Paige Patterson Warns Against Going to Court or to the Press

“Anybody ever told you it's easy to be a Christian lied to you.  It's a 100 percent commitment.  It's not just what you believe; it is a commitment to follow the ways of God.  And it is our Lord who says don't take it before the world.  Settle it within the church of God.  And If you suffer for it and if you are misused and if you are abused and if you are not represented properly, it's O.K. You can trust it to the God who judges justly.”

Paige Patterson (26:50 mark)

http://www.publicdomainpictures.net/view-image.php?image=19341&picture=quiet-pictogramQuiet Pictogram

Paige Patterson, President of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SWBTS), two time president of the Southern Baptist Convention, and one of the architects of the Conservative Resurgence, delivered a chapel message earlier this week which ended with the above quote. 

In his SWBTS address — So You Believe in the Inerrancy of God, Bully for You — Patterson preached on 1 Corinthians 6:1-11.  After hearing his half hour message, it sounds like he is advocating the position "Let go and let God…"

Here is the Bible passage Patterson expounded (NASB version):

Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints?  Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?

Actually, then, it is already a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? On the contrary, you yourselves wrong and defraud. You do this even to your brethren.

Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

Interestingly, it was the Christian media that alerted us about this SWBTS chapel address.  Bob Allen quoted portions of Patterson's message in his Associated Baptist Press article SBC Leader Says Don't Talk to Press. Here is an excerpt:

“If I had fifty dollars for every time that I have told somebody from the press: ‘I’m not going to comment on that because, frankly, it’s none of your business; it’s the church of God’ — if I had fifty dollars for every time I’ve done that, this would be a wealthy institution and you wouldn’t have to pay any tuition at all,” he said.

“I’m not going to talk to the press about things that are matters internal to the church of the Living God,” Patterson said. “It is none of their business. And they can’t possibly get it right, and they don’t get it right, so why do you take it to the world of unbelief? Whether that be the court, whether that be the press? ‘Well there’s just no other way to handle it.’ Yes there is. Commit it to the Lord God Almighty.”

Patterson said the reason grievances between church members wind up in court or the media is: “If I appeal to the church elders, if I appeal to the church congregation as a whole in the matter where I have been offended, where I’ve been misused and abused and misrepresented, if I appeal to them they may not get it right. What do I do if the church makes a mistake?”

“The church will make mistakes,” Patterson said. “The church is made up of fallible human beings — hopefully redeemed human beings, but we know not all of them are. We can tell it because by their fruits you shall know them, and we can’t be root inspectors but it’s unavoidable to be fruit inspectors. When there’s no fruit it’s pretty good indication that they’ve never really been saved.”

“But even if it’s the saved of the Lord Jesus, we still live in mortal bodies; we still can make mistakes,” he said. “The church of the Living God may very well make a mistake, and Paul anticipates it and says: ‘You don’t understand. You still don’t go to the court. Why don’t you learn to just accept wrong, just to accept injustice?’”

“You say it’s not in my basic makeup to do that,” Patterson said. “It isn’t in mine either. You know I’m an Irish Texan, let’s fight. But it is what God’s word demands.”

One of the primary reasons why TWW exists is because 'the church' is not dealing with crucial matters such as sex abuse, authoritarian elders, and the misappropriation of 'God's money', to name a few.  Patterson said that "the church will make mistakes"; however, one has to wonder when, if ever, church leaders have admitted to those mistakes and rectified them.

We have presented story after story where those in charge have swept serious problems under the rug and pretended they do not exist.  With the SBC in a serious downward spiral, what are the chances that Southern Baptist pastors will tackle crucial matters before a watching world?  If those matters were being handled in a godly manner, then Christians would not be inclined to involve the court system or the press. 

Patterson's message sounds like the same old, same old; and we have little hope that anything will ever change.  Remember, this is the Christian leader who told a wife who was being physically abused by her husband the following: (audio link)

“I had a woman who was in a church that I served, and she was being subject to some abuse, and I told her, I said, “All right, what I want you to do is, every evening I want you to get down by your bed just as he goes to sleep, get down by the bed, and when you think he’s just about asleep, you just pray and ask God to intervene, not out loud, quietly,” but I said, “You just pray there.”  And I said, “Get ready because he may get a little more violent, you know, when he discovers this.”  And sure enough, he did.  She came to church one morning with both eyes black.  And she was angry at me and at God and the world, for that matter.  And she said, “I hope you’re happy.”  And I said, “Yes ma’am, I am.”  And I said, “I’m sorry about that, but I’m very happy."

"And what she didn’t know when we sat down in church that morning was that her husband had come in and was standing at the back, first time he ever came.  And when I gave the invitation that morning, he was the first one down to the front.  And his heart was broken, he said, “My wife’s praying for me, and I can’t believe what I did to her.”  And he said, “Do you think God can forgive somebody like me?”  And he’s a great husband today.  And it all came about because she sought God on a regular basis.  And remember, when nobody else can help, God can.

And in the meantime, you have to do what you can at home to be submissive in every way that you can and to elevate him.  Obviously, if he's doing that kind of thing he's got some very deep spiritual problems in his life, and you have to pray that God brings into intersection of his life those people and those events that need to come into his life to arrest him and bring him to his knees."

Dee and I are praying for those who have been hurt by the church.  As Christian bloggers, we are committed to exposing serious matters that church elders refuse to address. 

"The press" is expanding thanks to the internet, and leaders like Paige Patterson need to understand that the rules of the game have changed.  Silence is not golden…

Lydia's Corner:   Job 16:1-19:29   1 Corinthians 16:1-24   Psalm 40:1-10   Proverbs 22:1

Comments

Paige Patterson Warns Against Going to Court or to the Press — 108 Comments

  1. And yet even Paul trusted the Roman court to set him free at one point (well, because he was a Roman citizen and therefore subject to their laws). What’s interesting is I looked up the same passage in the NAB (Catholic version of the Bible) and the notes on the passage refer to Corinthians going to court over MINOR matters, little things that should be dealt with easily between the two parties. There is nothing about MAJOR matters such as abuse which meant that these matters were to go before the courts because they were so injurious, that they affected not just the parties involved but also others who may not have been directly involved but had heard about it, etc.

  2. As always, it is the rich, the powerful, the high-ranking and the influential who talk about the sanctity of the status quo. It is easy to tell others to “trust God” when you don’t have to.

    Let’s say, for a moment, that we really do believe in a commitment to follow the ways of God. That means we understand that there is a judgement to come, in which (among other things) many who are first now will be last; and the last first. When that time comes, there just may be some who are grateful that their misdeeds were exposed before it was too late; for the bloggers and wounded people who were willing to speak out against their misdeeds when their “friends” eulogised them. There might just be some who now occupy pulpits, and teach others to submit, who are mightily relieved that they were willing to let God tell them things they didn’t want to hear through people they wouldn’t have chosen for the job.

  3. As an attorney (now retired), and also a Christian and local church leader, who has helped survivors and brought cases against abusive church leaders (always pro bono – i.e., for free), I wrote about this issue a couple of years ago. It’s on “Abusive Church Leaders – Civil and Criminal Law”.

    Needless to say, I disagree with those who misinterpret 1 Cor. 6 to protect sexual predators in the church.

    For those interested, here’s the link: http://crossroadjunction.com/2011/05/30/abusive-pastors-4/

  4. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    As always, it is the rich, the powerful, the high-ranking and the influential who talk about the sanctity of the status quo. It is easy to tell others to “trust God” when you don’t have to.

    I give Patterson very little credit. Based on this message of his, and on what I’ve heard about him (here and elsewhere), he is completely detached from reality. He has absolutely no clue about how the world works, and cares nothing for how the “peons” are suffering.

  5. Perhaps the Pope and Blessed, be-hatted Virgin Dorothy, are preparing the stage, or giving ‘fair warning’ to someone who has a yet to be revealed grievance with the Holy Duo. Sometimes, I imagine God’s head just EXPLODES when He hears the likes of these people. Seriously, talk about the spirit of anti-Christ…from these Two, to the likes of Beth Moore, and Mark Driscoll…it’s a wonder ANYONE wants to be associated with Jesus.

  6. @ Janey: I tweeted a bunch of stuff on Driscoll’s cameo appearance at Strange Fire. We’ll try to get something up about it ASAP.

  7. @ jack: I do know that the SBC was contacted by the media on the Furtick’s house and it appears they have no trouble with it.

    Then., of course, is Patterson’s relationship and support of Darrell Gilyard who eventually went to jail for have sex with minors.

  8. jack wrote:

    to the likes of Beth Moore

    I don’t mean to rabbit trail, but…this is the second time recently that I have seen Beth Moore’s name lumped together with other problem people. I don’t understand what the problem is with her and am wondering if someone will elaborate.

  9. @ Janey:
    I’m also following the shenanigans on the left coast. I had a good chuckle because five years ago (before TWW launched) I didn’t think there would be enough to write about. Now we’re having a hard time keeping up with current events in Christendom.

  10. I’ve no idea who Beth Moore is (to which you could quite rightly respond, well, dae some research, yer numpty), but to be fair, you’ll often see Dee’s and Debs’ names lumped together with problem people.

    This is an honourable estate to which I, too, aspire!

  11. Paige, Paige, Paige. Read the text-all of it. In the first paragraph Paul remarks on the sorry state of the secular legal system. He then goes on to lament and criticize the situation that the church did not, in fact, have a suitable system for dealing with injustices or else was not utilizing that system. He asks them why in the world not, do they not have any wise man who can handle conflict resolution? He then said that, well in that case, you just have to suffer the injustice and leave it unresolved. The picture here is that the people had, or thought they had, nowhere to turn-not the secular authorities nor the church. So they turned to the secular authorities. Sad commentary on the church indeed. Paul has looked at the situation in that church and found it lacking and told them to solve it. And he is, as apparently was his custom, speaking strongly about it.

    Paul himself would live to suffer from this, and he did indeed appeal to Rome. I have read (no, I have no reference-sorry) that tradition has it that when Paul was beheaded at Rome he was betrayed into the hands of his enemies by competing church bigwigs. Paul, friend, I am sorry. You deserved better than that. But you did know that grievous words stir up anger. I see courage here in the face of a bad situation. Bless you, brother.

    Paul’s original argument here, though, presupposes that the secular authorities are unrighteous and not saints. If NT Wright is correct, the words righteous and unrighteous at that time for the Jews meant doing-the-right-thing vs not-doing-the-right-thing. Such that a judge would be “righteous” if he did the right thing in his judging, regardless of his piety or personal life style or religious beliefs. So Paul in this sentence would be saying that the secular judges would not do the right thing and also would not be a believer. He seems to think that in that case, you are better to throw in you lot with a fellow believer.

    Then he goes on to say that the church situation is not any better, apparently, because they don’t even have a system utilizing some wise man whom they have not identified and/or utilized. And Paul wants to know why not. Paul knew the answer to that (else why criticize) and eventually lost his life when brother betrayed brother, if such a story is to be believed

    Paige, I want to know why not also. Where are our wise men who do the right thing? Do we have canon law or canon lawyers at all to establish parameters and guidelines to keep local hotheads in line? Do we have any professionals trained in conflict resolution and with enough job security that they can indeed be unbiased and judge rightly? (Take a hard look at that job security issue.) You are a powerful man and a seminary president and a skillful communicator. Do something about this situation. Paul may have identified the problem, but only you and your buddies can solve it. You say that the church does make mistakes, but that what? that there is nothing to be done about that except for people to suffer injustice? The secular authorities in my state openly set up procedures to try to rectify injustices committed by the secular legal systems. Are you saying that the church cannot or will not do that? I ask the question that Paul seems to be asking. Why not? And I am saying that before your buddies and co-religionists tell our husbands and sons to stand up and “be men” let the church authorities do it themselves.

    And Paige, are you saying today’s secular judges do not judge rightly, are not righteous in Paul’s terminology? Are you equating our legal system with that of Rome? Really? So why does scripture tell us to be subject to the secular authorities?

    Paige, I got that Irish part. I am partly Irish and my children even more so. And I got that Texas part. My mother spent her youth from toddler age to young adulthood in Sour Lake, Texas while grandfather worked in the east Texas oil fields around Beaumont back in the day. Get over it.

  12. Paige Patterson:

    It is none of their business. And they can’t possibly get it right, and they don’t get it right, so why do you take it to the world of unbelief? Whether that be the court, whether that be the press?

    If the courts are bound to get it wrong, does that mean that criminal activity by members of the church need not/must not be reported by

    a) pastors
    b) members of the congregation
    c) members of the congregation who are victims of a crime?
    Is the church (or at least some churches) above the law?

    I always had the impression that Paul’s letters told us otherwise. If Paige Patterson does not clarify his stance, from how I understand it at present, I must conclude that this attitude – and the advice following from it – is, if not outright criminal, then at least criminally negligent.

  13. ChrisCross wrote:

    jack wrote:
    to the likes of Beth Moore
    I don’t mean to rabbit trail, but…this is the second time recently that I have seen Beth Moore’s name lumped together with other problem people. I don’t understand what the problem is with her and am wondering if someone will elaborate.

    When I did my first, and only, Beth Moore study I didn’t get past the first chapter. I red lined all the presumptions she made about the bible text, where she would take a verse which read “And the king died.” and make statements about why he died, what happened because he died, etc, that are simply not in the text. This article covers more concerns about Moore’s methods.

    http://www.midwestoutreach.org/mcoijournal/theology-more-or-less-with-beth/

  14. @ ChrisCross:

    Chris, some of us are more afraid of the Beth Moore followers than any of the big name guys. I can remember mega’s who brought her in for a ONE DAY session and they not only sold out immediately but we knew ticket scalping was going on. She is a veritable rock star, seriously. And getting to actually talk to Beth and her sign the book? Well that was pure rapture. Some well heeled women even got to “study” with her in the Swiss Alps if they could afford it. She milked it. Lifeway milked it for quite a while and had her churning out shallow studies on everything. She has been a money machine for the industry. (Her star is waning)

    But she is so deep I am still contemplating the deep questions of her bible studies. Questions like… if you were attending Sarah’s baby shower what gift would you take? (snark alert)

    Moore is nothing but the perfect example of the “commercialization” of Christianity celebrity. She is the Joel Osteen of Women’s ministries.

  15. Atheism is NOT the threat to Christianity, guys like Patterson are. If my only option was to follow his version of Christianity or be a pagan or atheist, I’d be constructing my own statue of Baal or anything other than following him. There seems to be no end to the amount of bull feces that he throws out under the guise of ‘Christianity’. I do believe that God is weeping when he sees and hears what guys like Patterson do and say in his name.

    So, according to Paige ‘wives, take one (or more) for the team’ Patterson, “what happens in church stays in church”. That’s exactly what greedy, totalitarian, and/or perverse church ministers and authorities want to hear. Deflect, hide, and cover-up the immorality so it can continue. After all, nonmembers really don’t need to know about the sexual abuse, spiritual abuse, fraud and corruption that goes on.

    In short, it’s OK with Paige if members of some church become fodder for the pleasure of those in authority. Eh, mistakes happen – better that than, God forbid, outsiders (like law enforcement) find out and end up with infidel outsiders passing judgment.

    Not surprisingly, Patterson completely misses the main point of 1 Corinthian 6. That is, if the members of the church were all acting in a Christian manner, there would be no disputes in the first place because, as Paul says, “to have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you”.

    Here endeth rant. My apologies for the tone. Perversion of the Gospel does that to me sometimes.

  16. No problem. It is amazing how I hear the same excuses time and again for ignoring, or covering up, sexual predation in the Church. I think I’ve heard them all. It’s good to look closely at what these scriptural passages actually say, so we can see how are being distorted to justify all sorts of evil.

  17. Paige Patterson Warns Against Going to Court or to the Press

    In the Mafia, this is called “La Omerta.”

    God the Father…
    God Father…
    Godfather…
    Hmmmmmm…

  18. Nicholas wrote:

    John Piper and Bruce Ware are apparently in agreement with Patterson’s above comments on both spousal abuse and the church being the only court for Christians:

    (Editor delete “WOMAN, SUBMIT!”

  19. On the Mark Driscoll vs. John MacArthur dust-up, I find it humorous and sad at the same time how watching disagreements between celebrity megachurch ‘pastors’ unfold so often look like WWE Monday Night Raw.

  20. Jeff T

    Just did a quick post of the fun and games at Strange Fire. James MacDonald was involved in the hilarity as well.

  21. Patterson’s got to be loving what Scientology did yesterday in Texas: it (a) admitted it harassed Monique Rathbun because (b) it was its First Amendment right to do so and (c) filed an anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motion against Ms. Rathbun.

    It’s worth keeping in mind that Ms. Rathbun, while married to the former #2 in Scientology, has never been a Scientologists and probably, like me, has never been IN a church of Scientology. But it’s OK to harass her (spy on her, set cameras on her property to record her movements, send her a s*x toy at work, that sort of thing) to protect Scientology’s First Amendment rights.

    http://tonyortega.org/2013/10/19/scientology-drops-a-bomb-on-monique-rathbun-harassment-lawsuit/

    Yep, Paige Patterson’s probably loving every minute of this, and for all the wrong reasons. I mention this because it’s (a)religion and (b) the last time I checked, Patterson’s based in Texas.

  22. Any guesses as to how Paige Patterson would have counseled a man whose wife was hitting him and slapping him around?

    I’m guessing he would have told him to call the cops.

  23. dee wrote:

    Jeff T
    Just did a quick post of the fun and games at Strange Fire. James MacDonald was involved in the hilarity as well.

    Thanks Dee! Is that in the Entertainment section of TWW? 🙂

  24. dee wrote:

    @ Southwestern Discomfort:
    And you wonder why I say not to sign anything when you join a church or cult?

    You’ll get no disagreement from me here. While it’s quite off this topic, I’d just note that churches with these “covenants” must seriously mistrust their members, while at the same time wanting their minds, time and talents.

  25. Since Patterson was addressing predominantly pastors-in-training at Southwestern, I would imagine that they will be mimicking him if and when they achieve pastordom.

  26. Nick Bulbeck wrote:

    I’ve no idea who Beth Moore is

    Beth Moore is sort of the female version of preacher Joel Osteen. She is a female motivational speaker, basically.

    Moore is a guest speaker every Wednesday on the Christian TV show Life Today, but is better known for being a conference speaker for womens’ conferences in the USA. She also writes books and Bible study workbooks which are used in a lot of lady Sunday School classes.

    Beth Moore’s Bio Page on her Living Proof Ministries web site

  27. Anon 1 wrote:

    Moore is nothing but the perfect example of the “commercialization” of Christianity celebrity. She is the Joel Osteen of Women’s ministries.

    😆 I said the same thing in my reply to Nick, but I wrote my comments before having seen yours. I too feel she is the female version of Osteen.

    I’m not completely opposed to some fluff in Christian studies, including jokes, or the speaker talking about their personal lives. Too much can be a bad thing, but a little bit does’t bother me.

    IMHO Christian speakers and preachers should strike the right balance between going deep/ serious with biblical studies but bringing some humor/ encouragement into the mix.

    I do not support the seeker friendly movement (and Moore and Osteen seem to cater to that), but on the other hand, I get glassy eyed at times listening to purely intellectual studies/ speakers drone on and on.

  28. Regarding Patterson’s advice to the lady that she keep praying for her abusive husband, and he had a turn around the next day.

    That is very, very atypical, based on what I’ve read in books that touch on domestic violence.

    The psychiatrists and counselors (both Christian and Non Christian) whose work I’ve read, say that sort of “magical thinking” (by abused women, that if they just keep praying and hoping hard enough that God will instantly change their husbands), is one thing that keeps some Christian women trapped in abusive marriages, when they should be making plans on divorcing the guy and leaving him.

    Just prayer or submitting to an abuser is not going to change most of them, based on material I’ve read. Such men have to go to counseling for their abuse, and even then, it’s not a sure thing they will change.

    As a matter of fact, several of the books I read said that constantly capitulating to an abuser, to keep living with him and submitting is viewed by most abusers as your permission to keep being abused, they take it to mean you WANT to be abused.

    And this applies with garden variety adult bullies in workplaces too, or when you’re a kid with kid bullies.

    There’s a time to be loving towards mean, horrible, or abusive people, but there’s a time to stand up to them, too (and there are examples of Jesus Christ, Paul, and other bible people standing up to abusers).

    The Bible does not, not, not teach that believers are to be lovey, forgivey in each and every situation regarding every single person you will ever encounter no matter what.

    You have to know when to practice the lovey bit and know when to stomp on someone to defend yourself or someone else.

  29. Pacbox wrote:

    because they were so injurious, that they affected not just the parties involved but also others who may not have been directly involved but had heard about it, etc.

    Off topic: Thank you for those words. There is an abuse-related matter in which nobody understands my unhappiness about it, wishing I could do something about it, telling me that I am not directly involved/ not the injured party. Thank you for admitting people can be affected.

  30. “But even if it’s the saved of the Lord Jesus, we still live in mortal bodies; we still can make mistakes,” he said. “The church of the Living God may very well make a mistake, and Paul anticipates it and says: ‘You don’t understand. You still don’t go to the court. Why don’t you learn to just accept wrong, just to accept injustice?’”

    Well, Paige, what if it’s not just a silly ol’ mistake? What if a church is intentionally harassing someone? How convenient to brand someone unChristian for trying to protect themselves through the courts. A secular court system is safer and preferable in such a circumstance than a corrupt church.

  31. @ Retha Faurie: This angers me (on your behalf, let me be clear) more than many things that might seem worse.

    If you’re on the receiving end, you’re “hurt” or a “wounded person” whose viewpoint is clouded and therefore you have no right to speak. And apparently now, if you’re not on the receiving end, you’re not directly involved and therefore you have no right to speak. In a nutshell: when someone without standing, influence or power is abused, nobody has any right to speak.

    It is not surprising that the powerful and privileged are becoming increasingly vocal against attempts to bring their deeds into the light. And let’s be clear here: many of these issues are not simply the mistakes of the “redeemed-but-fallible”. They are actions untouched by the blood of Jesus or the love of God.

    The ranks of the protestant clergy have become too heavily spotted with people who have seated themselves in Moses’ seat (as though we still needed it) and developed an overblown sense of entitlement from it. They can rebuke, correct, gate-crash or denounce anybody they like – it’s “church discipline”. But nobody can do it to them.

  32. @ Heather
    @ Anon 1
    @ Nicholas
    @ Daisy
    Thanks for the information. Beth Moore is big in the circles I run in so I had no idea…

  33. Southwestern Discomfort wrote:

    I’d just note that churches with these “covenants” must seriously mistrust their members, while at the same time wanting their minds, time and talents.

    And their money. Especially their money!

  34. Re: CrissCross

    I would not describe Beth Moore as a female Joel Osteen, in that she is not just touchy feely. She does point to the Scriptures and encourage women to study themselves. I think one reason she became popular is because of she offered some depth and straight forward talking that many women were drawn to.

    I’m in no way defending Moore’s weak areas. I simply have no personal information. I can’t imagine a good reason to return an adopted child to a mother who had previously given this child up, and think it prudent to keep a red flag by her name unless more info clears her somehow (though I can’t think of how.)

    While I don’t like to here teachers add to the text of what is not there, I admit overlooking this in Moore, simply because I find this everywhere and can’t seem to escape it, as much as I wish I could. At least (in my experience) with Moore, she was willing to say, “I might be wrong, check for yourself.” That is a major step up from most of the other (man or woman) Bible teachers I’ve known.

    I liked and benefited from several Moore Bible studies, but in the end, I don’t do fill-in-the-blank very well. While I was sick, it the Moore studies helped me to focus. Later on, I needed a more Word based study so I looked elsewhere.

  35. While on the sidetracked discussion of Women’s Bible studies … I’d like to say that I desperately wish that people could go to church and learn how to study the Bible, and do it, without it costing money. Seems this should be a priority of the church. Not latest book or trend studies, but Bible studies. I suggest that it’s not done that much, if at all, because people are really uncertain how to approach the Scriptures and how to handle the unknowns.

  36. Patterson is missing the entire point. The church should be OPEN with the unbelieving world, having NOTHING to hide. It’s like drug testing. You can come to my work any day of the week and test me for drugs. BUT if I start whining…and not showing up, don’t you have reason to think that I may be using? If you are AFRAID of exposure…what are you HIDING? Fools…..we may be Christians but we are also CITIZENS and the law does not get suspended just because we claim to know Christ. I think of the verse “the name of GOD is BLASPHEMED among the gentiles on (Pattersons) account……the world is not so naive and stupid as he things.

  37. Uh oh, PP, looks like the evil press at World Magazine in a new article writes about Prestonwood Baptist’s failure to report child sexual abuse PBC refuses to give any further comment when asked by a reporter if they called the police to report Langworthy (but they sure did call the police on Chris Tynes for asking questions and hanging out in the *gasp* church parking lot.) And the SBC [read: Prestonwood via Houston’s First Baptist] called the Houston police on me because I *gasp* blogged about our awareness event plans to speak to the media at the annual meeting. http://www.worldmag.com/2013/10/the_high_cost_of_negligence

    Excerpt: Earlier this year Prestonwood Baptist Church, a Southern Baptist congregation of about 15,000 in Plano, Texas, faced questions about how it handled a past allegation of abuse. Its former youth worker, John Langworthy, pleaded guilty in Mississippi to five of eight counts of molestation involving five boys in the early 1980s. A judge gave Langworthy a 50-year suspended sentence.

    Mike Buster, an executive pastor at Prestonwood, told a local news station in 2011 the church received an allegation in 1989 that Langworthy had “acted inappropriately with a teenage student.” The pastor said the church dismissed Langworthy, and that “the elected officers dealt with the matter firmly and forthrightly.” Buster didn’t say whether church officers filed a police report. WORLD requested further comment, and Buster replied in an email, saying nothing had changed from the church’s original statement. Langworthy went on to work as a music minister at Morrison Heights Baptist Church and a high school choir director in Clinton Public Schools. He resigned both positions in 2011.

    Lumpkins said to me about Prestonwood’s failure to report Langworthy to police: “But I don’t think you ‘get’ I don’t see viable evidence you do. I can’t be clearer.”

    That’s “willful blindness.” I can’t be clearer.

  38. @ Amy Smith:
    Amy, that whole article is well written. It brought me to tears. The author did a good job portraying how difficult the experience is for sexual abuse survivors, even as they work through the process of seeking justice.
    Thank you for the link.

  39. This post hits so close to home tonight. Bear with me. A church leader I trusted and respected and believed has, in my opinion, revealed himself to be an arrogant, uncaring and blind to some specific problems in our church. I am devastated. This church has been a safe haven to me for the past several years. Jesus has met me there. I have met Jesus there. And I feel so confused and betrayed. And I feel like no one in the world can understand this pain. I feel I have no voice and am not seen as credible by anyone in charge at my church. Why don’t leaders understand and appreciate the tremendous power that they have to wound or to heal? I feel so alone. And so helpless. And as a childhood abuse survivor, this is am eerily familiar feeling. I just never thought I’d feel it in this church.

    I’m sorry for such a personal post. I wanted to get some of these feelings out.

  40. grieving wrote:

    And I feel so confused and betrayed. And I feel like no one in the world can understand this pain

    There are likely many here who can identify with your pain. No apology necessary for expressing your confusion and sorrow. We are here for you. Sending a virtual hug…

  41. @ grieving:

    I feel my own pain in every word of yours…deep grief. But coming out of the betrayal and shunning and rejection by my own parents and the Baptist institution, I am finding strength of heart, and clarity, like I’m coming out of a fog I didn’t know I was in, even a few years into speaking out about Langworthy and the abuse covered up at Prestonwood for decades.

    I was thinking today about these hurtful words and attitude by Paige Patterson, how depressing it is that he’s imparting this completely un-Christ-like mindset to the next leaders of SBC churches, and I realized that the reporters and bloggers that I’ve had the pleasure of communicating with have done more to help the wounded heal and protect kids than any pastors I know. In fact, in the many cases of child sexual abuse that I know of, it’s pastors and churches who have perpetuated the evil of abuse by covering it up.

  42. @ Heather:
    Beth Moore’s problem is not Beth Moore. The problem is “allegory” and making scripture say whatever you want/need it to say.

  43. @ Amy Smith:
    Amy, I’m sorry for your pain. But not sorry enough to withhold pointing out the weakness of your charges against Peter Lumpkins. Wasn’t it Peter who led the SBC to colletively adopt a strongly worded resolution against abuse?

    Wasn’t it Peter Lumpkins who exposed this tragedy within Southern Baptist churches publicly through numerous articles on his website calling attention to the matter?

    I have read the indicting evidence SNAP and others have offered up as “proof” of a coverup by Prestonwood Baptist Church and it’s pastor. My opinion of the “evidence” is that it comes closer to meeting the criteria of prejudiced assumption than that of indisputable evidence. Lumpkins demonstrates intergrity by not taking this kind of shoddy evidence and running with it.

    For the sake of maintaining the credibility of your cause, I would suggest you try practicing the same.

  44. grieving wrote:

    Why don’t leaders understand and appreciate the tremendous power that they have to wound or to heal?

    Grieving, Do your grieving and then start knowing Jesus on your own. The beauty is that never again will any “leader” have tremendous power to wound or heal you. I cannot tell you the freedom and love that awaits you once you work your way through this. But you have to work through it. And that is what blogs like this help with. You are so not alone. Many thought of their church as family only to be scorned and treated with disdain. And many thought they were safe there because it was a “church”.

    Give yourself plenty of time and space to work through this. And remember, He is with you.

  45. Scott

    At the risk of a conflict, i want to jump in here and say I think the Prestonwood/Langworthy thing was poorly handled.Children always come first and I am not sure that *all* children were considered in the response. And now, as I see Graham taking part on the compensation committee for the likes of Furtick, I must admit that I am not thinking very well of him at the moment.

  46. @ dee:
    Dee: You’re certainly free to think of Jack Graham as you choose. Your thoughts about how the Prestonwood/Langworthy “thing” was handled may very well be valid in light of all the facts (which none of us have). Problem is, nobody from Prestonwood or the local authorities saw the need to consult your input, mine, or others save those of involved parties in the matter.

    As I suggested to Amy earlier, Peter Lumpkins chose the high road of integrity with regard to chasing Prestonwood rabbits based on assumptions and he said-she said types of evidence. Regardless of what ACTUALLY did or didn’t happen.

    Accusing a man who has courageously drawn attention to the problem of sexual abuse in baptist churches of “willful blindness” on the Prestonwood incident is a public cheap shot that detracts rather than adds credibility to her efforts.

    These rants are not fair to Peter Lumpkins nor the membership of Prestonwood Church and its pastor. I’ve heard Jack Graham preach on television a few times but do not know him personally.

    Our emotions in the wake of this incident have little or no bearing on facts (or the absence thereof)IMO.

  47. @ Scott Shaver:

    To your ignorance and arrogance, I reply with the statement of a mother of one of Langworthy’s continued child sexual abuse victims at Prestonwood for 15 months:

    As a mother of a child that was molested by John Langworthy when he was at Prestonwood in the late 80’s, I want people to know the truth, The hurt our family endured during this time is indescribeable. First of all, we were not contacted by Prestonwood when our son went to the youth minister, Neal Jeffrey to tell him what he had been going through for months at the hands of John Langworthy.
    The phone rang and it was the counselor’s office calling to confirm my son’s appointment. I called Neal immediately to find out what was going on. The next thing I remember is seeing my son sitting on the curb outside our front door waiting for Neal and a youth volunteer to arrive. Our son could not bring himself to come into our home to tell us what John had done to him. We felt Neal was there to look after the church’s interest.
    Prestonwood only tried to protect themselves. The church never reported John to the police, and he left Texas within a week for Mississippi. My husband and I found out that Langworthy was working at a elementary school in Mississippi. We made a call to a school official to tell them about John’s molestation of young boys. We knew we had to notify the school. No more children needed to be John’s victims.
    We ask that Prestonwood take responsibility for their coverup, and to say they are sorry.
    – See more at: http://watchkeep.blogspot.com/2013_01_01_archive.html#sthash.iocHI0OX.dpuf

  48. Scott Shaver wrote:

    nobody from Prestonwood or the local authorities saw the need to consult your input, mine, or others save those of involved parties in the matter.

    I doubt there is a church in Christendom that would, or should, consult me! So, I speak as an observer. The situation was poorly handled in my never to be humble opinion.

    As for emotions, I usually take the side of the abused and oppressed. Well known pastors always have a slew of admirers backing them up. Little children who are abused have way too few of those in their lives.

    As you know, these things boil down to two sides. We all take sides, one way or another. I choose to be concerned that kids continued to be abused where Langworthy went. Could something more have been done? I think so just as you think not. However, I bet you are not surprised by my stand. In general, I am pretty consistent on this issue.

  49. @ Amy Smith:
    Amy:
    My disagreement with your logic consigns me now to the realms of “ignorance” and “arrogance”? Nice touch to employ when engaging with brothers and sisters who share your concern. So be it.

    I still don’t see from your posted testimony of an offended party any mention of details (intentional cover ups specifically) on the part of Graham.

    Quite the contrary, the testimony reveals that a member of the church staff was there upon discovery to assist the family in its ordeal. This despite the evaluation of the victims mother, “We FELT (caps mine) as if Neal was there to look after the church’s interest.”

    Of course he was there looking after the church’s interest. But that does not necessarily mean he conversely had no interest in the welfare of the abused child and his family.

    Don’t reply with a statement, Amy, reply with facts.

  50. @ dee:
    Dee:

    I don’t beleive I ever stated a conviction that “nothing more could have been done.” I stated a conviction that evidence heretofore produced by Amy and others as “proof” of a cover-up don’t pass the smell test with me personally.

    Beyond that, I don’t know enough facts to make any judgement calls with regard to this incident … save one.

    Peter Lumpkins is far from being “willfully blind” simply because he doesn’t jump when Amy Smith says frog.

  51. Prestonwood did not report the matter to the civil authorities in Texas. That is dereliction of duty. Graham was the CEO and thus responsible for the failure, because that is where the buck stops. It is allegedly why he gets paid so much.

    Had the interest of the child been paramount, instead of the interest of the church, the facts would have been formally reported to the authorities. That did not occur. As a result, Langworthy was dispatched without a criminal record, and subsequently abused more children. Graham is responsible for every one of those cases for failing to act, including failure to inform his next employer. Yes, Graham was not directly handling the matter, but he should have been as the senior pastor, when a staff member, hired with his permission or retained with his permission, violated children.

    And, quite frankly, the parents of the children abused in Mississippi might have a civil cause of action against the church and Graham, as well as any one else involved in the coverup. I know, I have represented churches when a staff member has not kept their pants on and should have.

  52. Anonymous Attorney:

    Do you know for a fact that Graham had not contact with the church Langworthy relocated to? I find that hard to believe. During my 20 years in the pastorate I received calls from every single church that ever hired off of our staff.

    My understanding is that the offending minister was immediately canned by Prestonwood when learning of the incident. Their failure to report “a crime” to police was obviously not pursued by authorities either in the state of Texas or Mississippi. Whether this “failure” should have been prosecuted … I don’t know.

    Quite frankly, if the families and children abused in Mississippi have a civil cause of action against Prestonwood and Graham, shouldn’t we wait for the result of that litigation before pronouncing guilt?

    Why haven’t authorities in both Texas and Mississippi already taken issue with Graham and Prestonwood for “failure to report” in light of your stated “cause for action”.

    Perhaps you should take their case in paramount interest of the children.

  53. I know the facts because I have lived this story. Langworthy was my minister. He lived with my family. He sexually abused several of my friends. I have talked to them in the last 2 years about this abuse. One contacted me about a year ago who had never told anyone, not even his parents. Now he has. I know that one of them told Neal Jeffrey, then youth pastor, but he didn’t tell the boy’s parents, and arranged counseling for him without the parents’ consent. His mom found out about the abuse when the counseling clinic, Minirith Meier called and asked for her son. That was the day she is referring to in her statement when Neal showed up at her home. My dad was one of the “officers” who “handled it.” Langworthy confessed to my dad and to Neal Jeffrey and to Jack Graham who fired him.

    One of the victim’s parents was ready to go to the police when they got a harassing phone call from my dad, on behalf of Prestonwood. He was a deacon. He told them to drop it and leave Langworthy alone in MS. They were intimated into silence by the fear of a megachurch.

    These are the child sex crimes that are detailed against 5 boys ages 6-13 in MS from 1980-84, just before he came to Prestonwood. The prosecution document also details a victim from TX, abused by Langworthy at Prestonwood. He came forward to the Hinds County DA. Langworthy continued to sexually abuse kids at Prestonwood until he was fired and moved back to MS.

    Thanks to the report by Brett Shipp and WFAA, the story then began airing in Jackson, MS in Aug. 2011. That next week, one of Langworthy’s victims (abused from age 9-13) went to the police. The press reported that and then 4 more victims had the courage to come forward. Langworthy pled guilty in Jan. 2013.

    The State of MS vs. Langworthy http://www.scribd.com/doc/117329773/Langworthy-State-s-Response

  54. It’s possible that too much time has passed for a criminal case to be undertaken. It depends on the laws in each state. I hope a civil case(s) is being pursued.

    One thing is certain, to send such a person on their way to possibly repeat offend without doing everything in your ability to have the person arrested and brought to trial, would be morally wrong.

  55. Bridget wrote:

    One thing is certain, to send such a person on their way to possibly repeat offend without doing everything in your ability to have the person arrested and brought to trial, would be morally wrong.

    “Here you go. (He’s your problem now.)”

  56. More: transcript of the call from my husband to my dad after my interview about Langworthy aired. My husband recorded the call so I could hear what my dad had to say. My parents were very angry with me for speaking out. He put this transcript together and emailed it to us. He discuses details of the knowledge of the abuse at Prestonwood. http://www.scribd.com/doc/135223354/Transcript-of-Matt-s-Call-August-20-2011

    Email to me from Mike Buster in Feb. 2011, executive pastor at Prestonwood. To my knowledge they still have not done what he said they would do “cooperate fully with law enforcement agencies regarding this matter.” http://www.scribd.com/doc/141668494/Email-from-Mike-Buster

    Email from Neal Jeffrey at Prestonwood admitting that church attorneys were involved in the knowledge of the abuse. Still none of them called the police as TX law required. http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/141672431

    The church had some of the victims in 1989 sit down with church attorneys and give statements. They didn’t report this to the police.

  57. There are statutes of limitation on almost all offenses, murder being the major exception in some jurisdictions. In Texas, the statute allows prosecution of sexual assault, including sexual assault of a child, at any time, without limit.

  58. The statute of limitations on FAILURE TO REPORT a possible sexual offense against a child is two years from commission of the offense. This lets Prestonwood and Graham off the hook for criminal prosecution for failure to report about Langworthy.

    The civil statute of limitations is generally four years or less, with some exceptions. For some offenses against children, the limitation period starts when the child turns 18. A creative DA and judge could find basis in the criminal code provisions to extend the statute via reference to the criminal code provisions.

  59. My opinion: Graham did not report and acted to cover up the offense. It is also obvious that he did not inform the Mississippi employer of the circumstances of Langworthy’s leaving Prestonwood. Together, those actions/failures to act had the effect of making Graham and other staff liable for prosecution under Texas law for failure to report, and Graham, other staff and the church liable under tort law, especially to the Mississippi victims Langworthy abused after leaving Prestonwood, but perhaps also to the employer entities in Mississippi.

  60. Scott Shaver wrote:

    @ Amy Smith:
    According to Amy Smith tis a crime.
    The authorities obviously didn’t see it that way.

    No, not according to me, according to the state of TX, failure to report the knowledge of or suspicion of child abuse is a crime. It has been mandated since 1971. The police didn’t even know about Langworthy’s crimes in 1989 when Prestonwood fired him, because they didn’t report him, ever. Langworthy’s crimes were not publicly exposed until August 2011 when he publicly confessed from the pulpit at his church in MS.

    Are you related to Steve Shaver who was on staff at Prestonwood?

  61. @ Amy Smith:
    @ Anne:
    Amy:

    My response would be sorrow over any expired statutes of civil law that might justifiably augment what you consider to be “just” reparations within the constraints of Spirit-led, biblically informed Christian conviction.

    I’m sorry that your obvious close ties with Langworthy and the subsequent abuse of his victims did not surface in your awareness until two years ago or whenever these things did come to light.

    I’m sorry that even with your extended and personal details of involvement with the incident I still find nothing more than concentric circles of allegations and demands for apology on your part from the membership of Prestonwood and Jack Graham for enabling the predator.

    You mentioned the man “living with your family”. By the logic you seek to employ against Prestonwood and Jack Graham would that not also make you an enabler of some fashion …even with the default of not being aware of his activities?

    Additionally, I’m sorry the church in Mississippi (a separate entity from Prestonwood) didn’t do a better job of checking this guy out prior to his relocation from Texas to MS.

    Like it or not, statutes of limitations are part of our civil system of justice. To date, your concerns against Jack Graham and Prestonwood have not been validated by any court of law.

    Beyond that, I’m hopeful that Christians will weigh carefully in the balances those things rendered to Caesar and those things rendered to God apart from the clamor of activists who appear convinced they’ve got God in their pockets.

    That’s my response Amy.

  62. @ Amy Smith:
    Amy Smith wrote:

    @ Scott Shaver:
    How dare you malign the stated feelings of a mother of a child sex abuse victim.

    No, that one’s on you Amy, you present the mother’s stated FEELINGS as facts. I empathize with her feelings but “fact” are thus far missing in your reply to my previous request for them.

    Don’t serve somebody else up on the chopping block to make your point.

  63. @ Scott Shaver:

    I don’t often say such things, but you are a case. Not a word of concern have you written for the children that were affected by this man. Your only concern seems to be for the leader of a church, and trying to tell Amy that she is wrong to call attention to the matter. I’m ill reading your comments, seeing that your concern seems to be for a huge church with power and money and not for the least of these that were harmed when this man went to Mississippi. Then you have the gaul to blame the church in Mississippi for not calling Prestonwood. No words for the likes of you!!

  64. An Attorney wrote:

    My opinion: Graham did not report and acted to cover up the offense. It is also obvious that he did not inform the Mississippi employer of the circumstances of Langworthy’s leaving Prestonwood. Together, those actions/failures to act had the effect of making Graham and other staff liable for prosecution under Texas law for failure to report, and Graham, other staff and the church liable under tort law, especially to the Mississippi victims Langworthy abused after leaving Prestonwood, but perhaps also to the employer entities in Mississippi.

    Good there anonymous attorney:

    Does “opinion” mean you’ve been retained? I will await outcome of litigation before forming one of my own as to the issue of cover-up with criminal intent.

  65. Bridget wrote:

    @ Scott Shaver:
    I don’t often say such things, but you are a case. Not a word of concern have you written for the children that were affected by this man. Your only concern seems to be for the leader of a church, and trying to tell Amy that she is wrong to call attention to the matter. I’m ill reading your comments, seeing that your concern seems to be for a huge church with power and money and not for the least of these that were harmed when this man went to Mississippi. Then you have the gaul to blame the church in Mississippi for not calling Prestonwood. No words for the likes of you!!

    Bridget, not only have I expressed concern for the feelings of the abused in this thread (read closely) you can check out my numerous comments at SBC Tommorrow prior to and leading up the recent SBC resolution on child sexual abuse. Additionally, nobody has been a stronger critic of Paige Patterson’s most recent offering about how to handle these matters.

    So much so that ABP could not print my response.

    Referring to sources outside a short disagreement with Amy Smith on Wartburg Watch (a fine site I add) might give you a more balanced perspective as to my levels of both concern and compassion regarding the sexual abuse issue in question.

  66. @ Scott Shaver:
    Also Brigette:

    As I indicated at the beginning of my involvement in this thread, I have never set foot in Prestonwood, am not aware of anyone in the church I know and I do not know Jack Graham apart from hearing him preach on television.

  67. dee wrote:

    @ Southwestern Discomfort:
    And you wonder why I say not to sign anything when you join a church or cult?

    Haaaa haaaa. Nothing but total agreement here.

  68. @ Scott Shaver:

    Bringing in church attorneys to meet with victims and handle it (the job of law enforcement only), take statements internally, investigate internally, and not reporting these allegations of abuse to police as TX law required, was an intentional act to keep the abuse quiet, covered up.

  69. Amy Smith wrote:

    @ Scott Shaver:
    Bringing in church attorneys to meet with victims and handle it (the job of law enforcement only), take statements internally, investigate internally, and not reporting these allegations of abuse to police as TX law required, was an intentional act to keep the abuse quiet, covered up.

    That’s the clarion call of one Amy Smith. Not the outcome of any legal or civil judgement. As to Christian judgement. I’ve already stated my opinion Amy.

  70. @ Scott Shaver:

    Facts are facts. Prestonwood admitted firing him for acting “inappropriately with a teenage student” (that’s a crime, 15 yo) but didn’t report this to the police as required by law.

    And the clarion call for truth by Dee from her TWW post in Aug. 2011:

    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2011/08/12/does-the-sbc-fear-women-pastors-more-than-their-kids-getting-molested/

    “However, I think that, if the SBC really cared about this issue, within two weeks of Prestonwood’s admission that they did not report this incident to the police, a vote should have been be taken to disfellowship Prestonwood from the North Texas Baptist Association.

    But, such an action will never take place. Why? The answer is quite simple. It is far more dangerous to have a woman in the pulpit than to have pedophiles raping children. The impeccable priorities of the SBC are quite clear and the watching world sees it for what it is. Time Magazine called the SBC’s neglect of this issue one of the underreported stories of 2008. Link

    Oh, and in case one is tempted to educate me that it was a local association that disfellowshipped the Mount Airy church, I have one thing to say. Why hasn’t any association disfellowshipped a church that has not reported a pedophile a la Prestonwood ? This sort of weaseling is unbecoming. The SBC is doing nothing different than the Roman Catholic Church did with their cover-up of their pedophile priest scandal. SHAME ON THE SBC. (Yep, I’m shouting, blog style).”

  71. @ Scott Shaver:

    Yet, you’re fine with continuing to speak out about the abuse at SGM though the outcome of the legal judgment was to dismiss the case? Shouldn’t you refrain from judgement about Mahaney then, if we apply your logic to this case with Prestonwood?

  72. Amy Smith wrote:

    Facts are facts. Prestonwood admitted firing him for acting “inappropriately with a teenage student” (that’s a crime, 15 yo) but didn’t report this to the police as required by law.

    This, Mr. Shaver, is the heart of the matter. The fact that Preston knew of child abuse and did not report it as required by law is wrong, wrong, wrong on a moral and legal level and trumps any of smoke you are blowing to deflect from this FACT!

  73. @ JeffT:
    Bridget wrote:

    It’s possible that too much time has passed for a criminal case to be undertaken. It depends on the laws in each state. I hope a civil case(s) is being pursued.
    One thing is certain, to send such a person on their way to possibly repeat offend without doing everything in your ability to have the person arrested and brought to trial, would be morally wrong.

    I don’t see where Mr. Shaver addresses that issue. My experience with his comments is that he is after Amy for some reason.

  74. MR. Shaver wants “facts”. Prestonwood admitted all of the necessary facts to show that they did not report and did, in fact, cover up sexual abuse of children by a staff member, abuse which they knew had occurred by the confession of the abuser to the senior pastor. Shaver is willfully denying reality and should consider counseling for his continued denial of reality. The facts have been there in public for some time, admissions by the church and the senior pastor.

  75. Scott Shaver wrote:

    Positively laughable. A Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night.

    Good comeback. Guess that’s all you got when you got no facts.

  76. I just found Dee’s first post on the Prestonwood/Langworthy story this morning that I linked in a comment above. I had never heard of TWW or communicated with Dee until, I believe, about a year ago when she contacted me about writing about my story of my parents’ rejection. I found this comment she wrote on her original post, and I think I’ll leave this thread with this…

    dee on Sun Aug 14, 2011 at 10:58 PM said:
    notastepfordsheep
    I, too, believe that the SBc left me. I could no longer support , in particular, the attitude and actions of those churches in the SBC that play games when it comes to protecting children. Better one nondenominational church in which I can have a real voice. At least I will be heard. I do not think anyone in the SBC hierarchy care or they would have seriously addressed this issue. Steve Gaines, Paige Patterson, Jack Graham, and the folks of Wonderland are still having tea parties while children are suffering.

  77. BTW, here are the facts:

    Executive Pastor Mike Buster gave offered this statement:

    “In the summer of 1989, the church received an allegation that John Langworthy had acted inappropriately with a teenage student. Based on this allegation, he was dismissed immediately, removing him from all responsibilities with the church. In no way did officials of the church seek to cover up the actions of Mr. Langworthy or silence his accuser. The elected officers dealt with the matter firmly and forthrightly.”

    Here is the source:

    http://www.wfaa.com/news/investigates/Disturbing-revelations-about-former-Prestonwood-minister-127284918.html

    No mention at all by Prestonwood of contacting law enforcement, which was a crime. I will gladly retract if a police report documenting such contact can be produced. If not, it was a cover up and no amount of smoke or “so’s your old man” reply can make that go away.

  78. @ JeffT:
    I’m not the one making the argument and trying the case of cover-up with criminal intent here Jeff, Amy is. Facts are not my responsibility based on the specific nuance of our disagreement.

    My final comment on the issue of cover-up with criminal intent to Amy and others was posted earlier in the thread. It concluded that I still had not seen facts or evidence substantiating these concerns against either Prestonwood or its pastor…IMO. Lack of any concluded ongoing legal or church action either in Texas or Mississippi buttresses my position. Sorry.

    I applauded the intergrity of folks like Peter Lumpkins for refusing to jump just because concerned advocates like Amy Smith say frog. That’s pretty much all I have to contribute to the conversation.

  79. @ Scott Shaver:

    Your callous disregard for the serial child sexual crimes committed by Langworthy that Prestonwood knew about yet sent him quietly back to an unsuspecting community of kids is exhibit A of why victims stay silent. Your defense of that decision is reprehensible, and your argument that I should have kept my mouth shut is beyond the pale. Prestonwood became aware of Langworthy’s past when someone from MS called them to tell them there was a problem. Exposing the truth about what I knew took place at Prestonwood, based also on direct accounts from victims and their parents, gave courage to victims in MS to go to the police, breaking the silence that protected this predator, for 22 years.

    I would shout FROG a billion times over if it gives courage to victims to come forward and protect even one kid.

    The State of MS vs Langworthy http://www.scribd.com/doc/117329773/Langworthy-State-s-Response: victims one through five are detailed in the prosecution’s document as well as TX victim that came forward to Prestonwood but was harassed into silence in 1989.

    Let’s recap the “concluded legal” action that Langworthy pled guilty to. He did these heinous acts to kids before his job at Prestonwood, then was caught again at Prestonwood and fired because of it. But allowed to go back to MS to PREY on kids without a peep from Prestonwood. NO WAY he didn’t continue his pattern…

    …and one victim, [initials], disclosed that he had been sexually abused by Langworthy in a church in Texas.

    [initials]disclosed that Langworthy began abusing him when he was nine years old and continued to sexually abuse him until he was thirteen years old.

    The list of crimes goes on in graphic detail in the document of the sexual crimes done to 5 victims.

    Victim One: