.

  75. @ Law Prof:
    In reply to your 10:06 AM post. Notice how Eric Davis never once refutes or acts appalled by the counseling methods that anonymous Jane describes. Why not refute those counseling methods and say that TMU (TMC) and TMS would never advocate such atrocious methods in counseling a raped woman. Surely he can say that much without overstepping his bounds as a former TMU employee. Why not insist that the counseling methods employed by TMU (formerly TMC) and TMS are to immediately report rape as a crime to the police? Why not insist that the counseling methods of TMU (TMC) are to always offer comfort to a rape victim and to take pains never to assign guilt or shame to such a victim? There is so much Eric Davis could have said without, as he says, “violating privacy laws and TMU’s own confidentiality regulations.” It’s as much what Davis doesn’t say as what he does, that casts suspicion on the way TMU (TMC) handled Jane’s case.

  76. A question of concern, “Why wasn’t Jane notified that her rapist would be present at Rick Holland’s counseling(?) session so she could bring her lawyer, family and friends to help her cope with reliving that sinful(on the part of the perpetrator) experience all over again?”

    Should not a responsible adult pastor forewarn the victim of her upcoming circumstances? Why would a pastor not want a support system in place for the victim’s well being, unless, he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing?

  77. dee wrote:

    I have to admit I have been having fits of giggles over the *sin of ballroom dancing.”

    I saw that somewhere and it was funny, but did they really attempt to go *ballroom* dancing?? I just assumed they went to a club. Probably because that was common for me at that age. Although one of the clubs we went to was latin, so maybe that counted as ballroom dancing?

  78. Lea wrote:

    @ Kyle Thompson:
    I think you hit buzzword bingo on everything with this post.

    He sounds like the usual churchianity broken record we hear, with no soul.

  79. Karen wrote:

    Why would a pastor not want a support system in place for the victim’s well being,

    He wanted to bully her, he was afraid for her to have back-up. He was on the side of the rapist, two men against a young woman who had just been raped. Sounds like church to me.

  80. Darlene wrote:

    By the way, what do women without husbands do in this scenario?

    IMO, stay far far away from anyone like this. The only other option is apparently to live with your dad in your 30s…

  81. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    I’m shocked to see so many of the quick reactions to this story.

    The institution has not provided a concrete defense nor has the victim made a fact-based accusation that can be double checked. All that they both have is their respective sides of the story.
    It’s a classic tale of he-said-she-said. In the place of cold hard facts I would think that cooler heads should prevail and wait to pass judgment.

    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.

    This runaway groupthink is like watching a train wreck unfold. I should count it very much a blessing that many of you are not judges who sit on courts and rule on these matters. One of our country’s fundamental beliefs is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. When did we flip the script?

    If the victim’s story is true there are serious problems and far reaching ramifications here. If it is not, you all should be ashamed for rushing to judgment. A trend that is too common these days and the damage it causes is devastating.

    I must give my disclaimer: I personally know many people involved in this story. They are hard-working, fair, honest, and good people by anyone’s standard. They wake up everyday and try to do the right thing – not unlike you and I. They are not being treated fairly. I am an alumnus of TMU, I’ve seen first hand some of its short comings – it’s not a perfect place (what place is?) but it’s filled with countless good, fair and honest people. Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.

    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.

    Kyle:

    I don’t believe you are a troll. I suspect that you have been exposed to these people in generally positive settings, and that they have been a blessing to you in many ways.

    I have been around a while, and am part of the conservative evangelical circles in which these people travel.

    The reason Jane’s story rings true with me is that when she recounts the theological positions of these people, and when they express themselves, this is how they view sex and sex related matters. It’s also how they view protecting the church.

    I have no doubt that Sovereign Grace and Mahaney believed back when the abuse happened that they way to handle this was to keep it in house. And there are certain biblical texts that could, if read alone, steer someone in that direction. However, that is a serious error, and if the entire counsel of God is read properly in context, people would know not to handle abuse they way SGM did.

    Fast forward a few years, and when the facts all tumble out, even the SGM people realize how bad it looks. Therefore, they don’t want to talk about it.

    The best case demonstrating this is The Village Church and Matt Chandler. I am not sure if you know the story there, but the bottom line is that the Church disciplined publicly a young woman whose husband turned out to be a pedophile, or at least a purveyor of child porn. And because the husband “repented”, the Church let him off the hook, but because the wife followed through with a divorce without getting church permission, the Church disciplined the wife.

    But once all the facts hit the press and the sunlight of public disclosure showed what was happening, the Church could see how awful it was. The reversed course, apologized (sort of) to the wife and did their best to move on.

    I learned the Village Church even wrote letters to former members they had done this to.

    So, that was a fresh case where all of the facts were known.

    In the SGM case, and in this case, you have the victims coming forward and saying what happened.

    And in response, you have the church officials clamming up. That’s because it looks so awful and indefensible.

    I understand your admiration for these people, and they have no doubt done a lot of good for many people.

    But I would urge you to ponder why a woman, who apparently has nothing to gain at this point, would come forward. And I would ask you to consider whether the counseling methods and some of the statements that are alleged to have been made could not have occurred, especially in an insular institution.

    And then finally consider why the school, the church, if they deny these things didn’t happen, why not just give a full accounting of what did happen.

    Instead we get surrogates vouching for the integrity of people, we get vague and general denials, no specifics.

    Rape is a very serious thing. Churches and schools should treat it as a serious thing.

    And they should come clean and apologize when they drop the ball on things like this.

  82. Karen wrote:

    I was being conditioned to hate that family as much as the leadership did

    That’s just awful. That’s exactly what Jane’s detractors who ‘know’ what a terrible person she is sound like. They sound brainwashed.

  83. ___

    A Deliberate Obstruction Of Justice: “She Should Be Dancing, Perhaps?” (1)

    hmmm…

    These Calvinist 501(c)3 religious criminals destroyed this woman’s life eleven years ago. Now they want to do it again?

    Pay back is hell, huh?

    Masters is making mistakes by the numbers, huh? Are they stalling so that they can get their lawyers involved?

    Q. Is it time to release the perps name from the police report ‘outside’ of The Wartburg Watch blog to the general public?!?

    Could be.

    Maybe he would like to fess-up ‘AGAIN…’

    Confession is good for the soul…

    Women are obviously no longer ‘safe’ any where near a 501(c)3 Calvinist religious institution.

    (sadface)

    Q. Is this woman trying to stay alive?
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hNvs8oXXJcg

    Could b.

    (tears)

    Sòpy
    ___
    (1) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HQDrduMuWOc

    🙁

  84. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.

    Finally, someone is talking sense on this blogload of claptrap and hysteria.

    It’s high time you all put aside your personal, emotional and experiential biases and put the asses of the facts in the case:
     FACT: Mr Thompson testifies that he knows the people involved and they’re good people by ANYBODY’s standard – this is fact, not Mr Thompson’s opinion, unlike all of you;
     FACT: Mr Thompson says you’re devastating and should be ashamed – this is a fact
     FACT: Mr Thompson is an alumnus of TMU and says it’s not a perfect place: this is a fact, and proves that he is not speaking from personal or experiential bias but from humility and honesty, unlike all of you;
     FACT: Mr Thompson personally testifies that he can’t find a single negative thing to say about these good people and that he is sure this story is exactly like those, where – FACT, not his opinion, because he CAN’T (not “doesn’t choose to” – CAN’T) find a negative thing to say about them, and this is a fact.

    You’re all rubbish.

    Up yours,

    Roger Bombast

  85. @ Roger Bombast:
    FACT: Mr. Thompson is man. He got to see the ‘good’ treatment men get in these situations.
    FACT: Mr. Thompson does not understand or care about the way women are treated in this crowd.
    FACT: This sort of counseling is par for the course for this type of church.
    FACT: I explain all about how LOGIC dictates that we default to believing the most likely scenario to Mr. ProbablyNotDon of Prairie Village, but he didn’t like dealing with facts and statistics too terribly much.
    FACT: I am weary of repeating the thing about how this isn’t court, and we’re allowed to believe the person we find most credible and ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is a legal standard, not a moral one. Truth is truth, no matter what you can prove in court.

  86. John Immel wrote:

    Jane was going to be victimized over and over the moment she joined the college because implicit to the doctrine is the abolition of moral innocents.

    That theological mindset is toxic. I have noticed in conversations with these type of folks that they will pull out the “we are all deserving of hell” as a way to put people in their place. If someone talks about the way they were abused, rather than offer comfort and support, they will tell the victim something to the effect that “they are sinners too and deserving of hell” just like the person who committed abuse. In their sin-leveling views, all people are reduced to being equal offenders.

  87. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    He even twists his words do praise into a glorification of slavery.

    I have noticed these men have a fetish with slavery and rape. Doug Wilson being the most enthralled with it, and they insist everyone minimizing rape with them.

    I sincerely believe Ariel Castro is their idol and hero. They try to use the bible to get what he got. Women are condemned if they don’t get married, once married they are owned by a man. Wife cannot deny man sex, wife can not divorce man, man can beat wife and she can not leave him, rape is never man’s fault. I would rather be dead than married to one of these men. I would never raise a daughter with one.

  88. @ Lea:

    FACT: Just about all of the points made by “Kyle Thompson” are statements of his personal, emotional or experiential bias!

  89. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Lea:
    NON-FACT: Just about all of the points made by “Kyle Thompson” are statements of his personal, emotional or experiential bias!

    Men are never emotional! They have no experiences! They have no personal opinions, despite personally knowing all of the people involved they are defending!!! /s

  90. @ Nick Bulbeck:
    I changed your fact to non-fact, when I meant to add to mine, thus ruining the whole look of the thing. Sorry! My kingdom for an edit button…

  91. It doesn’t matter if this guy confessed! They don’t care all they care is that Jane is talking about it and those involved are being shamed because of their own sorry excuse counseling tactics.

    Billy’s rapist confessed to! We posted the plea deal of his confession to two counts of aggravated sexual assault in the 1st degree! along with the medical records. I supplied emails and the crap nouthetic counseling they tried to give us! And yet our former pastor, elders, and some church members not only shame billy to this day but from the pulpit my child has been accused of being a homosexual and among those we once fellowshipped and broke bread with. It is unconscionable yet they do this all the time.

    It does not surprise me one bit that Jane is going through this. They all seem to go from the same play book on rape! Whether your a man, woman, or child doesn’t matter its the same crap they try to pull. Fortunately a cease and desist letter and the D.A. protected billy from them surprising us with his abuser like Mr. Holland did to Jane. We were spared that trauma but other things they did were just as damaging and my son is still trying to heal from this.

    Anyone criticizing Jane come talk to me! It is very abnormal for victims of abuse to accuse someone of these offenses by making them up! If it makes you feel better to accuse her of wrong doing go for it but your going to have a whole body of Christians on your butts for it to!

    By the way Mr Holland and our former pastor at lakeside bible church in Montgomery are best buds to! They hobnob at the same conferences and speaking engagements , go to the same churches to give their grandiose sermons! More like motivational audios and auditing is what I see!

  92. Lydia wrote:

    @ Lydia:
    On another note, isn’t all this similar to what they did to Karen Hinckley at the Village? They did not get the opportunity to kick her out, she left, but wasn’t the process made clear she had to adhere to their discipline to be a member in good standing (or whatever they call it)?
    It’s all the same type thing. Control.

    It’s a script they all follow. It’s one where there are no victims of abuse, just people who are equally sinners that need discipline. And when it comes to male versus female, the subjugation doctrine must always be applied to the female. Females must subjugate themselves to all male authority. In this case, Jane had to subjugate herself to Rick Holland’s counsel, even if it caused her severe trauma. The primary doctrine that must be followed at all costs when it comes to women is to submit to male authority.

  93. Lea wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:
    @ Lea:
    NON-FACT: Just about all of the points made by “Kyle Thompson” are statements of his personal, emotional or experiential bias!
    Men are never emotional! They have no experiences! They have no personal opinions, despite personally knowing all of the people involved they are defending!!! /s

    And remember, the Neo-Calvinist Jesus has no emotions. He is a Spock figure. Except, of course, when He is angry and turning over the tables of the money changers in the temple.

  94. Darlene wrote:

    Females must subjugate themselves to all male authority.

    I agree with you on this and with Lydia that it’s all about control.

    Here is the thing though. In these situations, the men at least pretend to be under ‘control’ of the ‘authority’ involved, like TVC or Rick Holland. They ‘confess’, say they’re sorry, pretend all the things.

    The church ‘authority’ involved, though, has not asked them to do anything hard. What they have asked is generally beneficial. In Jane’s case, the man involved suffered no consequences from this supposed confession. He got a free pass, and support from the church. He suffered no discipline that we know of.

    Meanwhile, what they ask of the victim is in no way beneficial. They are asked to do everything they’re told, even when it is both hurtful and stupid, and then punished for standing up in the fact of this and saying no. And this pattern repeats and repeats.

    What a mess.

  95. Lea wrote:

    I am weary of repeating the thing about how this isn’t court, and we’re allowed to believe the person we find most credible and ‘innocent until proven guilty’ is a legal standard, not a moral one. Truth is truth, no matter what you can prove in court.

    I am so glad you said this.

  96. ishy wrote:

    Kyle Thompson wrote:
    Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.
    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.
    “This story”? A large number of victims have since come forward with similar stories, many who name the same people and are using their real names. There isn’t just one story here anymore.

    Ishy, just curious, but where have these other non-anonymous victims come forward with similar stories?

  97. shauna wrote:

    It is very abnormal for victims of abuse to accuse someone of these offenses by making them up!

    Shauna, I am so sorry for what happened to your son, it makes me sick. Please tell him there are many people he will never know who is on his side, and we are p*ssed about what happened to him. We think the person who did it to him belongs in prison, and the bullies are the worst of humankind.

    The hardest thing to say is, I was raped. I am very talkative and blunt, but saying that took years. It is very hard to say.

  98. Lea wrote:

    @ Kyle Thompson:
    I think you hit buzzword bingo on everything with this post.

    Can I add Neo-Calvinist buzzword bingo? 😉

  99. @ Nick Bulbeck:

    Lol! That one cracked me up. Hey People, any horrible thing that you experienced or witnessed only means you are biased toward the bad stuff so you must not ever take that experience into consideration. Ever.

    Hee hee. Well, of course I am biased!

    Experiential “wisdom” is more like it.

  100. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.

    I remember when Matt Chandler said something similar to me on Twitter when we first released the Karen Hinkley story. No, we do not have to set aside anything. The change in the treatment of women who have been raped has come about precisely because logical people got sick and tired of the he said/she said scenario.

    I have the right and,some might say, the obligation to listen to and care for those marginalized by celebrity enterprises who run churches and para-church organization as if they are K Mart. The employees of these Kmart churches run around to defend their business and forget, entirely, that their first obligation is to care for the victims and the marginalized.

    The law recognizes my right to believe a story of abuse. I believe stories of abuse based on a number of things, one of which is a police report. I have been doing this for8 1/2 years. I have yet to be wrong about a situation. One of these days I will be. However, I would far rather spend my time defending those with no voice as opposed to sitting around in some Kmart trying to figure out how to defend the celebrity enterprise.

    Kyle Thompson wrote:

    This runaway groupthink is like watching a train wreck unfold.

    Logic would demand that I comment on the issue of groupthink involved in your comment and in your wholehearted defense of the status quo at TMU and GCC. Something is amiss if an institution makes ballroom dancing an expulsion level offense. Ah yes, the Waltz of the Wicked…. This is bizarre. You are as much involved in groupthink as anyone else and I think you know it. Youe didn’t show up when we discussed other ministries. Kyle shows up when we discuss TMU, etc.

    Kyle Thompson wrote:

    I personally know many people involved in this story. They are hard-working, fair, honest, and good people by anyone’s standard.

    Excuse me. I thought you guys understood the Gospel. Perhaps I am mistaken about the level of understanding of the Scriptures that is being encouraged in your organization? Each and every person that you mentioned is capable of sin. And they sin without alerting Kyle. I am posting a story of a famous *good man* and respected theologian who lived a double life. I plan to post it tomorrow.

    Kyle, you are naive. You have no idea whatsoever what goes on the lives of people you see and live with every day. As Christians, we are positionally holy but we are still functional sinners. The sinner I shall discuss tomorrow hid his long time sins from even his closest family members. So, your witness to the supposed *goodness* of you BFFs runs hollow and does not even sound biblical.

    Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time.

    Once again, Kyle, you sound naive. So long as Kyle knew them and observed them then they must be as Kyle says they are. They are not and neither are you or me. You see what you want to see.. I am thankful for your comment because it helps me to see the weakness and superficiality of the theology that you espouse. Is this what you were taught at GCC? If so, I am saddened.

    Prediction: One day, you will be stunned and you will wonder why you didn’t see what was really going on.Remember this comment.

  101. dee wrote:

    Ah yes, the Waltz of the Wicked

    The waltz was considered risqué when if first debuted something like 200 years ago… 😉

  102. Thank you guest! Billy has had an incredible amount of support here at TWW. I don’t know how we would have processed some of what happened afterwards without the support of those of you here. My son is stronger because of you and he is on his way to healing because of the love he has received from those here. God is good and He will use billy to love others who are broken, that I’m sure of.
    His abuser was brought to justice even if no jail time was given. He was exposed and hopefully if he ever does again the next victim will be the one who puts him away for a long time. Most abusers go on for years with no criminal record. Billy’s abuser has one, even if it’s a juvenile one. He can not hide in the dark and TWW also made sure of it by posting biily’s story. I am so proud of Jane. I hope she is reading these posts. What a brave woman and she is in my thoughts. I am so mad for her because of the injustice with these men.
    They make things so much worse more then it had to be! I just don’t get it. I guess evil comes in many forms and the main form the worst form is appearing as angles of light. They become ugly when they are exposed and Mr. Holland and the rest of the pack have been exposed. They know it to that’s why they are coming out with all their lies.

    I have known the names of these key men since we begun going to lakeside bible church. Pastor Ramey has promoted their books, conferences, taken trips and shared the same platforms with these men abusers. Yes I say abusers because when they use their twisted counseling and scare tactics ( using the bible) to intimidate and scare believers into silence they are bullies and abusers. Every one of them and they know it! They want our silence and when they can’t get it they will use their platforms, lawyers, friends, and investigators to discredit those they abuse.

    Its a fact and one we need to start facing head on. How do you deal with a bully? Well we do what King David did, hit them right between the eyes! For him it was a sling shot for us it’s the truth and standing on God’s word. They can’t combat it no matter how many lawyers they get. Guest wrote:

    shauna wrote:

    It is very abnormal for victims of abuse to accuse someone of these offenses by making them up!

    Shauna, I am so sorry for what happened to your son, it makes me sick. Please tell him there are many people he will never know who is on his side, and we are p*ssed about what happened to him. We think the person who did it to him belongs in prison, and the bullies are the worst of humankind.

    The hardest thing to say is, I was raped. I am very talkative and blunt, but saying that took years. It is very hard to say.

  103. “But once all the facts hit the press and the sunlight of public disclosure showed what was happening, the Church could see how awful it was. The reversed course, apologized (sort of) to the wife and did their best to move on.”

    Dear Oracle,

    I know you did not mean it this way but you just made a very strong case for why attending church is dangerous business. What you described are people who are in a little leadership bubble and thought what they were doing was to the glory of God. Once it went public about the Villuage–and became bad press– they totally changed their tune. And frankly it didn’t become public right away.

    This is a perfect example of why it’s a big mistake to trust such insulated and indoctrinated people. They show very little wisdom in the most important of matters.

  104. dee wrote:

    One day, you will be stunned and you will wonder why you didn’t see what was really going on.

    I would not be surprised if he knows what is going on and he simply doesn’t care, he is a man, they like men, he is getting his. Scr*w women.

  105. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Lea:
    FACT: Just about all of the points made by “Kyle Thompson” are statements of his personal, emotional or experiential bias!

    Ah….but Nick, they are all FACTS in Calvinista Land. 😉

  106. shauna wrote:

    By the way Mr Holland and our former pastor at lakeside bible church in Montgomery are best buds to! They hobnob at the same conferences and speaking engagements , go to the same churches to give their grandiose sermons! More like motivational audios and auditing is what I see!

    Why am I not surprised?

  107. Darlene wrote:

    Ishy, just curious, but where have these other non-anonymous victims come forward with similar stories?

    I am not sure if it started on Marci’s blog or the first TMU statement. The first statement had a bunch of victims coming forward until TMU started deleting them. Some of their stories were pretty horrifying, and Julie Ann posted them on her recent post about Jane’s story. A woman named Karen Caldwell is kinda organizing that group and I believe both Marci and Julie Anne are referring people over to it. There’s also a Facebook page called #DoYouSeeUs that has started, I guess to act as a spokesman for it.

  108. I just cannot understand how these leaders think that forcing victims to reconcile or to forgive the people that abused them is the correct way. Yes, it is true that Jesus instructs us to forgive those who have done wrong towards us, but I fail to see where the Bible says that Churches or others should force us to do that. Forgiveness and reconciliation are great but they have to be freely given. Preachers or others in the church attempting to force or guilt victims into forgiving or reconciling with their abusers are no better than people who try to convert others with the sword, in that they are not achieving true forgiveness or reconciliation but are instead creating a superficial bending to their will. God created each of us with freewill, no one including God himself can force us do anything. Therefore, it is wrong of the Church to think that they can override our freewill, when even the Lord does not. Of course, they should teach that we should forgive and reconcile with those who sin against us, just as God forgives and reconciles with all of us who sin against Him, but they need to comprehend that there is no time table on forgiveness or reconciliation, each individual will progress at their own pace. Christians are still imperfect humans we do not receive special forgiveness superpowers at the moment we are saved.

  109. Dee, you are quite right about C.J. Mahaney providing counsel to Rick Holland on how to handle Jane’s rape. They were close friends when the rape occurred in March 2006. In fact, they had been friends for about 3 years.

    By March 2006, they were talking about all the most important subjects touching upon John MacArthur, the staff and the church. C.J. filled me in on those conversations. Rick sought and gobbled up C.J.’s counsel including how to deal with John MacArthur himself. The staff was very frustrated. No one felt they could correct him, approach him or be friends with him. That was a main reason Rick left Grace Community Church.

    The way Rick handled the situation with Jane is precisely the way C.J. and his staff handled sexual abuse in Covenant Life Church and parts of Sovereign Grace Ministries I did not directly oversee. Victims were told the pastors would handle things internally and crimes should not be reported to law enforcement because that will only make matters worse. I did the exact opposite and did not learn about this corruption until the lawsuit came out. C.J. hid his unwritten policy from me knowing I would not tolerate it.

    Further, to report a rape or sexual abuse was a sign of bitterness and unforgiveness. Victims were required to meet with their raptist or abuser to grant forgiveness soon after the rape or abuse took place. Honestly, this was so cruel and a way to silence them. Forgiveness was used to cover up crimes. You don’t go to police or tell others if you really forgive! That is a corrupt and twisted application of forgiveness.

    Moreover, victims were always warned not to slander and gossip about their abusers. Some of the abusers were pastors, teachers and leaders like Nathaniel Morales. He headed up the international outreach at the University of MD campus for Grant Layman. He abused scores of boys over three decades. C.J. learned about him in June 1991. Never reported him. Twenty years later Morales was finally arrested and sentenced to 40 yrs. It was insane. Everything had to be covered up.

    As a result, people who were in harm’s way were never told about abusers. Even convicted ones. They could be babysitting your child and you would not know it. And the victim’s supposed sins were often given as much time and attention as the abuser. In addition, the parents of victims were often confronted for their perceived anger and bitterness. And in every case in the lawsuit, the abuser got more care than the victim. This all happened as a result of C.J.’s leadership. He should be in jail.

    I have strongly confronted Rick Holland in private for his cover up of C.J.’s sins. I sent him overwhelming evidence of ethical and criminal guilt. He refused to read it because he was too busy pastoring his church of 180 people with two other staff pastors. I begged him to repent. In my final email to him on Jan 26, 2016, I said “I hope you study the evidence, come to your senses, stop supporting C.J. in ministry, and help him repent.” Of course, there was no response and he continues to support C.J.

    You also know about my dealings with Phil Johnson, John MacArthur and Chris Hamilton (chairman of the board). They refused to deal with Phil for his extraordinary lying, deceit, bullying, and arrogance. It was staggering. If you let Phil remain in ministry you will let anyone remain in ministry. People can read my post on the matter. I sent it to all the church pastors and seminary professors.

    http://abrentdetwiler.squarespace.com/brentdetwilercom/john-macarthur-refuses-to-follow-his-own-teaching-in-dealing.html

    I don’t know all the facts concerning Jane but I do know John MacArthur and Rick Holland cannot be trusted to follow their own teaching or that of Scripture. They did not do it with Phil or with C.J. They have covered up for these men. I have no reason to believe they would not seek to cover up the rape of Jane or treat her in the manner she describes. I’ve repeatedly documented the corruption that characterizes far too many national leaders who are more concerned about their pretentious reputations than the glory of God about which they write. Soli Deo gloria has become a slogan. We need it to be a reality!

  110. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches.

    Kyle

    You do make some interesting points.

    I would be curious to know what Rick Holland actually “preaches” since you indicate you have never seen him fail to practice what he preaches. This is what Brent Detwiler said about Rick Holland recently on Facebook when he posted about this issue and I reminded Brent that Rick Holland was the one in the story that allegedly did the dirty work:

    Brent Detwiler That’s right and Holland is one of the “blind” who refused to study the evidence against Mahaney. No one with any integrity would support C.J. if they studied the overwhelming evidence against him. Only the willfully ignorant do so.

    I guess Rick never preached on looking at the evidence like against C.J. Mahaney or did Rick Holland teach how good it is to be “willfully ignorant?” Or for that matter say contacting Brent Detwiler to hear what he had to say about C.J. Mahaney?

    Did Rick Holland ever teach on Paul’s final warning in Acts about wolves and men from within and to be looking for them?

    As I shared earlier, Todd indicated that Rick Holland told Todd that he didn’teven read the documents that Brent compiled. This is just baffling that Holland would not do this but remain a staunch supporter of C.J. Mahaney. I guess since Rick had dealing with C.J. Mahaney and thought he knew Mahaney (it could have been the mask Mahaney wears when he visits other leaders) Rick Holland didn’t need to check other sources.

    Just realize that Pastor Rick Holland’s track record is poor so it is quite easy to believe what people allege about Rick Holland. Also as others have said what Rick Holland did is the typical action of leaders that Rick Holland hangs around and supports. Thus it would be no surprise if Rick did what is alleged since it is so similar to the actions of other “leaders” he supports.

  111. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    You also know about my dealings with Phil Johnson, John MacArthur and Chris Hamilton (chairman of the board). They refused to deal with Phil for his extraordinary lying, deceit, bullying, and arrogance. It was staggering. If you let Phil remain in ministry you will let anyone remain in ministry.

    Thanks, Brent, we appreciate your viewpoint on “Jane’s” situation and on Phil Johnson.

  112. John Immel wrote:

    All sin is morally equivalent (sort of) therefore the rapist and the rapee are at the root no different.

    Wild speculation: Could this be why Jane was asked if she had been “turned on” by the assault? Perhaps that was her sin [other than the “sin” of being born female] for which she needed to repent?

    More Wild Speculation: Could the perpetrator be connected to some bigwig at TMU? He wasn’t a student, yet knew some of the grad students. And Holland and crew seem to have gone to great lengths to protect him. “You are ruining that young man’s life!”

    I’m thinking of starting a conference called “Nauseous.” Not Anchored, or Resurgent, just Nauseous.

  113. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    I must give my disclaimer: I personally know many people involved in this story. They are hard-working, fair, honest, and good people by anyone’s standard. They wake up everyday and try to do the right thing – not unlike you and I. They are not being treated fairly. I am an alumnus of TMU, I’ve seen first hand some of its short comings – it’s not a perfect place (what place is?) but it’s filled with countless good, fair and honest people. Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.
    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.

    Hi Kyle, Thank you for your comment. I have questions for you. What were you like when you went to TMU? What crowd did you hang around with? Were you part of SLS? Were you well-behaved and abided by all of the rules? Did you ever skip chapel? Did you ever miss curfew? Did you do anything in which you got in trouble?

    Did you know people who got in trouble? Did you ask them how they were treated? Were you in a popular group?

  114. Guest wrote:

    dee wrote:

    One day, you will be stunned and you will wonder why you didn’t see what was really going on.

    I would not be surprised if he knows what is going on and he simply doesn’t care, he is a man, they like men, he is getting his. Scr*w women.

    “I Got Mine,
    I Got Mine,
    I DON’T WANT A THING TO CHANGE
    NOW THAT I GOT MINE!”
    — Glenn Frye, “I Got Mine”

  115. Darlene wrote:

    Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    @ Lea:
    FACT: Just about all of the points made by “Kyle Thompson” are statements of his personal, emotional or experiential bias!

    Ah….but Nick, they are all FACTS in Calvinista Land.

    “I REJECT *YOUR* REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE MY OWN!”
    — Mythbusters intro

  116. Lydia wrote:

    “But once all the facts hit the press and the sunlight of public disclosure showed what was happening, the Church could see how awful it was. The reversed course, apologized (sort of) to the wife and did their best to move on.”

    Dear Oracle,

    I know you did not mean it this way but you just made a very strong case for why attending church is dangerous business. What you described are people who are in a little leadership bubble and thought what they were doing was to the glory of God. Once it went public about the Villuage–and became bad press– they totally changed their tune. And frankly it didn’t become public right away.

    This is a perfect example of why it’s a big mistake to trust such insulated and indoctrinated people. They show very little wisdom in the most important of matters.

    Can’t really disagree. I don’t trust myself most of the time.

  117. Darlene wrote:

    And remember, the Neo-Calvinist Jesus has no emotions. He is a Spock figure.

    Not “Spock”.
    KRAIL.

    Thirty-odd years ago, there was this small-time SF author with the pen name of “Simon Lang”. Three novels of oddball Trad-Catholic space opera that you could tell began as Star Trek fanfic. The Big Bad of this “Star Trek with Rosaries” was a race called the Krail.

    The Krail were as un-emotional as Vulcans — Pure Intellect, Totally Dispassionate, Totally Rational and Reasonable. And one of the most coldly genocidal races in SF whose empire was pretty much a star-spanning North Korea. Slavery (“making most rational use of personnel resources”), genocide (“adjusting population to optimum” and “recycling biological resources”), torture (“negative reinforcement for desired behavior”), you name it. All totally Rational, totally Reasonable, totally Dispassionate pure Intellect.

  118. Guest wrote:

    I have noticed these men have a fetish with slavery and rape. Doug Wilson being the most enthralled with it, and they insist everyone minimizing rape with them.

    Those who Hold the Whip (or want to Hold the Whip) just cannot understand why there could be anything wrong with slavery.

    Rapists just cannot understand what could be wrong with rape.

    “When ‘What is Wrong’ has been totally deconstructed, ‘What I Want’ will still remain.”
    — attr to C.S.Lewis(?)

  119. John Immel wrote:

    @ Law Prof:
    no… re read everything i said.

    Nope, I agree with everything said in that post of yours. Are you referring to another?

  120. @ Sandra Ford: he told you why he cannot respond further. He’s correct in that assertion. I’ve seen situations like this, even been involved in dealing with many of them on the church leadership side. They are extremely difficult to get to the truth. I’ve seen lies on both sides.

  121. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    I’m shocked to see so many of the quick reactions to this story.
    The institution has not provided a concrete defense nor has the victim made a fact-based accusation that can be double checked. All that they both have is their respective sides of the story.
    It’s a classic tale of he-said-she-said. In the place of cold hard facts I would think that cooler heads should prevail and wait to pass judgment.
    Logic would dictate that we set aside the personal, emotional and experiential biases we have and merely asses the facts of the case.
    This runaway groupthink is like watching a train wreck unfold. I should count it very much a blessing that many of you are not judges who sit on courts and rule on these matters. One of our country’s fundamental beliefs is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. When did we flip the script?
    If the victim’s story is true there are serious problems and far reaching ramifications here. If it is not, you all should be ashamed for rushing to judgment. A trend that is too common these days and the damage it causes is devastating.
    I must give my disclaimer: I personally know many people involved in this story. They are hard-working, fair, honest, and good people by anyone’s standard. They wake up everyday and try to do the right thing – not unlike you and I. They are not being treated fairly. I am an alumnus of TMU, I’ve seen first hand some of its short comings – it’s not a perfect place (what place is?) but it’s filled with countless good, fair and honest people. Rick was my pastor for many years. Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time. I have an extremely difficult time believing a single word of this story knowing the caliber and testimony of the people involved. I’ve seen how other difficult counseling situations were handled and I have every confidence this was handled with an equal amount wisdom and grace.
    So there you have it, my cards are all on the table. I would only ask that you hold back judgment long enough to see the facts unfold.

    Kiddo, you’re the one with the runaway groupthink. It’s a subject I teach on at the university when I teach a course in white collar crime. You’re textbook.

  122. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    I’m shocked…

    And let me add you think you know someone, you think you know the caliber of the people with whom you associate, but you don’t know squat until you see them at their worst behind closed doors when they have no reason to be nice anymore. Just the fact that you’re part of the culture at TMU shows me you’re steeped in some very destructive thinking and engaged in pure projection when you throw grouptink shade at this forum. I do know about that place and have been following the career of Mr. MacArthur since perhaps before you were born. You don’t know squat.

  123. dee wrote:

    Prediction: One day, you will be stunned and you will wonder why you didn’t see what was really going on.Remember this comment.

    And having been down this road a number of times, repeatedly warned people that they were in destructive ministries serving men who secretly despised them, having told them the flat out truth that I had experienced and seen with my own two eyes, then seen everything I predicted come true, trust me that when Kyle’s fantasy world crashes, you will never, ever receive one word along the lines of of “Gosh, sorry Dee, you were right.” Has happened to me once in 35 years of knowing the Lord.

  124. —-

    Bigger Fish To Fry: “The Clock Is Ticking?”

    Hey John,

    Gōōd ta sêê ya!

    …inherent disaster?

    hmmm…

    Hurting people don’t give a #@%t about philosophy…

    (snicker)

    The issue John, IMHO is that an eleven year obstruction of justice incident has yet to be addressed; that an eleven year old injustice has yet to be satisfied, that a stricken purposeful life needs healing…

    That a group of proverbial famed self-‘con’-graduating sheep-skinned, cre-dent-ialed, authored, 501(c)3 Calvinestas are making every effort to cover their proverbial @zzes is a secondary issue.

    SKreeeeeeetch!

    Remember with da Ceege, we are still waiting for ‘justice’, and them multitude of broken extorted people who gave their trust, their day of justice as well…

    (sadface)

    Remember, we bind the enemy, and let the Lord Jesus spoil theyz goods. He certainly should have absolutely no trouble getting to the bottom of ‘this’ one, He has had eleven years to think about it…

    (grin)

    —> The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth mucho…

    Blessings!

    “Rising up, back on the street
    Did my time, took my chances
    Went the distance, now I’m back on my feet
    Just a man and his will to survive
    So many times it happens too fast
    You change your passion for glory
    Don’t lose your grip on the dreams of the past
    You must fight just to keep them alive…” (1)

    Thanks for caring about ‘Jane’ and stoppin’ by…

    May Our Lord continue to put ‘Wind’ in your prolific sails!

    ATB

    Sòpy
    ___
    (1) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VhnWNu06-Ts

    😉

    _

  125. ishy wrote:

    Darlene wrote:
    Ishy, just curious, but where have these other non-anonymous victims come forward with similar stories?
    I am not sure if it started on Marci’s blog or the first TMU statement. The first statement had a bunch of victims coming forward until TMU started deleting them. Some of their stories were pretty horrifying, and Julie Ann posted them on her recent post about Jane’s story. A woman named Karen Caldwell is kinda organizing that group and I believe both Marci and Julie Anne are referring people over to it. There’s also a Facebook page called #DoYouSeeUs that has started, I guess to act as a spokesman for it.

    Wow. So Jane opened up a can of worms. As far as that Neo-Cal world goes, I don’t think it matters to them how many people come forward about abuse they suffered at TMU (TMC) or GCC. Their entire belief system is such that they have little to no self-awareness of their abusive tactics. I would go so far as to say I think their system is dependent upon being willfully blind.

  126. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    ne of our country’s fundamental beliefs is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. When did we flip the script?

    Well, no. What it really means that the courts cannot claim that you are guilty unless sufficient proof is offered.

    However, I know you know that people can be guilty even when proven *not guilty.* OJ Simpson, and Casey Anthony are two examples unless you are one of the only people in American who thinks they are innocent.

  127. @ Brent Detwiler:

    Thanks for chiming in Brent! Yes, you would definitely know about the friendship between C.J. and Rick because you were still in leadership in SGM and one of Mahaney's colleagues.

  128. I read on Twitter today that Eric Davis is married to the woman who was RD of Jane’s dorm, whom she went to initially.

  129. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    Further, to report a rape or sexual abuse was a sign of bitterness and unforgiveness. Victims were required to meet with their raptist or abuser to grant forgiveness soon after the rape or abuse took place. Honestly, this was so cruel and a way to silence them. Forgiveness was used to cover up crimes. You don’t go to police or tell others if you really forgive! That is a corrupt and twisted application of forgiveness.

    I read this and I wonder why people stay in these authoritarian churches.

    I genuinely don’t get it.

    There’s no benefit. None.

    Men & women are equal. Full stop.

    This ideology is the worst garbage I have ever heard.

    I feel bad for the victims.

    This is so far from my world of experience.

  130. @ Lea:

    Lea

    I think your absolutely right. The fuller picture probably consists of their theological basis for their actions in the story Jane told, with insignificant changes to the details. That’s the feeling I got when I read his post.

  131. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    @ Headless Unicorn Guy:
    How about Q from Star Trek the Next Generation, Deep Space Nine?

    Q was basically a resident Mad God, a bored trickster.
    Not so much malevolent as just an omnipotent jerk (who liked to jerk Picard around).

    P.S. Does John DeLancie’s speech rhythm and delivery remind anyone of Vincent Price’s?

  132. dee wrote:

    However, I know you know that people can be guilty even when proven *not guilty.* OJ Simpson, and Casey Anthony are two examples unless you are one of the only people in American who thinks they are innocent.

    Probably not.
    They’re not Neo-Cal Big Dogs.

  133. Law Prof wrote:

    Kiddo, you’re the one with the runaway groupthink. It’s a subject I teach on at the university when I teach a course in white collar crime. You’re textbook.

    LawProf, I’d be curious to read your point-by-point compare-and-contrast.

    Give the Logical Dispassionate One a little Logical Dispassionate Analysis.

  134. I will state what I stated on PJ site during that discussion brent was bringing up, if CJ “believed” in evolution, converted to EO or RCC or was a member of BioLogos held to women pastors etc Mr. Johnson or JMac would not be seen on the same stage with CJ. In my Opinion, PJ pulled a bait and switch and turned to conversation toward himself and put words in my mouth. I do not trust this man nor JMac nor the organization. I am not really good at interacting with such blatant goal moving. Team Pyro was a shrine to bait and switch, passive-aggressive rhetoric, and caustic manipulation. They get all weirded out about gay people even SS attraction which Burk goes on and on about being a sin. Talk about giving people no hope. They suck the hope right out of the air and most of them are not even that good at being a preacher. PJ and Jmac went on and on about how rich charismatic preachers are but they make a pretty penny as well. Jmac also has a lot of political power and that can be intimidating, and it is supposed to be intimidating. Of course, that is just my opinion.

    Now why this is extremely dangerous for our species

    https://youtu.be/pXnwB97fBj8

    This is plain twaddle with horrible logic and blatant mischaracterization. It is also incredibly selfish and extremely short-sighted. It is lazy and weakminded even childish. Again just my opinion.

  135. Deb wrote:

    @ Victorious:
    Based on Jane’s testimony, her rapist was a smooth operator. I am concerned that there may be other victims.
    I’m left wondering whether he is/was a member of Grace Community Church?

    I would guarantee that there are other victims out there. He knew exactly what he was doing and the other men he lived with went along with it as well. This was a group effort.

  136. @ Law Prof:

    Law Prof

    You nailed it sir. I felt the passion of that post so strongly that I imagined myself in Mr. Davis’ personal space. I pray that someone Wil do so and unseat these jesters from their thrones.

    Ecclesiastes 10:5 There is an evil I have seen under the sun,
    the sort of error that arises from a ruler:
    6Fools are put in many high positions,
    while the rich occupy the low ones.
    7I have seen slaves on horseback,
    while princes go on foot like slaves.

  137. I promise to keep my language clean – it’s hard, though, because this story really makes me cuss!

    The issue that I have with Eric Davis’ response, or any response that turns the institution (or those involved) as the victim, is that I am left to think that Eric never believes any rape victim. He put his words out there as someone who knew Jane “before, DURING(??!!), and after” the event clearly letting everyone know he does not believe her. What rape victim would ever come to him now for any help? He would neither believe nor help someone who has been raped. And he claims to be a “pastor” and “counselor.” Yes, I put those words in quotes because I think they should be used loosely with him.

    Eric started out his first post by talking about his three daughters. What I want to know is if one of his daughters came to him saying that she was raped by someone he knew, would he treat her the same way he has treated Jane? Would he tell his daughter that she was making up the story and maligning the rapist? Or, would he be like Jane’s parents and believe her and fight for her?

    As a victim advocate, I hear a lot of stories. It saddens me to think that there is a pastor out there who would question the truthfulness of victim’s experience. Actually, there are lots of pastors out there because all of these guys that come out of TMS/TMU or are fans of those in the same circle are all the same. Those who experience abuse who go to their church for support should be absolutely certain that they will receive it. Otherwise, they will only have more unnecessary abuse heaped upon them.

  138. Kathi wrote:

    He put his words out there as someone who knew Jane “before, DURING(??!!), and after” the event clearly letting everyone know he does not believe her. What rape victim would ever come to him now for any help? He would neither believe nor help someone who has been raped.

    Maybe that’s the whole idea?
    1) Ees no Rape in my Church! Otherwise, they would have come to Me!
    2) Make an Example of one and you silence a thousand?
    3) No pesky wimmenfolk to interrupt my Important Studies of Theology.
    Feature, not Bug?

  139. GSD [Getting Stuff Done] wrote:

    John Immel wrote:

    All sin is morally equivalent (sort of) therefore the rapist and the rapee are at the root no different.

    Wild speculation: Could this be why Jane was asked if she had been “turned on” by the assault? Perhaps that was her sin [other than the “sin” of being born female] for which she needed to repent?

    Or her Pastor/Counselor was real interested in all the JUICY details, i.e. Voyeurism.
    (Considering so many of these MenaGAWD eventually get exposed as pervs…)

  140. @ Brent Detwiler:
    From your link:

    “Phil Johnson: The problem with this particular swarm of rancor monsters is that there are lots of people who self-identify as victims of “abuse” when in reality they just despise all authority, starting with the authority of Scripture. They profess to hate bullying, but their actions betray an eagerness to berate, accuse, and impute the worse possible motives to anyone who fails to affirm their omni-directional resentment. It is a potent flavor of spiritual abuse all its own, and it is as sick as any other form of spiritual abuse.”

    This is exactly how AL Mohler approached the CJ issue. We just hate authority, leadership and scriptures. Mohler told this to a Courier Journal religion reporter who published it. (It was deleted after the lawsuit came out)

    It’s the playbook.

    Mohler is still the pope of the SBC.

  141. Kathi wrote:

    never believes any rape victim

    From Jane’s deposition: “I am standing outside the door to Rick’s office… I open the door and am shocked to see the stranger sitting there. I am starting to shake and sweat. Rick asks me to sit down by my rapist. Rick speaks for the rapist. ‘He has admitted to everything he has done. He has acknowledged his sin and that this relationship was not consensual and he has repented. Look at him, he is crying.’”

    Therefore, three people witnessed a confession from the perpetrator: Rick, “Jane”, and the perp himself.

    No “he said”, “she said”. It is in Jane’s deposition. Does the Dear Leader Rick today say differently, which if this deposition is accurate, is a lie? Does the perp today admit what he confessed in that office? Or, has he now changed his story. If that was the moment of truth, then anything less today is a lie.

    Satan is the Father of Lies. God help them, they need it. They are not on God’s team.

  142. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    Moreover, victims were always warned not to slander and gossip about their abusers.

    Brent Detwiler wrote:

    They have covered up for these men.

    Megan’s Law, a federal law, requires all law enforcement authorities to make information available to the American public identifying registered sex offenders and their offenses.

    Neither slander nor gossip, it is a national database and it is the law.

    After confessing to the drugging, kidnapping, and raping of Jane, the predator should have been registered as a sex offender, because that is what he is. Who else are his victims? He had drugs ready to put Jane out – where else has he done this? He seems to have his MO down, organized, intentional, vicious. Serial? And the church crowd is his hunting ground?

  143. In order to become a member of MRBC, one must agree to their list of “What We Teach” and also agree with the church bylaws. The last section of the Bylaws usurp the role of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer. From the final section of the Bylaws: “The MRBC ‘What We Teach’ doctrinal statement and Bylaws does not exhaust the extent of our beliefs…For purposes of MRBC ‘s faith, doctrine, practice, policy and discipline, the Board of Elders is MRBC ‘s final interpretive authority on the Bible’s meaning and application.”

  144. More nuggets from the Bylaws of Rick’s Church:

    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    “In the case of a divisive man who comes into the church, the Board of Elders may act quickly to reject him so as to protect the unity of the church as instructed in Titus 3:9-11.”

    No mention of what happens if a divisive woman enters the fellowship.

  145. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    Good night, Dale! Good pickup. We always tell people to read church websites because you can often figure out what type of church it is.

    There is no way I would ever attend Rick Hollandis church given this statement. Folks, run from any church that has this on their website. It means they are proud of this.

  146. JYJames wrote:

    After confessing to the drugging, kidnapping, and raping of Jane, the predator should have been registered as a sex offender, because that is what he is. Who else are his victims? He had drugs ready to put Jane out – where else has he done this? He seems to have his MO down, organized, intentional, vicious. Serial? And the church crowd is his hunting ground?

    JYJames,
    Good point. Here’s a story of a man who drugged and raped 3 women just a few years before Jane’s rapist drugged and raped her.

    He was sentenced to 124 years in prison even though he was an heir to the Max Factor empire. He is still in prison today.

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/06/19/max.factor.heir/

    Where is Jane’s rapist now?

  147. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    By March 2006, they were talking about all the most important subjects touching upon John MacArthur, the staff and the church. C.J. filled me in on those conversations. Rick sought and gobbled up C.J.’s counsel including how to deal with John MacArthur himself. The staff was very frustrated. No one felt they could correct him, approach him or be friends with him. That was a main reason Rick left Grace Community Church.

    Wow!!!! Good information Brent. Thank you for sharing this with us. I was hoping you might comment.

  148. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    The way Rick handled the situation with Jane is precisely the way C.J. and his staff handled sexual abuse in Covenant Life Church and parts of Sovereign Grace Ministries I did not directly oversee. Victims were told the pastors would handle things internally and crimes should not be reported to law enforcement because that will only make matters worse.

    This sort of teaching absolutely frightens me. I cannot imagine all the things that must have been hidden during CJ’s reign at CLC. It makes me wonder if anything is hidden now at Rick’s current church since he and CJ are still BFFs.

  149. dee wrote:

    It makes me wonder if anything is hidden now at Rick’s current church since he and CJ are still BFFs.

    Exactly.

  150. Hugh Hefner.

    He died yesterday. Today, talk radio was rife with discussion about his “contributions” to the sexual revolution. I took a rather long drive to an appointment and listened to a long segment of a radio program where a female host was speaking with her famale guest. The guest was some sort of sexologist, I gather, because she sells certain toys. While the host lavished praise on Hugh for opening our monogamous world to the wonders of sexual revolution and birth control, the guest wasn’t so pro-Hugh, even though she is reaping the benefits through sales of her toys, which are a likely by-product of the revolution.

    The discussion was turned on its head when a woman called the show to report her complete disdain for Hugh. She called out Hugh for using and then discarding young women, for making women an object, for the way the magazine, which was found in every father’s nightstand, affected the way boys of 13-14 treated girls and the lasting effects this has made on our world today.

    Her description sounds so much like the way Rick Holland purportedly treated Jane. Jane was not given the basic consideration. She was not permitted a woman counselor, instead Rick appointed himself and other men, to interrogate her. She was asked probing questions which they had no right to ask. She was not provided legal counsel, a personal representative, a friend, or any other type of support. Yet all these men came en masse to support one another against this lone young, hurting, vulnerable girl. Jane was not given the courtesy of choosing when she might be ready to face her rapist, the decision was made for her. She was treated as a problem girl in a man’s universe. Her treatment by these grown men is despicable and makes me shudder with horror. How do these men call themselves spokesperson for God? It’s is untenable.

    It makes me wonder how many of these male, so-called pastors and counselors, learned this treatment of women from Hugh and his magazine.

  151. @ Deb:
    Quote from Julie Anne’s analysis, the link you provide:

    “Let me just add, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that tells me that The Master’s College has people who “provide skilled care” with someone who is sexually assaulted. I hope that problem is remedied.”

    Therefore, a college and community has self-identified (proven itself, with evidence) as not safe for women. (Considering what happened at Wheaton, where men violated men, perhaps also not safe for men.)

    I would add: Part of safety for everyone is identifying, registering, and community notification of sex offenders. Where is the perpetrator now? Who did he violate before? Who has he violated since, as he carried the rape drug with him that night and then opportunistically targeted Jane? Embedded in the Christian community is the answer? His hunting ground, since the leadership is proven to be enabling, with neither moral conscience nor empathy.

  152. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    Good grief! This sounds like a communist regime.

  153. Kathi wrote:

    I promise to keep my language clean – it’s hard, though, because this story really makes me cuss!

    Makes me wanna do something else, something vindictive.
    I have wondered (daydreamed??): If a woman gave Holland and cohorts date rape drugs, staked them to the ground down in the woods, cut their pants off, poured hot bacon grease on their external manly parts, and let a pack of coyotes do their thing …………. would these guys be accused of committing beatiality and fired???

  154. JYJames wrote:

    uote from Julie Anne’s analysis, the link you provide:
    “Let me just add, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, that tells me that The Master’s College has people who “provide skilled care” with someone who is sexually assaulted. I hope that problem is remedied.”

    Nothing like seeing a sentence quoted from your own blog that has a glaring mistake. LOL I oopsied. It’s now The Master’s University not College. I have since changed the wording on my blog.

    The rest of your comment was superb:

    “I would add: Part of safety for everyone is identifying, registering, and community notification of sex offenders. Where is the perpetrator now? Who did he violate before? Who has he violated since, as he carried the rape drug with him that night and then opportunistically targeted Jane? Embedded in the Christian community is the answer? His hunting ground, since the leadership is proven to be enabling, with neither moral conscience nor empathy.”

  155. Kathi wrote:

    I promise to keep my language clean – it’s hard, though, because this story really makes me cuss!

    Makes me wanna do something else, something vindictive.
    I have wondered (daydreamed??): If a woman gave Holland and cohorts date rape drugs, hauled truer sorry butts down in the woods, staked them to the ground, cut their pants off, poured hot bacon grease on their external manly parts, then let a pack of coyotes do their thing …………. would these guys be accused of committing beastiality and fired???

  156. Bridget wrote:

    Dale Rudiger wrote:
    Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”
    Good grief! This sounds like a communist regime.

    I’m watching Leah Remini: Scientology and the Aftermath, and the way Scientology and MRBC operate sounds very similar.

  157. Totally off topic, but has anyone noticed that Darrin Patrick has resurfaced and now on his social media pages says he is a teaching pastor in an ARC church called Seacoast? Why do so many ex-TGC, Acts 29 fallen pastors end up in ARC?

    Also, my cable IP address was blocked as spam for some reason. Who can fix that?

  158. Bridget wrote:

    Dale Rudiger wrote:
    Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”
    Good grief! This sounds like a communist regime.

    This seems to be SOP.

  159. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    From the final section of the Bylaws: “The MRBC ‘What We Teach’ doctrinal statement and Bylaws does not exhaust the extent of our beliefs…For purposes of MRBC ‘s faith, doctrine, practice, policy and discipline, the Board of Elders is MRBC ‘s final interpretive authority on the Bible’s meaning and application.”

    Wow, this is scary. So the Board of Elders have complete authority over the lives of the members at Rick Holland’s church. And since the final interpretation of Scripture is left up to them, THE TRUE INTERPRETERS, that means they have the prerogative to declare a person is in sin whenever it suits them and their fancy.

  160. Forgiveness is a response to a request!

    It cannot be demanded, nor can it be offered like the sprinkling of holy water upon one who has not asked for it. Now, we do need to stand ready to forgive, if one asks and is truly repentant.

    The demands of justice and holiness must be met, (hence, the necessity of the cross) before forgiveness/mercy can be extended. Redemption is first of all an act of God towards Himself. He satisfies His justice and holiness, offers Himself as a substitutionary sacrifice, and glorifies Himself through His Son as an act of Divine Love. Then as a by product, we are offered forgiveness and eternal life.
    Mercy is extended AFTER the sentence has been decreed (or during sentencing); otherwise, mercy would impinge upon justice. Mercy enhances justice.

    A truly repentant perpetrator should acknowledge their wrongdoing/guilt, vow to never commit this crime again, willing to accept the legal consequences, repair and restore (if possible) the loss/damage done (possibly adding a fifth – going beyond), and to ask for forgiveness. If these components are genuine, the Christian should stand ready to forgive.

    It frustrates me to hear some people think that heaven is a communistic country – that we will all be equal. Those who forgo wives, family, etc. will receive a hundred fold. Those who do not, will not receive a hundred fold! Some people will have their works burned up in the fire, some will bring them thru. There are angels and there are archangels. There is God’s throne, and there are thrones around that throne. Jesus did not dispute who could be greatest in the kingdom of God.
    We are not given the death penalty for our sin – separation from God. That does not mean that there are no other consequences for our sin – that we “get away with them.” God is a righteous judge.

    When we forgive others as God has forgiven us, we should not harbor hatred that their souls should die – separation from God. But the consequences remain. Some people think that our sin is forgotten. God is omniscient – He knows everything and forgets nothing. After judgment (both blessing and curse), He will not remember our sin against us – we are not condemned. But if God’s Word abides forever, there is a lot of people’s sin recorded in the Bible which lasts forever. Am I better than them? David sinned by numbering Israel and 70,000 died (abuse victims?).

    We should fear a Righteous Judge, and trust a Righteous Judge that He will right every wrong – those I commit and those committed against me. Glory to His Name!

  161. To all the folks who are following the Jane Story:
    A public Facebook group called DoYouSeeUs has been created for activists and general readers. Find it here: https://www.facebook.com/ibelievejane/

    Please join the group and post any items on it that will help us all follow the story and be activists provoking systemic change in John MacArthur’s institutions …and in all Christian institutions that are mistreating victims of abuse.

  162. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    I have strongly confronted Rick Holland in private for his cover up of C.J.’s sins…. You also know about my dealings with Phil Johnson, John MacArthur and Chris Hamilton (chairman of the board)… I don’t know all the facts concerning Jane but I do know John MacArthur and Rick Holland cannot be trusted to follow their own teaching or that of Scripture…

    Hamilton is a forensic accountant/fraud investigator and a member of LA County Bar Association and SFV Bar Association.

    http://www.arxisfinancial.com/personnel/chris-hamilton-cpa-cfe-cva/

    He probably has connections in the LA County D.A.’s office (Steve Cooley was D.A. in 2006) as well as with local law enforcement officials. If I were an investigative reporter, I might look into that.

  163. Bridget wrote:

    Good grief! This sounds like a communist regime.

    The tactics are the same.
    You are guilty until confessing of true or fabricated part of your sin in a matter, because no one is above sinning unless you have attended some form of seminary and learn proper biblical tactics by the peacemakers and admonishing counselors. Those that learn how to play the self-righteous hypocrisy game by copying the devil, cry and confess and get to stay and play a little longer and give G-d glory by supporting the ox that is treading the wheat. Those other naive weakened and beaten souls who have their consciences bound by the she*herds interpretation of the bible, live in fear of being put out of the synagogue. A popular writer in these circles wrote this in his book of biblical shepherding on the topic of obedience.
    ” Without challenge
    Without excuse
    Without delay ” .
    This is were they want you. In a oath bearing contract using G-d name to get you to do it. Except they do not imitate My Father in heaven who loves his children and does not lie or operate in darkness.
    He loves you just as he has loved his beloved son in whom he is well pleased.

  164. Curious wrote:

    my cable IP address was blocked as spam for some reason. Who can fix that?

    That happens to everyone now and then. Just reboot your computer and try again. It happened to me on my own blog yesterday.

  165. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    From the final section of the Bylaws: “The MRBC ‘What We Teach’ doctrinal statement and Bylaws does not exhaust the extent of our beliefs…For purposes of MRBC ‘s faith, doctrine, practice, policy and discipline, the Board of Elders is MRBC ‘s final interpretive authority on the Bible’s meaning and application.”

    Which is the closest I’ve yet seen to an honest admission, from an evangelical business’s managers, that “the Bible” is not in any sense their final authority: they themselves are.

  166. “Those who believe themselves to be of the company of the just tend to be supremely arrogant people bent on crushing others under the ostentation of their ‘justice.’ As someone once said, there is no worse canaille than ‘honorable’ people. . . .”

    De Unamuno, Miguel. Abel Sanchez and Other Stories (Kindle Locations 908-910). Regnery Publishing. Kindle Edition.

  167. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    Dale Rudiger wrote:
    From the final section of the Bylaws: “The MRBC ‘What We Teach’ doctrinal statement and Bylaws does not exhaust the extent of our beliefs…For purposes of MRBC ‘s faith, doctrine, practice, policy and discipline, the Board of Elders is MRBC ‘s final interpretive authority on the Bible’s meaning and application.”
    Which is the closest I’ve yet seen to an honest admission, from an evangelical business’s managers, that “the Bible” is not in any sense their final authority: they themselves are.

    Ah, but Nick, don’t you realize that they have the only TRUE, RIGHT and GODLY interpretation of the Bible? Everyone else is deceived.

  168. Deb wrote:

    Are you and Roget Bombast identical twins? There’s quite a resemblance.

    Yes. Odd, that.

    That said, I notice Mr Bombast sports the Union Flag; there are a lot of men with good hair just like me over here.

  169. Rick Holland, if you are reading these comments, I heartily recommend that you read “Fraudulent Authority” by Wade Burleson. Based on MRBC Bylaws you are guilty of the spiritual rape of your congregation. You are demanding submission in spiritual matters with the threat of spiritual punishment. In Christ’s Kingdom leaders submit and serve. You demand submission to your teaching prior to actually teaching and pastoring and earning respect. You squelch anyone in your congregation who may have spiritual insight that you may lack.

  170. @ TEDSgrad:

    Well, now, young man. You are preaching it like they used to do in Baptist pulpits before the great falling away (my terminology) which was just before the attempt at ‘conservative resurgence’ and all that followed that.

    Good work.

  171. Brent Detwiler wrote:

    Rick sought and gobbled up C.J.’s counsel including how to deal with John MacArthur himself. The staff was very frustrated. No one felt they could correct him, approach him or be friends with him. That was a main reason Rick left Grace Community Church.

    I was not aware of this, but it’s ironic. Detwiler has written that Mahaney’s subordinates had the same problems with him.

    Holland’s “fall from Grace” helps me understand why his boys attend Boyce College and why Holland’s Twitter account frequently show him cozying up to Al Mohler rather than John MacArthur.

  172. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    More nuggets from the Bylaws of Rick’s Church:

    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    “In the case of a divisive man who comes into the church, the Board of Elders may act quickly to reject him so as to protect the unity of the church as instructed in Titus 3:9-11.”

    No mention of what happens if a divisive woman enters the fellowship.

    “…and all other professing Christians”.

    Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?

    The hubris never ceases to amaze me.

  173. Ah,… the Utopia of a Christian institution for eager learners.

    Not.

    Yesterday, the NYT ran an article (http://nyti.ms/2yxs4k3) about the investigations of “elite” private schools and their legacies of sex abuse. These investigations have become a cottage industry, parsing out what really happens in these “sanctuary” communities.

    The comment section is particularly interesting as constituents weigh in.

    From Charles in NJ: “Being members of organizations gives individuals advantageous contact with their colleagues and subordinates. I have always felt a responsibility not to take advantage of that. But some horribly abuse those relationships.”

    From Jan in NM: “As a boarding school graduate, my school never had the issues now being revealed as sensational “scoops.” Perhaps the reason was our Trustees supervised the school administration more closely than other schools.

    “There are predators who gravitate to schools who have total control of students. The antidote is for parents to stay involved and the Trustees to keep hands on. Too often youngsters are “dumped” at such schools while the parents run off to Switzerland for the school year.

    “That attitude only enhances the predator’s opportunities. The youngster is alone and without resources if the administration winks.”

    Whole Community engagement: – checks and balances, transparency, all voices – the key.

    The Brentwood Academy story, covered by TWW, is also mentioned with a link.

  174. JYJames wrote:

    Brent Detwiler wrote:
    Moreover, victims were always warned not to slander and gossip about their abusers.
    Brent Detwiler wrote:
    They have covered up for these men.
    Megan’s Law, a federal law, requires all law enforcement authorities to make information available to the American public identifying registered sex offenders and their offenses.
    Neither slander nor gossip, it is a national database and it is the law.
    After confessing to the drugging, kidnapping, and raping of Jane, the predator should have been registered as a sex offender, because that is what he is. Who else are his victims? He had drugs ready to put Jane out – where else has he done this? He seems to have his MO down, organized, intentional, vicious. Serial? And the church crowd is his hunting ground?

    Excellent JY James. This man should be registered as a sex offender, premeditating his violence long before his crime occurred.

    The rapist admitted to the crime, and the religious cult calls her “a liar?” Am I understanding the craziness of the religious Pharisees here, or am I missing something?

    Also, to Kyle. What character traits would you ascribe to someone like Jane? Hardworking, fair, honest, and a good person? Or has her value as the victim of a violent rape reduced the worth of her character to that of a dog?

    I will reiterate….when a beautiful young lady was raped by one of the church leadership families’ son, the innocent sheep were slowly and systematically controlled and indoctrinated into believing the victim’s family was trashy. And finally, when most of us found out about the rape, through “gossiping” behind the scenes (because the pastor, church leadership, and the important “in the know people”), we were led to believe that since the family had many “faults,” it was the victims fault because she wore “too low of necklines, she partied once in awhile, she was a flirt, she flaunted her beauty, she was too mouthy, and she ‘didn’t know the lord’ as well as the rapist for he attended church regularly and was in the praise band leadership.”

    So the leadership of that false church, became the advocate for the rapist, and the victim and her family left that Baptist cult to protect their own well being. And I won’t even go into how those young teens were treated at their school by those so called “spiritual Baptist churched teens”……guess their version of “growing deeper in the lord (a false one), doesn’t include “loving thy innocent neighbor.”

  175. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    the Board of Elders is MRBC ‘s final interpretive authority on the Bible’s meaning and application.”

    This claim is a way of making themselves equal to God. The people of Jesus’ day were astounded that he interpreted Scripture as one who had authority. Rick and his Board can claim authority to interpret Scripture rightly, but only Jesus has that authority.

  176. Jenny wrote:

    Hamilton is a forensic accountant/fraud investigator and a member of LA County Bar Association and SFV Bar Association.

    http://www.arxisfinancial.com/personnel/chris-hamilton-cpa-cfe-cva/

    He probably has connections in the LA County D.A.’s office (Steve Cooley was D.A. in 2006) as well as with local law enforcement officials. If I were an investigative reporter, I might look into that.

    Have they built their own theocratic empire with their own special police?

    To those who attend GCC,
    Please know you can walk away. You don’t need to confront anyone, just disappear. There are many good pastors and churches that don’t demand abject obedience to themselves, don’t pretend they have the only correct interpretation of the Bible, and don’t sin-sniff. The John MacArthurites will likely gossip about you, but they’ll forget you over time. Just get out now. There are plenty of pastors who understand spiritual abuse and will be supportive of your spiritual journey.

  177. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches.

    Kyle

    I am sure you were only sharing what you have seen about Rick Holland and were sincere with what you posted. I do hope you review the comments here and especially what Brent Detwiler shared about his interactions with Rick Holland and how close minded Rick Holland was to any information about C.J. Mahaney that exposed Mahaney’s sin and hypocrisy. Thus I sure hope you haven’t seen Rick Holland speak on these passages of scripture:

    Proverbs 18:21:

    To show partiality is not good– yet a person will do wrong for a piece of bread.

    Ezekiel 13:19:

    For handfuls of barley and fragments of bread, you have profaned Me to My people to put to death some who should not die and to keep others alive who should not live, by your lying to My people who listen to lies.

    Proverbs 18:5:

    It is not good to be partial to the wicked and so deprive the innocent of justice.

    Exodus 23:2:
    “You shall not follow the masses in doing evil, nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after a multitude in order to pervert justice;

    Proverbs 17:15:
    He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD.

    If you read the testimony of Brent Detwiler along with Todd’s posts and testimony (https://thouarttheman.org/about/) and my personal experience with Rick Holland you will find that Rick Holland most definitely didn’t heed the warnings talked about in the above passages. In other words Rick Holland did the following;

    – Showed partiality to the wicked perhaps for material gains
    – Basically lied to God’s people about C.J. Mahaney and perhaps others
    – Justified the wicked

    Thus I hope that Rick Holland never preached on any of these topics.

  178. Beloved Son wrote:

    The tactics are the same.
    You are guilty until confessing of true or fabricated part of your sin in a matter, because no one is above sinning unless you have attended some form of seminary and learn proper biblical tactics by the peacemakers and admonishing counselors. Those that learn how to play the self-righteous hypocrisy game by copying the devil, cry and confess and get to stay and play a little longer and give G-d glory by supporting the ox that is treading the wheat. Those other naive weakened and beaten souls who have their consciences bound by the she*herds interpretation of the bible, live in fear of being put out of the synagogue. A popular writer in these circles wrote this in his book of biblical shepherding on the topic of obedience.
    ” Without challenge
    Without excuse
    Without delay ” .
    This is were they want you. In a oath bearing contract using G-d name to get you to do it. Except they do not imitate My Father in heaven who loves his children and does not lie or operate in darkness.
    He loves you just as he has loved his beloved son in whom he is well pleased.

    Very true, but unfortunately brought back bad memories when we were caught up in the McArthur cult in the 90’s. I hope more people are freed from that bondage by reading all of these comments. Nothing of the sort was available back then.

  179. Curious wrote:

    has anyone noticed that Darrin Patrick has resurfaced and now on his social media pages says he is a teaching pastor in an ARC church called Seacoast?

    Interesting! Has it been 6 months now? I was curious when he would resurface. Honestly, his stood out to me of all the scandals because of the funny way they tried to say he cheated but didn’t have sex, or something.

  180. Ron Oommen wrote:

    More nuggets from the Bylaws of Rick’s Church:

    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    “In the case of a divisive man who comes into the church, the Board of Elders may act quickly to reject him so as to protect the unity of the church as instructed in Titus 3:9-11.”

    Translation = We will remove anyone we cannot control.

    They trap people who desire authoritarian rule, people who are happy to shut off their brains/hearts and hand over complete power to mere men.

    And that’s such a shame, because following the Lord is a wonderful spiritual adventure and might take you in a different direction from your church’s leadership. I’ve seen it many times.

  181. Ron Oommen wrote:

    “…and all other professing Christians”.
    Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?

    ha! Good luck with that. Although I’d guess practically they’re talking about people who were smart enough not to join…

  182. I read the post of Davis’ statement with the comments by Julie Anne.

    God has given government the sword to punish wrongdoers when crimes are committed.

    It is not the job of the church or its related institutions to handle matters in such a way as to protect wrongdoers from the sword of government.

    If the perp confessed to sexual relations with Jane when she was not competent to give consent, that is a crime.

    You will notice that Mr. Davis even says he’s not really interested in discussing the legal aspects of the matter and whether a crime was committed.

    If a crime was committed and the perp is walking free today, that shows the people Davis is defending did not fulfill their biblical mandate, and showed themselves to be incompetent and uncaring people generally.

  183. Karen wrote:

    This man should be registered as a sex offender

    I understand this sentiment but he would have to be charged/convicted/plea first I believe.

  184. One other thing, if you look at the following post you will see where Rick Holland is coming with his fascination and perhaps even deification of Mahaney

    https://approachingdamascus.com/2012/06/28/thoughts-after-the-culmination-of-the-resolved-conference/

    This is what (I believe Rick Holland) wrote about C.J. Mahaney:

    C.J. Mahaney was not well known in our circles when he came to the conference. He so graciously accepted our invitation to speak that first year and none of us were ready for what God had for us. His sermon on Christ’s agony in Gethsemane that first year rocked us and in a real sense defined the trajectory of Resolved. I’ve listened to that one sermon more than any other sermon. Most of it is committed to memory. His ability to apply the Scriptures and gospel truth can only be attributed to God’s gifting. No one makes me laugh and cry, worship and repent, pray and praise more than C.J. To God be the glory.

    Thus what apparently happened with Rick Holland is that he heard C.J. Mahaney give such a “gifted” message and assumed that C.J. Mahaney had the character one would might assume with someone who preached like this. We now know better about C.J. Mahaney including Mahaney writing a book on humility when his actions showed just how proud and arrogant Mahaney was.

    Perhaps Rick Holland is now seeing that his (Rick Holland’s) is finding him out.

  185. Janey wrote:

    (This was about Rick Holland’s church’s policies)

    Translation = We will remove anyone we cannot control.
    They trap people who desire authoritarian rule, people who are happy to shut off their brains/hearts and hand over complete power to mere men.
    And that’s such a shame, because following the Lord is a wonderful spiritual adventure and might take you in a different direction from your church’s leadership. I’ve seen it many times.

    In other words they don’t want people that think for themselves if they reach a different conclusion than what Rick Holland and other pastors teach. That was very similar to what you would see in CLC/SGM.

    I am sure it was a sad but effective way to bully and keep people silent.

  186. Lea wrote:

    Ron Oommen wrote:
    “…and all other professing Christians”.
    Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?
    ha! Good luck with that. Although I’d guess practically they’re talking about people who were smart enough not to join…

    That’s what I was thinking. Actually, my first thought was “Let’s see you try, mate”.

  187. @ Dale Rudiger:

    If you look closely enough, you will see that these guys have theologically replaced Father, Son, and Spirit with themselves or with systems that they control.

  188. @ Steve240:

    I have heard Mahaney speak in person one time at a Sovereign Grace Church in our area. It was one of his canned talks – Cravings and Conflicts.

    Let's just say I was terribly unimpressed. It was such a bad sermon that the church substituted it (on its website) with a message he gave at another church.

  189. @ Deb:
    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons.

  190. Lea wrote:

    Karen wrote:
    This man should be registered as a sex offender
    I understand this sentiment but he would have to be charged/convicted/plea first I believe.

    Yes, Lea, you are correct. So true.

  191. @ Karen:
    I do want to say, I saw expressed a time or two that she was somehow letting the rapist ‘off’ by focusing on the issues with counseling instead of giving everyone his name. I completely disagree.

    She reported him at the time. That is all she can do on this. And even if they decided not to prosecute, that report is on file. If someone else subsequently had a similar problem, that record could help them I think. If the police saw enough reports against the same person, that would help. So she didn’t do ‘nothing’ because 11 years later she’s focused on the poor behavior of the school and others in response.

  192. Lea wrote:

    @ Deb:
    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons.

    What about wearing sandals, or is that still showing too much skin 🙂 ?!?

    You know, men can’t control themselves, thus the women must exhibit total control over their being, otherwise there’s no one left to blame. Modestly speaking of course – intense sarcasm there.

    That’s one thing I loathe about the prostitute church (the harlot); is the fact apparently women are to blame for the Fall of all of mankind.

    Better get my ugly calloused hands busy, otherwise the fruits of my mouth won’t be so pleasant.

    I do see you Jane, and I believe you with my heart. Praying you will overcome and find peace and joy in this life before you meet Jesus face to face.

  193. Karen wrote:

    You know, men can’t control themselves, thus the women must exhibit total control over their being, otherwise there’s no one left to blame.

    But they should also simultaneously be in charge of everyone, because women can’t be trusted.

    uh-huh. Patriarchal Male Logic for you.

  194. shauna wrote:

    some church members not only shame billy to this day but from the pulpit my child has been accused of being a homosexual and among those we once fellowshipped and broke bread with. It is unconscionable yet they do this all the time.

    Good grief! It’s ridiculous the way adults force adult notions onto children. First and foremost, children’s brains aren’t as developed as those of adults. Secondly, kids don’t comprehend sex and relationships the way adults do. Thirdly, no child asks to sexually assaulted. That’s not a “fun” experience for kids. Here, it seems they’re equating Billy’s rape with Billy having stolen a cookie, watched a movie on TV he wasn’t supposed to, or told a lie about who messed up the kitchen. None of those can be equated with being raped!

    Argh!

  195. Lea wrote:

    But they should also simultaneously be in charge of everyone, because women can’t be trusted.
    uh-huh. Patriarchal Male Logic for you.

    God trusted Mary with Jesus. Surely, there must be hope for the female folk somewhere!

  196. @ Todd Wilhelm:

    This sounds like the East Coast-West Coast feud that led to the death of Tupac and Big E. I can see that Mark Dever thinks he’s Sean Combs, but who is Suge Knight? Unfortunately, it seems both have a pretty low opinion of women.

  197. Ron Oommen wrote:

    Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?

    The hubris never ceases to amaze me.

    Am I alone in wishing Rick Holland soul come to my house to discipline me? Good catch on that one, Ron.

  198. Lea wrote:

    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons.

    I think they’d be much happier in their own kind of neo-reformed and whimsical christianese Pakistan.
    But the real questions remain and poke their heads up through the cracks like so many sidewalk weeds, what is the draw? How do these guys exert such a mind numbing control over their pew serfs?

  199. Ron Oommen wrote:

    Dale Rudiger wrote:
    More nuggets from the Bylaws of Rick’s Church:
    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”… Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?
    The hubris never ceases to amaze me.

    Haha. I am the bi-vocational pastor of a small country in church in NC and I have a fluid view of membership (i.e., a believer in Christ is a member of His church and that’s enough). I can provide him the church’s address if he wants to come speak to the deacon board.

  200. What Happened wrote:

    I can see that Mark Dever thinks he’s Sean Combs, but who is Suge Knight? Unfortunately, it seems both have a pretty low opinion of women.

    Bros and Hos, MoFos.
    “GANGSTAAAAAAAAAAA!”

  201. Sam wrote:

    Here, it seems they’re equating Billy’s rape with Billy having stolen a cookie, watched a movie on TV he wasn’t supposed to, or told a lie about who messed up the kitchen. None of those can be equated with being raped!

    Two words: SIN. LEVELLING.

    Because if “God Hates All SIN With a Perfect Hatred” and “All SINS are Equally Vile in God’s Sight”, the Rapist can point to Billy and say “I THANK THEE, LOOOOOOORD, THAT *I* AM NO WORSE THAN THAT FILTHY SINNER OVER THERE…”

  202. Lea wrote:

    @ Deb:
    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons.

    And if they follow New England Puritan practice (which they admire), those sermons will be LONG.
    Long and interesting as one of Caesar Nero’s lyre concerts.

  203. Ron Oommen wrote:

    “…and all other professing Christians”.
    Wait….what??? So….these blokes are going to discipline non-members too huh?

    GAWD Hath Chosen and Anointed Them To.

  204. Beloved Son wrote:

    A popular writer in these circles wrote this in his book of biblical shepherding on the topic of obedience.
    ” Without challenge
    Without excuse
    Without delay ” .

    My example of such Cheerful First-Time Obedience comes from the WW2 movie Is Paris Burning?:

    The German Occupation Authorities are cleansing vermin. Scene in woods outside Paris, lit by the headlights of military vehicles. We see young German after young German, the headlights shining on smiling Nordic face after smiling Nordic face, picking out the double Seig-runes on their right collar badges and the Hakenkreuz decals on their Stalhelme. Then the vermin are herded over to the freshly-dug mass graves, the Order is given, and the young SS-Manne obey — “Without challenge, Without excuse, Without delay.”

    “Ich habe nur meine Befehle ausgefert.”

  205. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    @ Deb:
    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons.
    And if they follow New England Puritan practice (which they admire), those sermons will be LONG.
    Long and interesting as one of Caesar Nero’s lyre concerts.

    But then if they admire the Puritans so much and their Puritanical ways, why in the world aren’t they dressing up, modestly and fashionably of course, just like them? And for that matter, why not go a bit further and dress up like John the Baptist and consume his diet as well!

    Seriously, isn’t much of what they preach and teach ALL about the externals?

    This is precisely why women like Jane are treated like non-humans as far as I’m concerned and sex crimes within the church are more rabid than we realize. Harlot religious system comes to mind once again.

  206. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    More nuggets from the Bylaws of Rick’s Church:
    “Members of MRBC and all other professing Christians who error in doctrine…shall be subject to church discipline, including dismissal.”

    Purity of Ideology, Comrades.

  207. Dee, you did that as well for our pastor. You called to get their side before posting billy’s story. I then get a text from you stating you left a message with the church secretary who I know very well. I still have that text because you sent it to me shortly after you called giving them an opportunity to respond. Then I have another text from you stating that they chose not to respond. I am responding to this comment because in our case Dee gave LBC every opportunity to respond and they to this day have not given any answers to TWW except to address the church and defend something that can not be defended. . dee wrote:

    Deb, I called Rick Holland’s office and left a message before I posted Jane’s story. He did not respond. His allegation of someone not giving them a chance to respond prior to the post is codswallop!

    Also, I have called many, many offices in years of doing these posts, I have only received a few return calls. I believe that TMU would NEVER have responded to a phone call prior to the posting of the blog. I think they are just mad they didn’t have time to call the lawyers to give them a heads up.

  208. oops what I mean is Pastor Ramey only addressed LBC privately in order to twist the story with those whom he worried would question or leave.

  209. Janey wrote:

    We will remove anyone we cannot control.

    Or, we will remove anyone who does not kiss our petty juvenile brat bottoms. Rick Holland is an outrageous joke, no smart man or woman would put up with his self-serving bullpoop.

    The real world traumatizes these men, so they create play fake make-believe-land and then try to recruit gullible naive people to pretend it is real with them. And who gets to play God in these make-believe play-lands? Rick Holland, John MacArthur, C.J. Mahaney, Al Mohler, Eric Davis. And they swoon over each other like a groupie swooning over the Rolling Stones in the 70s, it is so bizarre and creepy, it is not how real men, grown men act towards other men. They all talk and act like they are in a cult, and they are the gods of their own cults.

  210. shauna wrote:

    I have called many, many offices in years of doing these posts, I have only received a few return calls.

    Puffed-up-thugs can dish it out, but can not take 1/4 of their own medicine.

  211. Guest wrote:

    And who gets to play God in these make-believe play-lands? Rick Holland, John MacArthur, C.J. Mahaney, Al Mohler, Eric Davis. And they swoon over each other like a groupie swooning over the Rolling Stones in the 70s…

    More like Harley Quinn swooning over her Joker.

  212. Just looked at MRBC’s membership application. Included is the following:

    “Please describe, in your own words, your understanding of ‘submission to the loving rule of the elders over you (Hebrews 13:17).”

    and,

    “Are you willing to submit to that loving rule?”

    Wade Burleson translates the verse in Hebrews as “Choose to yield to those who are out in front leading you because you are pursuaded they are likewise being faithful in their task, knowing they will be held accountable.” The verse DOES NOT denote “ruling over” nor does it describe unqualified submission to elders.

    Me thinks the elders of MRBC are on a power trip. I assume they can hold the membership application over the member’s head like the sword of Damocles to keep the sheep in line.

  213. The fact that they advocated for him throws up red flags everywhere!!! If he wasn’t associated to the college, the church, or the ministry why would they insert themselves into a criminal act by sheltering this creep? It makes no sense so my perspective is there is something else there with this guy that might have implicated the college , the church, or their ministry. I bet they thought after all these years Jane was a thing of the past. Now that she has resurfaced they don’t see that maybe the Lord is dealing with their ungodly treatment of Jane. Remember what sin you try to hide it always will find you out! Lea wrote:

    John Immel wrote:

    Look, i can appreciate being cautious in condemning a man to the charge of rape merely because a woman makes the accusation.

    If this man who was charged didn’t attend the college, they had no reason to adjudicate this criminal case at all. And yet, they decided to step in and kick the victim out. IF they had simply said we don’t know what happened, but we are supporting you regardless emotionally that would have been ok.

    He said/she said is a dodge. Nothing they did was right. Period.

  214. It would be interesting if a reporter went undercover into TMS/TMC/GCC. Someone who could go in there and not get indoctrinated. I think they would be doing the Christian community a favor by doing that and seeing first hand what has taken years for some of us to learn and see.

  215. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    Just looked at MRBC’s membership application. Included is the following:
    “Please describe, in your own words, your understanding of ‘submission to the loving rule of the elders over you (Hebrews 13:17).”

    This would be a fun essay to write 😉

    *My membership application was like ‘where do want us to send the mail’ + ‘give us something to throw in the ‘new members’ newsletter’.

  216. Karen wrote:

    JYJames wrote:

    Brent Detwiler wrote:
    Moreover, victims were always warned not to slander and gossip about their abusers.
    Brent Detwiler wrote:
    They have covered up for these men.

    Brent I can attest first hand to this. Not even a week after billy’s abuse I was told by our former Pastor ” for me to say anything or talk about what happened to Billy would be considered slander”.

    Again I only share this to support Jane and confirm that I have no doubt she was told this just as SGM survivors were told by these miscreants!

    What is really sad is Jane didn’t have the kind of support she deserved. I can’t imagine the pain her parents went through. Breaks my heart and infuriates me that this is what they do across the globe in these places they call churches. I’m sorry but when you treat a victimized woman and children like this you don’t deserve to be called a pastor or a church!

  217. Guest wrote:

    And they swoon over each other like a groupie swooning over the Rolling Stones in the 70s, it is so bizarre and creepy, it is not how real men, grown men act towards other men.

    No kidding. The way they introduce each other at conferences is gross. It’s uncomfortable to watch and way over the top. They literally worship and treat each other like gods. But there is also an understood reciprocal thing going on. They know if they introduce each other like that, they, too, will be elevated to god-like status. Oh, to be in the midst of these amazing human gods and to be granted the privilege of sitting in their pews or conference seats, I am so unworthy! If anyone ever tried to introduce me like that, I’d get up mid-stream and grab the mic post haste, saying, “that’s enough.”

  218. Sam wrote:

    Lea wrote:
    But they should also simultaneously be in charge of everyone, because women can’t be trusted.
    uh-huh. Patriarchal Male Logic for you.
    God trusted Mary with Jesus. Surely, there must be hope for the female folk somewhere!

    Yes, indeed He did. What a profound concept. The uncircumscribable God became circumscribable in the womb of the Theotokos. The God of the universe trusted a handmaid to raise the Son of God!

  219. shauna wrote:

    It would be interesting if a reporter went undercover into TMS/TMC/GCC. Someone who could go in there and not get indoctrinated. I think they would be doing the Christian community a favor by doing that and seeing first hand what has taken years for some of us to learn and see.

    Two reporters: one male, one female ……. two spies. Compare and contrast their experiences.

  220. Nancy2 (aka Kevlar) wrote:

    Two reporters: one male, one female ……. two spies. Compare and contrast their experiences.

    I am pretty convinced when I read responses that men often simply don’t get it, in a fundamental way. Some do, but most in these organizations seem to be treated radically different from women. And from some of the comments I was reading, there is also an element of the ‘in-crowd’, women and men, get better treatment as well.

    Julie Anne posted a link to a satire about how men shouldn’t wear tank tops so as not to lead women on to lust, and there are a bunch of men commenting in a humorless, completely misunderstanding fashion. Fascinating stuff.

  221. Dale Rudiger wrote:

    Just looked at MRBC’s membership application. Included is the following:
    “Please describe, in your own words, your understanding of ‘submission to the loving rule of the elders over you (Hebrews 13:17).”
    and,
    “Are you willing to submit to that loving rule?”

    The potential applicant should answer this question with a copy of the page out of Elevation’s Coloring book – “We are united under the visionary”

  222. shauna wrote:

    I bet they thought after all these years Jane was a thing of the past. Now that she has resurfaced they don’t see that maybe the Lord is dealing with their ungodly treatment of Jane.

    And also, according to their own theology, maybe God has ordained that Jane should tell her story, and instead of fighting against that story, they should rejoice that God willed it to be so. Instead of getting upset and accusing everyone of a “smear campaign” they should be expressing thanksgiving and submitting joyfully to what God predestined should happen.

  223. Burwell wrote:

    Dale Rudiger wrote:
    Just looked at MRBC’s membership application. Included is the following:
    “Please describe, in your own words, your understanding of ‘submission to the loving rule of the elders over you (Hebrews 13:17).”
    and,
    “Are you willing to submit to that loving rule?”
    The potential applicant should answer this question with a copy of the page out of Elevation’s Coloring book – “We are united under the visionary”

    And, we promise to leave all critical thinking skills at the door.

  224. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    Because if “God Hates All SIN With a Perfect Hatred” and “All SINS are Equally Vile in God’s Sight”, the Rapist can point to Billy and say “I THANK THEE, LOOOOOOORD, THAT *I* AM NO WORSE THAN THAT FILTHY SINNER OVER THERE…”

    I didn’t realize that an immature child could be compared to a grown-up rapist. Who knew? *sarcasm alert*

  225. Mary27 wrote:

    And also, according to their own theology, maybe God has ordained that Jane should tell her story, and instead of fighting against that story, they should rejoice that God willed it to be so.

    That Rick Holland guy is gone. I’m not sure from a PR perspective why they don’t just throw him under the bus by saying something like ‘many years ago, we are afraid that counseling for Jane was not handled appropriately. We fully cooperated with the police investigation, however our staff at the time should have been more sensitive to a student’s distress. We have revamped policies to show more compassion’ yada yada yada.

    I mean, they don’t actually believe any of that I feel confident, but it seems like it would have been better than to jump out with the ‘stop talking! Slander! Defamation! Scaryness!’ attack. Maybe the grades thing concerns them, because that could theoretically be actionable?

  226. Guest wrote:

    Karen wrote:
    Why would a pastor not want a support system in place for the victim’s well being,
    He wanted to bully her, he was afraid for her to have back-up. He was on the side of the rapist, two men against a young woman who had just been raped. Sounds like church to me.

    The more I think about this scenario the angrier I get, and I was already pretty mad when I put together this post!

  227. @ Lea:

    This is a sticky scenario. Rick’s involvement would have been under the “Grace Church” umbrella and yet he was involved in making demands/threats on behalf of the college as well as the church? Murky waters here. Fuzzy boundaries of incestuous authority.

    Also to throw Rick under the bus might be tricky. He knows too much.

    Jane’s story is but a drop in the bucket of their abuse. Lots of people and churches share the bucket with Jane. It’s an old bucket and a big one that sadly is still being filled.

  228. Deb wrote:

    The more I think about this scenario the angrier I get, and I was already pretty mad when I put together this post!

    Regarding Karen’s thoughts about a pastor getting a support system in place:

    Deb, after reading Eric’s second post and scribbling notes for a follow up post, it occurred to me that he has 14 points under his “smear campaign” thoughts and 8 under “soul care” thoughts. Wouldn’t a pastor be more concerned about soul care than a smear campaign?

  229. Kay wrote:

    Jane’s story is but a drop in the bucket of their abuse. Lots of people and churches share the bucket with Jane. It’s an old bucket and a big one that sadly is still being filled.

    There are so many survivor blogs for abusive churches. Does GCC/TMU have a dedicated one yet?

    (By the way, TheElephantsDebt.com, which was dormant for several years, has been reactivated due to concerns about financial misbehavior. Expenses were not turned over to auditors, and the Harvest Bible Chapel is in serious debt.)

  230. Julie Anne wrote:

    Guest wrote:
    And they swoon over each other like a groupie swooning over the Rolling Stones in the 70s, it is so bizarre and creepy, it is not how real men, grown men act towards other men.
    No kidding. The way they introduce each other at conferences is gross. It’s uncomfortable to watch and way over the top. They literally worship and treat each other like gods. But there is also an understood reciprocal thing going on. They know if they introduce each other like that, they, too, will be elevated to god-like status. Oh, to be in the midst of these amazing human gods and to be granted the privilege of sitting in their pews or conference seats, I am so unworthy! If anyone ever tried to introduce me like that, I’d get up mid-stream and grab the mic post haste, saying, “that’s enough.”

    And I would give you a joyful standing ovation Julie Anne! Amen!

  231. Guest wrote:

    He wanted to bully her, he was afraid for her to have back-up. He was on the side of the rapist,

    Yes, it makes you wonder why he sided with the rapist, not assisting in getting the man arrested. These GCC/TMU leaders are all about morality and sin, so you would think they’d be lining up to condemn him.

    Is it a theological thing? (Maybe: Men are entitled to take what they want from women because even unconscious women are manipulative seductresses?) Or does the rapist have powerful friends or family at Grace Community Church?

    At any rate Rick contributed to allowing a sex offender free on the streets.

  232. Deb wrote:

    Guest wrote:
    Karen wrote:
    Why would a pastor not want a support system in place for the victim’s well being,
    He wanted to bully her, he was afraid for her to have back-up. He was on the side of the rapist, two men against a young woman who had just been raped. Sounds like church to me.
    The more I think about this scenario the angrier I get, and I was already pretty mad when I put together this post!

    I hear you loud and clear. Very LOUD. The Psalmist in chapter 4:4 speaks loudly to me “Be angry, but sin not;” We certainly can have a righteous anger against the sin that Jane confronted from her rapist. We can also be angry over the sins of the clergy system who believe they know more and know better how to address the sin in Jane’s situation. I believe they failed, tremendously.

    From my personal experience long ago, my best friend and roommate was raped in college and was so ashamed that she did not share this with any of her friends, only family. I wondered why her body was bruised in unusual places and when I asked, she responded with, “Oh, I fell down, clumsy me.” I heard many years later from another friend, that she was violently raped and became pregnant as a result. An abortion ensued.

    So Jane’s post stirs much sadness, anger, disappointment, and the failure to be a good loving friend when my best friend needed a strong support system from her peers. Praise our LORD God Almighty, she had a supportive family and today, is a wonderful early childhood development teacher, for she loves children. And she has a powerfully strong faith in Jesus Christ for she has overcome much, and is a joyful and delightful person to be around.

  233. “Classic case of willful female student character defamation and obstruction of justice?”

    hmmm…

    Masters protected a perp who confessed to the crime of rape and who didn’t even attend the school, and charged and dismissed the victim who was a student, drugged and unconscious at the time of the incident? Because of the police report, Masters went into damage control protecting the school, withholding the perps confession from the police, and ultimately throwing the victim under the bus when the victim would not cooperate with the schools silencing demands.

    🙁

  234. Janey wrote:

    Kay wrote:
    Jane’s story is but a drop in the bucket of their abuse. Lots of people and churches share the bucket with Jane. It’s an old bucket and a big one that sadly is still being filled.
    There are so many survivor blogs for abusive churches. Does GCC/TMU have a dedicated one yet?

    They started a Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ibelievejane/

  235. If it were witnessed/proven that she was drugged….. automatically that would imply non-consent….i e rape. That’s critical to this story.

  236. Lea wrote:

    The only thing I saw with CJ was that ‘women be ‘modest’ because guys can’t handle themselves at all’ thing and it gave me hives, so I can’t imagine sitting through a bunch of full length sermons

    Well if you ladies would just wear burkas then we wouldn’t have any problems would we? ;-). JOKING

    Seriously I do wonder why all this talk about modest dress. At best Mahaney is only going to control the women in his church and associated churches. When you are in the world chances are you are going to see women at times dressed a lot more immodestly than you would ever see in most churches.

    You are going to have to control yourself in the world. Just baffling.

  237. Abigail wrote:

    If it were witnessed/proven that she was drugged….. automatically that would imply non-consent….i e rape. That’s critical to this story.

    I don’t think there’s any amount of proof that would convince them. Many of the TMU people are already spreading rumors that everybody who knew her knew she drank and did drugs and slept around. And they see the police report as proof of that. They are claiming that because the rape was not prosecuted, then it’s proof she lied about being raped. It’s a total sham of course, because that’s not how any police report is handled, but they do have their followers buying it.

  238. Kyle Thompson wrote:

    Not once did I see him fail to practice what he preaches. Eric lead a group I attended. He is an extremely understanding and fair man and I can say the same thing about him. In fact, I cannot say a single negative thing about either of them and I’ve watched them both over a long period of time.

    It will be interesting to see if Kyle Thompson is brave enough to come back and post again. I will say that it took a lot of guts to post here being he had a different opinion.

    I would be curious to hear what he has to say especially about Rick not practicing/obeying a number of scriptures on being fair/balanced like I pointed out in one of my comments. I am also especially curious what he has to say in response to Brent Detwiler commenting on just how close minded Rick Holland was to hearing any evidence of C.J. Mahaney’s sin and hypocrisy.

    I imagine C.J. Mahaney and Rick Holland both have various “skeletons in the closets” that both know about with each other and thus it keeps both of them quiet about the other. I don’t know this for a fact but really wouldn’t surprise me.

  239. Janey wrote:

    @ kin:
    Kin, can you explain how you got free?

    Well, it definitely was a process that took years for us to see the man-made cage we were in. God used a series of spiritual abuses from pastors that idolized JM (and the seminary) to help us start thinking outside the box. Evidently we started asking the wrong questions. 🙂

    Funny how God gave perspective and things became very clear when we decided to leave the system. Sadly, the whole experience has been extremely difficult on all of our children (now adults). Very few fond memories of “church” life.

  240. These are local and surrounding area police who were invited. The church’s own police/law enforcement were recognized in the earlier service.

  241. ishy wrote:

    I don’t think there’s any amount of proof that would convince them. Many of the TMU people are already spreading rumors that everybody who knew her knew she drank and did drugs and slept around.

    What did I say above about a standard defense against a rape charge?
    PAINT THE VICTIM AS A HO.

    And remember these words from Reichsminister Goebbels:
    “A lie, repeated often enough, becomes the Truth.”

  242. @ Kay:

    IMO it’s a very good thing to honor law enforcement officials, firefighters, and military personnel who put themselves in harm’s way to protect the rest of us. I respect them greatly. I’m sure these folks and their families were blessed by being honored in such a way that day. Wow – one of the few things JM and I agree on.

  243. Karen wrote:

    The rapist admitted to the crime, and the religious cult calls her “a liar?” Am I understanding the craziness of the religious Pharisees here, or am I missing something?

    Also, to Kyle. What character traits would you ascribe to someone like Jane? Hardworking, fair, honest, and a good person? Or has her value as the victim of a violent rape reduced the worth of her character to that of a dog?

    I will reiterate….when a beautiful young lady was raped by one of the church leadership families’ son, the innocent sheep were slowly and systematically controlled and indoctrinated into believing the victim’s family was trashy. And finally, when most of us found out about the rape, through “gossiping” behind the scenes (because the pastor, church leadership, and the important “in the know people”), we were led to believe that since the family had many “faults,” it was the victims fault because she wore “too low of necklines, she partied once in awhile, she was a flirt, she flaunted her beauty, she was too mouthy, and she ‘didn’t know the lord’ as well as the rapist for he attended church regularly and was in the praise band leadership.”

    So the leadership of that false church, became the advocate for the rapist, and the victim and her family left that Baptist cult to protect their own well being. And I won’t even go into how those young teens were treated at their school by those so called “spiritual Baptist churched teens”……guess their version of “growing deeper in the lord (a false one), doesn’t include “loving thy innocent neighbor.”

    Just now reading your comment, which I found very interesting.

  244. @ Jenny:

    It’s good to read your post. I have several close family members who are in local and state police departments in addition to friends and family who are firefighters and military. I have great respect for them and think we all need to keep them in our prayers daily.

    I do wonder though how some loyal to a church/college, some even holding positions within the church might react when their loyalty to job and church is tested.

  245. @ Jenny:
    That being said, close ties with GCC could possibly influence a law enforcement official’s handling of cases that are of special interest to the church. Maybe.

  246. Kay wrote:

    … loyalty to job and church is tested.

    My experience with GCC was that when confronted with choosing between obeying the law or protecting the church, they chose to protect the church. It’s a purely corporate move, and no different than Enron or Equifax. The church is supposed to be standing for truth, law, and order, though. Very disappointing.

  247. @ Burwell:

    I see this in the Church of England too – one of many reasons why I left. Requiring vicars to have an academic degree of some kind, usually at least a Masters. And yet some of them barely believe in God, or are obsessed with control, and are completely graceless in their dealings with people, especially those who don’t agree with them 100%. I was speaking to an Anglican vicar at our (Pentecostal) prayer meeting last night and his description of a meeting he’d been to recently sounded exactly like gaslighting. I know another vicar who was actually an amazing, down to earth guy who was great with people but was a mechanic by trade. And yet they’d made him go to theological college, which he struggled with, and the pressure on him to provide these amazing, posh-sounding, complicated academic sermons was so great that he ended up plagiarising (and I mean word for word including anecdotes told as if they were his) from books of a well known scholar.

    There is a need in the church for good scholarship, accurate Bible translation and so on, but there is also a need for pastoral care, and the number of diplomas and degrees a person has, has no bearing on how good they are at showing love and compassion.

  248. Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    Preachers or others in the church attempting to force or guilt victims into forgiving or reconciling with their abusers are no better than people who try to convert others with the sword, in that they are not achieving true forgiveness or reconciliation but are instead creating a superficial bending to their will. God created each of us with freewill, no one including God himself can force us do anything. Therefore, it is wrong of the Church to think that they can override our freewill, when even the Lord does not.

    Exactly this. These things take time, and they will take longer if the original hurt is not adequately acknowledged. In fact, the original hurt is compounded and made worse when people try to dismiss it or blame the victim for it. I also think that forgiveness and reconciliation must be recognised as two separate things. I have forgiven the man who sexually assaulted me, but we are not reconciled because the one time I reached out to him, he quickly demonstrated that he had not changed at all. And I feel no guilt about that. I feel I have done what is required of me. If he had changed and was remorseful then things might have been different, but it is not up to me to pursue this man and try to get him to see how wrong he was.

    I can understand that, after a long time, a pastor might be concerned that a person was being held back by unforgiveness. In my view, forgiving someone releases me as much as it releases them. HOWEVER it is still not the pastor’s job to force anything. You might possibly speak to someone very gently and find out what they think – do they think that forgiveness is a possibility yet? What would happen if they chose to forgive? And most importantly, how can the church help you work through what’s happened so that you can move on? It seems so patronising to me to speak to someone and assume that they want to be bitter, or that they’re somehow to blame for their situation. Why can we not have “trust and help” as the default if someone comes to us in pain, and only IF you have good reason to suspect things aren’t as the person says, then question them further.

  249. Just a thought. If Rick Holland acknowledged that the rapist had “confessed” to everything, so he basically knew this fella had committed multiple crimes. Did he report that to police? I have next to no knowledge on US federal/state laws about such things – would he have committed a crime himself by not going to the police in this instance and basically covering this up?

  250. Ron Oommen wrote:

    Just a thought. If Rick Holland acknowledged that the rapist had “confessed” to everything, so he basically knew this fella had committed multiple crimes. Did he report that to police? I have next to no knowledge on US federal/state laws about such things – would he have committed a crime himself by not going to the police in this instance and basically covering this up?

    He only acknowledged it to Jane, as far as we know. He probably will say he never made them meet together to the public.

    We discussed the mandated reporting laws a bit earlier. They do exist, but they can have a lot of loopholes for clergy. I think if he didn’t insist the rapist go to the police first then he never should have handled anything on his own with either of them, but Jane’s testimony said they were clearly upset she involved the police. Churches like that think that they should handle crimes on their own (despite Romans 13:1 which says that Christians should respect governing authorities).

  251. ishy wrote:

    He only acknowledged it to Jane, as far as we know. He probably will say he never made them meet together to the public.

    This had not occurred to me. Thanks!

  252. @ Kay:

    That video is concerning to me, especially in light of your previous comment below.

    Kay said:

    I do wonder though how some loyal to a church/college, some even holding positions within the church might react when their loyalty to job and church is tested.

  253. Julie Anne wrote:

    Guest wrote:
    And they swoon over each other like a groupie swooning over the Rolling Stones in the 70s, it is so bizarre and creepy, it is not how real men, grown men act towards other men.
    No kidding. The way they introduce each other at conferences is gross. It’s uncomfortable to watch and way over the top. They literally worship and treat each other like gods. But there is also an understood reciprocal thing going on. They know if they introduce each other like that, they, too, will be elevated to god-like status. Oh, to be in the midst of these amazing human gods and to be granted the privilege of sitting in their pews or conference seats, I am so unworthy! If anyone ever tried to introduce me like that, I’d get up mid-stream and grab the mic post haste, saying, “that’s enough.”

    That is exactly what repulsed my wife and me the first time we ever saw John Piper in person in downtown Minneapolis in 1996 or ’97. At a march through the downtown to purportedly honor Jesus put on by three churches. The three church leaders, including Piper, took the outdoor podium that had been set up for them on a portable stage and stood in front of a thousand or so of us and lavished praise on each other why the honored person sat next to them and pretended to guffaw, and then it would be the turn of the one who’d just been puffed to stand up and reciprocate. That way, of course, you get all the glory your narcissistic, selfish heart craves, while getting none of the blame—unless, of course, someone who isn’t one of your fanboys happens upon your event and is watching you from the collapsible seats and, unencumbered by groupthink, sees you for the ugly person you are.

  254. Headless Unicorn Guy wrote:

    “When ‘What is Wrong’ has been totally deconstructed, ‘What I Want’ will still remain.”
    — attr to C.S.Lewis(?)

    It’s from “The Abolition of Man”, HUG. The actual quotation is: “When all that says, ‘it is good’ has been debunked, what says ‘I want’ remains.”

    (Apologies if anyone has mentioned this already. New job prevents me from keeping up with comment threads like I used to.)

  255. There’s something about this that I haven’t yet seen an answer to, although there might be some comments I missed, so if this has been addressed, my apologies for repeating it. Let’s see if I can articulate it properly.

    “Jane” apparently believed, at first, that the perp was a seminary student. It was later found out that he was not. Is this correct?

    Has anyone explained who the perp actually was, and what relationship he might have had to the college, the seminary, or the church? Other than that he seemed to be friends with the 3 seminary students (and their girlfriends) that “Jane” went out with that night?

    The reason I ask is that if he was not a student, and if he was not somehow affiliated with or involved with either the college, the seminary or the church in some way…

    … how did Rick Holland even know who he was or where to find him in order to summon him to that infamous meeting in his office, the one where “Jane” was more or less ordered to reconcile with the rapist?

    And if he was not affiliated in any way, why would he even obey the summons to some pastor’s office?

    Does this question even make sense? I didn’t sleep much last night so I’m a little foggy, and may not be articulating it very well.

  256. StillWiggling wrote:

    Does this question even make sense

    It does. I think most people have speculated that he was affiliated in some way, possibly with the church rather than the school?

    I tend to take that ‘not a seminary student’ thing as likely true since it is the ONLY hard piece of refutation we have actually gotten from that side. They all ask for things, and talk in vague terms, but that was stated clearly.

  257. Thanks, Lea. That’s what I was trying to get at. It seems like they would have had to know who he was, in order to even summon him to a meeting, and for him to obey the summons and show up for the meeting, it seems like he had to be affiliated in some way. Plus, their epic covering of, um, assets, then and now, in my mind at least points to him being affiliated. Because if he was just some random unknown perp off the street, they would have had no reason to try to hush it up and handle it “in-house.” Right?

  258. Deb wrote:

    ishy wrote:
    He only acknowledged it to Jane, as far as we know. He probably will say he never made them meet together to the public.
    This had not occurred to me. Thanks!

    The school can also claim that what Jane has revealed now (we only have her side) is not true. The school/church are not providing their sides. I’m sure lawyers are involved at this point, which will pretty much keep their lips sealed.

  259. StillWiggling wrote:

    Thanks, Lea. That’s what I was trying to get at. It seems like they would have had to know who he was, in order to even summon him to a meeting, and for him to obey the summons and show up for the meeting, it seems like he had to be affiliated in some way. Plus, their epic covering of, um, assets, then and now, in my mind at least points to him being affiliated. Because if he was just some random unknown perp off the street, they would have had no reason to try to hush it up and handle it “in-house.” Right?

    Exactly!

  260. StillWiggling wrote:

    Has anyone explained who the perp actually was, and what relationship he might have had to the college, the seminary, or the church? Other than that he seemed to be friends with the 3 seminary students (and their girlfriends) that “Jane” went out with that night?

    He was connected to the Grace Community Church, not the college. Rick Holland was a leader at the church.

  261. Liz wrote:

    Jarrett Edwards wrote:

    Preachers or others in the church attempting to force or guilt victims into forgiving or reconciling with their abusers are no better than people who try to convert others with the sword, in that they are not achieving true forgiveness or reconciliation but are instead creating a superficial bending to their will. God created each of us with freewill, no one including God himself can force us do anything. Therefore, it is wrong of the Church to think that they can override our freewill, when even the Lord does not.

    Exactly this.

    Jarrett Edwards’ words about forcing forgiveness ring true. However, it occurred to me in reading them that Neo-Calvinists like Rick Holland have a view of God that, in my opinion, absolutely does force Himself upon us. Consider their doctrine of Irresistible Grace. Consider the Calvinist understanding of Free Will. It seems to me that the underpinning theology of Calvinism is what was the foundation driving the counseling Jane received.

  262. Thanks, Julie Anne. Is it known whether he was simply a member there, or was he serving in some capacity, as an employee, volunteer, leader, whatever? Because the higher his position, the more urgent it was for them to put a lid on the whole thing as fast and as hard as they could. Right?

    Another question has surfaced. Yesterday I told a friend about this situation. Since his son is a student right now at the college, he was of course appalled, and a bit skeptical, not wanting to believe the story. He happens to be a lawyer, albeit the kind that deals with estates and wills and trusts. When I mentioned that there is no longer a statute of limitations in California for sex crimes, he said that although this sort of thing is not his legal specialty and it's been many years since law school, he was fairly sure that whatever the statue was at the time of the crime would apply, unless the newer law specified retroactivity, or something like that.

    Right now I can't find the comment thread where the law was discussed. Perhaps someone versed in those laws can chime in. (ed.)

  263. Julie Anne wrote:

    He was connected to the Grace Community Church, not the college. Rick Holland was a leader at the church.

    Makes you wonder why the rapist was being protected by Grace Community Church and The Master’s University. I wonder where he is now? Is he a pastor, by chance?

  264. Julie Anne wrote:

    StillWiggling wrote:
    Has anyone explained who the perp actually was, and what relationship he might have had to the college, the seminary, or the church? Other than that he seemed to be friends with the 3 seminary students (and their girlfriends) that “Jane” went out with that night?
    He was connected to the Grace Community Church, not the college. Rick Holland was a leader at the church.

    Woah….I wonder whether he was part of the hierarchy rather than just someone in the pews, or maybe a close relative of someone in the hierarchy.

    Curiouser and curiouser.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *