Back to the Moon-NASA
“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.
“Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cat: “we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad.”
“How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.
“You must be,” said the Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here.”
― Alice in Wonderland
Todd and I were speaking last week about the utter weirdness of this whole Chandler thing. If this was simply joking around, why didn’t his elders sit him down in a room and say, “Cut it out? It looks bad.” We were told, by Chandler and the gang, that there was nothing romantic or sexual going on, and everyone in the involved families knew about it and had no problem with it. Instead of telling him to cool it, they make him step down as pastor and as the leader of Acts 29. For what??? This is either an overreaction like the Karen Hinckley response, or something else is going on. Although Todd and I agree it could be “romantic.” I suggested that he could have been spilling confidential information to his texting buddy, which could be a real problem given what pastors usually know about people
Today I present two other theories.
Why is this not a local church matter?
I have been making this point for 13 years, and the theodudes still don’t get it. Chandler is not a local church pastor. He is a very public speaker, writer, and cattle ranch owner. His books are marketed in magazines I have read. He is brought in to be a public speaker at conferences, which are sold to people outside of The Village Church. Chandler has chosen to be a Christian celebrity and leader. He is (well, until the LOA) the head of Acts 29, a separate organization from TVC. So don’t try to tell me that we have no right to see what sort of life he lives given that he writes books about being good Christians, right?
There is a church down the street from me: North Raleigh United Methodist Church. I don’t know who their pastor(s) are. They have a nice little sign telling us that “all are welcome.” They occasionally have a bake sale and fish fry, which I have dropped in on sometimes. I hear about it from a little sign out front of the church. I have nothing to say about their church because they don’t go jumping up and down and seeking attention.
Not so for Chandler and friends. So, whether he likes it or not, he is a public figure who has sought the limelight (of course, only for the glory of God and all that jazz.) He seeks recognition while attempting “humble.” My meme applies. “Play in public, pay in public.” If this guy behaves in weird ways, as he did with Karen Hinckley, then I want to know it so I don’t make the mistake of recommending people listen to his sermons and read his books. Currently, he is off my list of “preferred pastors.” Yes, I have a list like that. See the people I select for EChurch@Wartburg.
One of Chandler’s BFFs is defending him. Of course, he is. In the meantime, the elders release “a statement.” Do not get excited.
Baptist News Global posted A friend defends Matt Chandler, the elders issue a statement, and nothing else is any clearer. Whoops, I almost forgot that the elders also released a statement. When you read it, I imagine you might say, “For this I tithe?”
Baptist News Global said that speculation runs in two directions. I would have been happy to add another direction.
Speculation has run mainly two ways about what this means: Either Chandler and elders at The Village Church have no capacity to allow a man to have normal conversation with a woman to whom he is neither married nor sexually involved with, or there’s a lot more to the story than is being told.
The Statement
Here is a link to it on TVC’s website. They are still using the word “unhealth.” Here is part of it. This is only temporary discipline, and he will be back! It is a total nothing burger.
While the overarching pattern of his life has been “above reproach,” he failed to meet the 1 Timothy standard for elders of being “above reproach” in this instance.
We are strong proponents of brothers and sisters in Christ being friends, but there are boundaries around what’s appropriate in these kinds of friendships. A pastoral role requires a greater awareness of those boundaries. In this case, while the messages were not romantic or sexual in nature, the frequency and familiarity of the messages crossed a line. They revealed that Matt did not use language appropriate for a pastor, and he did not model a behavior that we expect from him.
While the elders believe that this did not rise to the level of disqualification, we do hold elders to a higher standard of behavior. The elders concluded, and Matt agreed, that Matt’s behavior was a sign of unhealth in his life, and that the best course of action would be for him to take a leave of absence from teaching and preaching at The Village Church.
Preston Sprinkle: Matt’s buddy who is also the leader of a conference that features Chandler as a leader
I can imagine how this one went.” Oh No! Chandler’s a speaker, and people come because of him, so I need to do something.” He still plans to have Chandler come. So, this friend is also involved in a business venture which depends on Chandler, so take it with a grain of salt.
That assessment came from Preston Sprinkle, an evangelical author and president of the Center for Faith, Sexuality and Gender. He’s also the organizer of an annual conference called Exiles in Babylon, where he said Chandler is still welcome to speak this year.
Sprinkle’s comments reportedly were sent to his financial supporters via Patreon, but BNG could not independently verify the source, since the messages are available only to donors. However, an image of the message was captured and reported as verified by a few online bloggers, including the far-right Reformed site Protestia, the website The Evangelical Dark Web and the Instagram account Wrecked Wretch.
Now, this one guy is at least more interesting than the elders.
First, Chandler insulted the friend of the other unidentified woman because he didn’t follow the Billy Graham rule. 😯
That’s right. The woman who came running to Chandler was upset over a violation of the Billy Graham rule.
He wrote: “To be clear, the woman he was messaging wasn’t at all offended and told Matt ‘don’t you dare apologize; you did nothing wrong!’ It was the woman’s friend, who lives by a very strict Billy Graham type of rule, that was offended that Matt was DMing a married woman (even though Matt’s wife and the woman’s husband was fully aware of it).”
So this warranted such a reaction? I think it is nonsense, but maybe you do not.
Second-Chandler joked about that demon brew “alcohol.”
According to the Evangelical Dark Web wrote Preston Sprinkle: Matt Chandler Simply Violated Billy Graham Rule:
Preston Sprinkle, a side b theology peddling liberal, posted on Instagram what Matt Chandler is accused of doing in his defense of maintaining him as a speaker. According to him, Matt Chandler merely violated the Billy Graham rule and the “coarse jesting” was an ancillary concern about alcohol humor.
Alcohol?? I thought these Reformed boys loved their tipple. The Billy Graham rule? This is all so weird that I wonder if our attention is being diverted from a more serious situation. If it isn’t, then they discipline for any old reason.
t
Is transactional sexuality, aka the purity culture, the root of this?
Baptist News Global posted What transactional sexuality could teach us about Matt Chandler’s odd leave of absence and confession written by Mallory Challis. Don’t worry. I didn’t know what she meant at first, either.
Chandler’s situation appears to be an example of something called “transactional sexuality,” a phrase that appears in Christianity Today’spodcast series “The Rise and Fall of Mars Hill.”
The podcast does not define the term directly, however, as I have researched this concept it seems it can be defined as such: Transactional Sexuality is a phenomenon within purity culture in which sex is viewed along the gender binary as an economic transaction — men are the consumers, desiring sex like it is a product, while women are the sellers, delivering sex like it is their job. When a man desires sex from a woman, it is because she has in some way advertised herself as being available for sexual relations (even if she did so inexplicitly). This means when men make a sexual offer, it is the duty of women to provide sexual gratification because they are responsible for the regulation of the desires circulating within the sexual economy (even if they do not wish to have sex).
She theorizes that this is all about the purity subculture.
Perhaps the reason Chandler felt the need to apologize for these conversations is that he has broken these rules of segregation, theoretically allowing himself to be exposed to another woman’s marketable, desirable and, for him, purchasable sexuality.
This type of relationship, regardless of its true nature, is risky within the boundaries of purity culture because evangelical Christian men have been taught they must be careful not to be tempted by promiscuous women. Christians also are taught that women (and their bodies) are responsible for what happens if they become a sexual temptress.
Sadly she summarized with this statement.
Chandler’s friendship with this woman is inherently scandalized within the church as something that could not possibly be platonic, even if it is as Chandler claims.
Final Thoughts: Never, ever sign a covenant at TVC
If this whole thing turns out to be diddly squat, then people who attend TVC are at risk of unjust disciplinary action. I have been saying for years not to sign a membership covenant which is a legal contract. Observe this mess. If it ends up that TVC has weird elders and a weird pastor, get out of that contract. Here are two posts that I have written on this subject. They came for Karren Hinckley, and they can come for you.
Church Membership Covenants – Legal Contracts that are NOT Biblical!
So, here are the choices thus far.
- Some form of affair
- Breaking confidentiality
- Joking about alcohol
- Not following the Billy Graham rule
- Transactional sexuality
Can you come up with something else?
Good question!!
And, I completely agree with “ Play in public, pay in public”
A number of years ago, a good acquaintance wanted to use Mark Driscoll stuff… I knew hoe disgusting MD was and made sure they knew it…
There was this as well on the Acts 29 side, which recalls a time where leadership may not have been completely forthcoming as to actions of other leadership:
https://julieroys.com/acts-29-president-matt-chandler-under-fire-for-removing-staff-alleging-abuse-changing-story-about-removal-of-ceo/
“Further compounding issues with Acts 29’s handling of alleged abuse by Timmis are the two different stories Chandler forwarded about why the board removed its CEO. On February 4, Chandler sent an email and video to the “Acts 29 Family,” informing them that the board had decided that it was “time for a new season of leadership” and that it was sending Timmis on a “4-month sabbatical and paying him through the end of 2020.”
“In the video, Chandler said that Timmis needed a sabbatical “where he can kind of rest and recover. He has wrung himself out for this network . . . So we’re gonna give him a chance to recoup and recover from that.” Chandler also praised Timmis and urged Acts 29 members to bless him, noting that under Timmis’ leadership, Acts 29 had grown from 300 churches mostly in the U.S. to 800 churches globally.
“However, the next day, Chandler sent a second email, noting that the “issues surrounding” Timmis had “garnered media attention, demanding that we share more specific details about the decision to transition Steve out of the CEO role.”
“It was then that Chandler disclosed that the board had received accusations of abusive leadership against Timmis two weeks prior, had launched an investigation, and had “found evidence” that Timmis should be removed “immediately.” Chandler said he was not more forthcoming initially because of “legal ramifications” and because “employment decisions involve real people” the board members “love deeply” and “for whom we continue to pray.”
“Steve McAlpine, who said he had connected with the fired staff six months ago, said he found Chandler’s words and actions to be disingenuous. “The fact that you eulogize (Timmis) one day and then the next day say he abused people—and then you say you found out two weeks ago when it was actually five years ago” is problematic, McAlpine said.”
JDV,
Sigh….
RE, the five choices thus far, up top at the end of the main article:
Here’s a sixth one I would add:
Much ado about nothing
I have a fringe theory that Matt Chandler is experiencing severe depression and/or burnout/disillusionment and “the other woman” was his confidant.
It would fit as a friendship that was ok with both their spouses and was neither romantic nor sexual in nature.
If he was using swear words to express anger and/or frustration with the situation (“I’m f***ing fed up with this b***sh**, I can’t f***ing take it anymore”), the conversation could be described as “coarse.”
His reaction to the confrontation of the friend of “the other woman” would appropriately be described as “disorienting” (I forget the exact word he used…) if she said something direct like “You have a mental health problem and you need professional help.”
If the elders saw the kind of sentiments he was sharing, especially if he is starting to go down the road of deconstruction Joshua-Harris-style, realizing how much of what he’s been taught and is teaching is fake and faulty, they would surely want him out of the pulpit and off the speaking stage before things blow up in a very public way.
And it would fit the description of “unhealth” that isn’t necessarily “sin” but still requires a leave of absence. (Though I’d argue that the sin of pride can lead to burnout, but that’s tangental to this theory.)
Our now-defunct Acts 29 church was all about image and looking awesome. And running yourself ragged “for the sake of the Gospel.” Frankly, I don’t see how he (or his family) can humanly keep up with it all. (Unless he has a whole team of “research assistants” to help with sermon prep and speaking gigs and book deals, of course. Which goes back to the tangental conversation regarding pride from above.)
Also, if memory is correct, it was the woman’s ‘friend’ who raised the stink about Chandler, after said woman confided in her.
I think I said before (in comments) that totalitarian environments like Chandler’s church, are a snitches paradise.
Anybody remember poor old Parsons in Orwell’s — 1984 — ?
His own kids ratted him out for mumbling in his sleep.
A snitch lives to snitch, they get off on it, and they love to stand back and watch the carnage that often times ensues.
“A talebearer* revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter.”
Proverbs 11:13
Hmmmmm…….. I wonder if he might have told his “confidant” that he’s tired of play-acting ….. living so much of his life running around pretending to be something he’s not.
Because, really, I don’t believe that he is what so many of his pew-sitting fans think he is.
A lot of evangelical culture prevents you from growing up, becoming a mature person that understands that life can be messy, not everything is black or white, that people and situations can be complicated and not what they seem… *This* is what I would call unhealthy
But Matt Chandler contributed to that unhealthy lack of maturity in his sermons, videos online, the culture at TVC, the church that he ran
Now the stupidity has come back to bite him. (Also, given his age, he seems remarkably immature: see the “narcissistic zero” video, or the one where he rants about bloggers “in their mom’s basement”)
I still think that his elders are upset with him because in his DMs he was too candid about some aspects of his life or his job.
This is very plausible. Chandler, and the people whose income depends on Chandler, cannot afford for Chandler to become much different from the public image he became. It’s much easier to restore someone to the pulpit who had a moral failure than someone who changed their fundamental theological positions. It could be financial ruin for many people if Chandler is not able to stay the course. He probably needs freedom to process things, but people in his position have too much to lose if they do, and so do those around him.
Whatever the situation, it sure is generating a lot of public discussion. Maybe The Village Church or Mr. Chandler’s agent believes any publicity is good publicity.
“… he failed to meet the 1 Timothy standard for elders of being “above reproach” in this instance …” (TVC Elders)
In the qualifications for pastor/elder (Titus, 1 Timothy), “above reproach” is first thing on the list … first and foremost. Indeed, it is the driver for all the other qualifications listed. Those Scriptures don’t provide any “in this instance” wiggle room. A pastor/elder must be and always be “above reproach”. They are selected on that basis, serve on that basis, and retained on that basis. They have been entrusted with the souls of others; they must never betray that trust. If they are deemed no longer above reproach for some sort of secret reason, they must be permanently removed from the sacred office they hold. This is serious stuff – representing the Lord of Lords and King of Kings – and pastors/elders are to act like it, to set an example, to pursue holiness, and to preach undiluted truth to others.
There are no examples in the New Testament of a pastor/elder slipping on the “above reproach” qualifier and being restored to ministry. This is not a Matthew 18 disciplinary matter in which you slap them on the hand, exile them for a season, then give them their pulpit back. IMO, if a pastor fails the driver for all the other qualifications, they are no longer qualified. If an elder team determined that the transgression was serious enough to remove them from ministry, they need to stick with their decision. Forgive them if they repent? Certainly! Restore them to ministry? No! There are other ways to serve in the Body of Christ. IMO, restoring the fallen to their pews is much different than restoring the fallen to a pulpit.
An overriding characteristic of Acts 29 “pastors” … an organization he directed until recently.
“Alcohol?? I thought these Reformed boys loved their tipple.” (Dee)
The new reformers in my area certainly do! Don’t you know, a little tipple of Calvinus Beer is good for the ministry?!
https://calvinus.ch/en/our-beers/
The elders have no choice but to “restore” Chandler. No Chandler = no TVC … the Christian celebrity / personality cult dilemma.
Max,
That’s a really interesting possibility. What if Chandler had a crisis of faith and was expressing some forbidden thoughts to a friend that he could not confide in his wife or anyone important?
I had never seen that!!! I had such a good laugh, I have decided to put it into a post. Thank you.!
Max,
Fascinating.I really don’t get how he can be forced to go on a LOA from two groups and still be considered the lead pastor, etc.
he’s still majorly miffed at Amy Smith and I over the karen HInckley thing.
Ive never thought about the whole “snitch” culture. I have seen this in various churches. And this Parsons would have been a dead duck in 1984. I always take in my sleep. My husband says I laugh a lot as well.
A new idea. Chandler was having a “crisis of faith.”
dee,
I agree… another great speculation…
And hear-in lies one of the fundamental contradictions of the whole Evangelical Industrial Complex….….It has to maintain the “party line”..
No matter that striving for integrity, honesty, humility, ( and the other character characteristics taught in the gospels) are fundamental to Christianity….. the “party line” trumps these virtues….
Just think, Christ said “love your neighbor as yourself”… he did not add that you MUST also believe in the 5 points of Calvinism…
So, all appearance of leaders not following the “party line” must be suppressed…. In fact, if you think about it, a majority of “issues” at TWW are not about a particular “sin”, it is about the “reaction/cover up” by said “church”…
The timing of Chandler’s vacation right after settling the sex abuse lawsuit just can’t be coincidental.
He hadn’t been joking with this other woman about elephants or alcohol or transactional Billy Graham rules.
He’d been grumbling and complaining to this other woman about people — most likely for the whole 6-7 difficult years during which the pace he ran burned him out. Any other joking wouldn’t have required lawyers. But settling up with the sex abuse victim would. Chances are some of his messages were about her, as well as many others who might sue if those messages ever saw the light of day.
Very possible, I hadn’t thought of that angle.
The last thing TVC needs is to have its pew serfs see one of the big honchos as not the paragon of ideological purity they once thought.
Possibly money is also involved. That’s just a guess, I know nothing of the situation but what I read in the news, but if it isn’t sexual, monetary gain might be the driver.
I guess we will have to wait and see. To misquote Princess Leia, the more you tighten your secrecy in this type of situation, the more folks you alienate into leaking.
Supposedly, Hybels complained about his better half (his wife) to women (that he deemed as his preferred A-list women at Willow Creek). He needed his A-types to fill in the gaps for what he felt was lacking in his marriage.
(Classic: the preferred women could do their Christian service by helping out this poor neglected pastor.)
His yacht(s) was(were) great for A-list women company for Hybels. In addition, when the wife was out of town, supposedly Hybels and his long-term relationship mistress would meet at his (their – his and his wife’s) home.
Entitlement. Pastor. The love of his youth is no longer good enough. He rose to power and outgrew fidelity. The pastor of a mega is above that simple concept of fidelity.
I don’t think that anyone over at TVC is qualified to determine what “unhealthy” is.
Maybe he didn’t keep up the image that the elders thought he should have as a pastor. Being “above reproach” has been one of the catch-all categories for accusations that get other pastors disqualified. I remember being told that their children’s behavior was one of those areas.
Trying to make sense of the Evangelicalese is difficult. If they wanted to be open about what happened, they could release the investigative report.
Every ex-New Calvinist – survivors of another gospel which is not ‘the’ Gospel – had a crisis of faith, a tension in their soul where they sorted out TULIP from Truth and chose Truth. Some Wartburers went through such crisis of belief, shed their “unhealth”, and found health in Christ. We can only hope that is what Chandler is experiencing.
Actually, maybe not so much, as this whole deal was his creation but didn’t go the way he intended. So, probably not transformative. Just re-arranging same old, a bit.
Does being “above reproach” mean being perfect?
If so, how does that square with the Christian dogma that only Jesus was a perfect human being.
If not, what *exactly* does it mean? My pastor is a really good guy, faithful to his vows, a real scholar, dedicated to serving the sick and bereaved, kind and conciliatory. *And yet!* he sometimes gets a little cranky. Lay ministry leaders often wish he would be more decisive, or that he wouldn’t let the business manager make so many decisions.
And his Boston terrier is totally undisciplined. I was in his office one Sunday to explain a couple of different things we were doing in the Spanish service that day, and the dog kept jumping up to bite my hands!
So is he “above reproach,” or not?
Since Matt Chandler is a New Calvinist, we’ll look to their tribe to define the term:
“… it means being beyond reach of any criticism or accusation that, if true, would either disqualify a man from office for aberrant conviction, deficient character, or sinful outward conduct; or would cast serious doubt on the credibility of his own personal profession of faith in Jesus and the reality of his repentance. He certainly is not sinless, but neither does his example invite the kind of disparagement that undermines his public ministry or the testimony of the church he serves.”
https://www.9marks.org/article/what-does-being-above-reproach-mean/
Let it be known that ole Max has no direct experience with Calvinus beer or other theo-brews 🙂
It would be movement-shattering, career-ending, TVC & A29-upending if the King of Dudebros recanted of aberrant NeoCal belief and practice. They MUST restore him to the pulpit … or else.
Okay, I guess that’s, as they say, “not sinless,” but it seems kind of circular.
“Criticism and accusation” could include the Stewardship Committee’s griping about what the business manager is allowed to decide. Is not putting his foot down with the employees “deficient character” or “sinful outward conduct”? Or is it just being a regular person who feels loyalty to the staff he inherited from his predecessor and doesn’t like disruptive conflict?
LOL. Good one, Max.
Tagging his transgression as “unhealth” has led to speculation that’s all over the map about what that word really means. The elders have made this a bigger mess than it needed to be, IMO.
Max,
Calvinus web page is hilarious… i got to order some…. If and when I get back to Switzerland, I have to visit this place..
Note the deal-breakers, overlookables, traveling in the right direction, and a sinking to a new low.
That almost sounds like a situation that eventually ends in suicide.
Fundagelical culture (for the most part) has an almost Islamic aversion to alcohol.
No surprise there, Fundagelicalism (reformed or non) has striking parallels with fundamental Islam.
Like Chin Dynasty Legalism, where The System was the true ruler over even the Emperor. Where a dying Emperor had to be held down so his death throes wouldn’t twist his body into an inauspicious/illegal pose.
VERY plausible.
And a Lead Megapastor’s role DEMANDS Absolute External Perfection. He cannot be shown as ever having a bad day, being depressed, or burned out. The Demand for Perfection can be a killer, and CHRISTIAN Perfection ramps it up still further to Cosmic levels. Welcome to the further depression pressure cooker, all hidden under the Pious Joy Mask until one day something cracks and everything blows sky-high.
Plus Lead Megapastor is THE Cash Cow for his Mega — and his Courtiers. If he goes down, they’re ruined.
I have observed when Christianity goes sour, it curdles into something closely resembling Islam.
Like Islamic-like legalism and More-So-Than-Thou one-upmaship are some sort of End State.
If not a minimal-energy System Rest State.
I always understood the rest of that passage in 1 Timothy 3 to be unpacking what “above reproach” means — husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, etc.
No Companionship there.
More like prostitution; the Prostie sells, the John buys and consumes.
Also no Trust possible.
Imagine longing for Companionship and being trapped in that System.
Imagine wanting a Companion and having to get a domestic animal with benefits instead, justified as “Gawd Saith”.
A mega church et al the trappings, including pastor, is a brand.
Apparently the cash cow went off brand, to become the deficit donkey?
That’s one way to look at it (and to spell Qin).
The 5 Harmonies or Unities (Fa jia, fa for standardization and jia for community) established the Common: Currency, Weights and Measures, Writing System, Governance, and Professional Guilds.
As Christians, if we don’t share basic common values, we don’t have church.
The question is how did Mega Man Matt shatter his commitment to our common values?
(Of public record, he did that long ago, IMHO, however. So maybe this latest is no surprise.)
Such a good point.
Relationships are fulfilling when transformational rather than transactional*.
*What the Patriarchy people and Complementarians dont get. …as the abuse cases and adultery cases pile up among clergy. Maybe even murder, with regard to the pastor’s wife found backed up into a truck, for example. Dateline documents a couple of pastors’ wives found at the bottom of stairs.
I hope you will address this, https://www.yahoo.com/news/she-told-sheboygan-lutheran-high-115638552.html
We don’t have an open discussion page anywhere so I’m throwing it here, but can someone tell me why CBN thinks they are for “institutional overhaul” when it comes to abuse? Tom Ascol is an absolute traditionalist and everyone knows it. Are they just blowing hot air? Or maybe did this article not understand who he is?
I looked at the linked article and it says Ascol ran on a platform of reinstilling the “fear of God” in the SBC. To me, knowing what Ascol and friends believe, his “institutional overhaul” probably is to take away the ability for the convention to vote and put all power in his group. Nobody’s gonna vote for that!
https://juicyecumenism.com/2022/09/09/whats-next-sbc/?fbclid=IwAR2IOlPkGZq0gVdCGMrvl1gAUCyijBcqwcELRtxG94OwlTV6nuDVd43p5A8
R,
Thank you, that seems reasonable.
Oh no!! What have I done?!
“Not following the Billy Graham rule”
I don’t think that even Billy Graham would have acted so weird about it if he had broken that rule! Yep, there must be more to Chandler’s “unhealth” than that.
A lot of men, regardless of religion, profess that what they want – if they must curtail their freedom – is a household and bedroom servant who doesn’t expect anything beyond being allowed to perform those roles.
In his imaginary rant on the previous thread I had him saying “you’re the only one I can talk to -/ my wife doesn’t understand me… remember the 7 years of marriage hell that effenb put me through?”
I forgot to include one rant I’d intended:
“That so-called pastor Smith isn’t even a type B leader – maybe C- at best. I’d fire his sorry ••• but his smokin’ hawt wife is a type A worship leader!”
Ohhhhhh… my poor virgin ears!!!
This has been my thought as well. These people are not their public image. So they either are self-deceived with bloated egos or they are a conman who has to get tired of the facade. Marjoe Gortner got to that place and then decided to get fame for himself by releasing his own documentary on how it is all an act. Leveraged his way up to get some hollywood roles playing villains. That documentary is a look behind the curtain for many a celebrity preacher. To me that documentary should be required viewing for all disciples.
Like what my church calls “Excessive Scrupulosity”?
Or (in the words of the Father Brown Mystery “Eye of Apollo”) “There were two crimes committed; and the greater made a mockery of the lesser”?
That anything like critics of Tsar Putin found below open 6th-story windows?
Headless Unicorn Guy,
DEFENESTRATION (lit. “Out the window”), a Medieval form of vigilante justice and/or “arranging an accident”.
Pinyin spelling (and the sounds of the letters) are NOT intuitive for native English-speakers. Years ago while co-writing an Old School SF novel, I had to figure out how to do a futuristic “Chinglish” (such as Joss Whedon’s “Verse-speak”) in print instead of audio. And putting in a pronunciation guide footnote for each word would completely break the narrative flow. I ended up using Mandarin idioms (and the occasional cussword) instead; when I had to use a Chinese loanwords, I played the word on audio and used my own spelling for the sounds (which resembled the older Wade-Giles spellings much more than Pinyin). Ended up losing the tones (except for descriptions of “strings of tonal monosyllables”) but could be figured out through context and kept the narrative flow.
JDV,
dee,
“ And I don’t know if that’s tied to my run pace or the difficulty of the last six or seven years,”
Yes — the difficulty began with the annoying bloggers and victim advocates 6-7 years ago. In the same timeframe he had Acts 29 trouble and “had to” fire 5 staffers who complained about Timmis.
Oh and they all also happened to be TVC members so it was a church difficulty too. I’m confident he’s been sharing profanity-laced complaints with this other woman since the difficulty began. Plus grumbling about the pace he’s forced to run. Likely he’d been sharing spouse-approved messages before that. But notice the timeframe he diabolically plants in the rabid sheeps’ minds— “a few months ago” so that they’ll think that’s when he did the foolish and stupid stuff.
I’m wondering if that mind-set is really as prevalent as it once was.
Muff Potter,
I don’t know, but it’s a thing.
Pinyin is often not intuitive and Chinglish can be hilarious.
The elevator that goes to Heaven.
The request to treat the grass with tender mercy, as in, “Keep Off”.
The armed guards at a remote border crossing on the Silk Road with a sign that says: “Chick Point”.
So this is off topic, but we went there, Hug.
Yes. Like.
Pastors, Putin style.
It all comes together in Ruth Ben-ghiat’s book, “Strongmen”.
Sometimes politics and pastoring are in sync. Unfortunately.
It is my fervent hope that couples trapped in that system will come to realize that God said no such thing.
Dennis Hulick,
Here’s the title of the article. Here’s how Sheboygan Lutheran responded when a grad reported that a teacher had sexually groomed, assaulted her
In my former HBC plant, it absolutely was. Not so openly expressed as your local IFB, perhaps. But there was definitely an undercurrent.
Being anything other than a stay-at-home-mom was openly frowned upon for women. Men weren’t supposed to earn less income than their wives.
Women’s primary ministry was to their husbands. Even to the extent of quashing their own spiritual gifts so that their husbands could serve in multiple ministries at church without having to be bothered to care for their own kids.
The first time the women’s half of my small group got together, we were told to introduce ourselves with our name, how long we’d been married, and how many kids we had. Not favorite food, fun fact about self, or favorite hobby. But by our place in the family unit.
The leader (an elder’s wife) literally burst out in the middle of group one night, “Girls, just have sex with your husbands!” Which was super awkward, because the topic had NEVER come up before in the women’s half of the group. Found out later one wife was in an abusive relationship, another’s husband had an affair, and a third was suffering from vaginismus. Let’s just say the advice to “just have sex” was less than helpful. (My husband told me it was not uncommon for there to be complaints on the men’s side about the topic, which he was uncomfortable with.)
And this is a large, growing church in a major metropolitan area. That is in the process of planting their first satellite campus. So, hardly a fringe group.
Wild Honey,
Quick question since I’m not abreast and up with the acronym soup.
What’s HBC?
HBC = Harvest Bible Chapel
Which rebranded after the James MacDonald downfall to Great Commission Collective (an appropriate reference to the borg, though I imagine not an intentional one).
“This is all so weird that I wonder if our attention is being diverted from a more serious situation. If it isn’t, then they discipline for any old reason.”
Yes, they discipline for any old reason. They also fail to discipline when they should. This ultimately became my objection to “church discipline.” Scripture describes some sort of system for dealing with people in the church who are violating it’s principles. But it is applied very hap-hazardly, and while often, leaders “mis-behavior” gets ignored, it doesn’t consistently get ignored. If a pastor crosses the wrong congregant, he will loose his job, and he will be accused of “heinous” things that may not be all that heinous. These very vague accusations could indicate that there really isn’t a good reason.
Furthermore, in spite of these churches loudly proclaiming that men lead and women follow, it is not always true. There are always women who have managed to gain a sort of behind closed doors power. It is usually a very select few.
Disclaimer: I don’t like MC. I don’t want to defend him. These vague accusations could be a cover up – that is still a very viable scenario. But I also cannot ignore a pattern I have seen before.
It kind of resembles the French Revolution: One day you’re running the whole thing, the next day it’s off to the guillotine on trumped up charges. No idea who is going to survive! In cases where people go to jail because of illegal behavior, they are going to cover that up and keep it silent. But in cases where the behavior is not illegal. And really just violates someone’s sense of propriety? They will call you to “account.” Why? because it looks like they are serious about biblical church discipline.
Wild Honey,
This is about what my husband said… minus the deconstruct Josh Harris style… but that sure is an interesting thought.
I think it’s more untrue than true. I just think a lot of men in those situations don’t realize how much they are being manipulated by the women around them. And in my experience, the most power hungry men often are the worst at picking spouses. They choose based on appearance or family connection and not on character. I’m not even sure those type of people could identify good character.
Some of the most manipulative people I have known were church leaders or married to them.
Is it possible that when any religion goes sour it has a certain kind of sourness? Because I would argue that Judaism has similarly a “curdled” version. As does Hinduism. I wouldn’t be surprised if other religions do too. And considering the variations on Islam, it’s kind of hard to say that these religions become like “Islam” when what you mean is that they resemble some (not all) interpretations of “sharia law.”
That took 3 reads to get what you meant.
Muff Potter,
That is hard to say. It is definitely still a thing. But, there are clearly men who are looking for a more well-rounded relationship. I suspect that it actually comes down to subgroups. I think there are certain environments that encourage boys to think that way, and other environments that encourage something else. Then there are ones somewhere in the middle. And somehow, even if you are raised in one environment, that doesn’t mean that you will ultimately hold that opinion.
Environment has a pretty big impact, though, especially when backed up with “My way is more biblical than yours.” I had wonderful, decent friends who turned into absolute monsters when hypercalvinism took over the SBC. They were or would have been decent partners, but with leaders like Driscoll telling them to treat their wives like objects, they started doing just that. Most of them didn’t even have any power, really, just the promise that they might one day.
Thing is, I have noticed a lot of women walking away from that environment and those relationships, but not a lot of men.
ishy,
I would argue that my home growing up was further to the toxic side of that spectrum. One brother chose a different path. The other one passed away and I’ll never know what he ultimately believed about the relationships of men and women. But the living brother started to reject what my parents taught in high school. And my parents both accused his wife of wearing the pants in spite of my brother insisting that they were a team. But that is what my parents tend to believe is happening if they see a man who defers to his wife at all.
Well, alot of men do want the upper hand. Hopefully they find no women to agree to that type of relationship.
Ok, this is a quote of the OP.
I have read and re-read this and although I have been part of several churches that have promoted the Purity culture, this idea is so far from the truth that it is laughable.
The only place that I have ever encountered anything even remotely similar to this was in the radical, far-right fundamentalist Baptist circles, with the likes of Jack Hyles, Bob Jones, etc.. They marginalized women so far as to command them to never wear pants, never wear makeup, never get into an elevator with a man who is not her husband, never speak in church. On anonymous sites, like http://www.fundamentalforums.org , women are called heifers and Rahabs, and blamed for many of the downfallen pastors in their midst.
But to say that in the current YRR churches that promote Purity Culture women and their bodies are responsible if they become a temptress.
To look overall at the post, the ideas being thrown around could all be possible. Who knows.
My gut tells me there is much more to the story than we will ever know. Unless the LORD decides to expose it before that day, as Luke wrote,
Luke 12:2-3 There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs.
Exactly.
I have a real life example. A certain man, let’s call him Rob, was in counseling with a pastor, and he made some backward steps with the issues he was being counseled on. This pastor called him in, and in the course of the meeting, said that he saw evidences of the presence of God in Rob’s life and was encouraged. In further conversation, Rob told this pastor that he was against a certain direction that the church leadership was taking, and unbeknownst to Rob, this pastor was the leader of that move. In a future meeting, 3 or 4 days later, that same pastor said that he was going to recommend church discipline for Rob. Not just practicing Matthew 18, where, if Rob repents and shows change, he is forgiven. No, Rob was summarily ex-communicated, using a strange reference to a book on church discipline. I thought it was very strange that it went from the pastor saying Rob had evidences of grace in his life to excommunication.
And Rob has a close friend, a friend of mine as well, who relapsed into drug addiction, lying to his family for the 3rd or 4th time in 3 years, and who was never brought up in the church for discipline.
Seems like it was not handled consistently.
Now, I believe in church discipline. But not this kind of power mongering, positioning, and playing with people’s lives based on factors that have nothing to do with sin.
Guess again.
Ever heard of “Harley Quinn Syndrome” (don-t know the real name) where a user and abuser triggers an “OOOOOOO! MY SOULMATE!” reaction? There are women out there who like that type of relationship, whether they just want to be abused and dominated or were overwhelmed and now relieved to have someone else to do all their thinking for them.
(The last showed up in a study of Western women who deliberately converted to an extreme form of Islam; they had been overwhelmed with responsibility in their pasts and saw a life where evarything was pre-determined for them as a relief, like some sort of return to the womb.)
RANK HATH ITS PRIVILEGES.
(And it keeps the Lowborn in line.)
“More Fill-in-the-Blank Than Thou” One-Upmanship nothing more.
Didn’t that Rabbi from Nazaareth offer an escape from that kind of crap instead of baptizing it as Godly?
Hard to walk away from something you personally benefit from.
“There’s Nothing Wrong with The System; The System Works Just Fine (for MEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!)”
NOBODY is as committed to keeping those on the bottom on the bottom as those who are second from the bottom.
Type example, some sort of trailer-trash Klansman interviewed in the Fifties (which would have been the Third Klan a la Mississippi Burning: “If I can’t be better than a n****r, who do I got to be better than?”
I’ve reported this before, but today seems like a good day to say it again.
A lot of churches don’t discipline any member for any reason. When I asked one of our pastors what I would need to do to incur church discipline, he looked completely baffled.
Sure, things go wrong. People do bad things. Families have problems. Amazingly enough, I can just email or phone a pastor to ask for guidance and/or prayer, and I’ll receive sensitive, kind, confidential help right away.
We are treated as beloved adults, not as worms or suspects.
I actually think you may be on to something here. Conservative evangelicals seem to preach hardest against the things they are struggling with the most. It happened over and over growing up in fundamentalist evangelical circles. So I can’t help but recall Matt Chandlers comments about deconstruction in December of 2021. If Mr I Kissed Dating Goodbye can deconstruct then so can Matt. I’d rather him be honest and deconstruct and go be a rancher than be like Driscoll and keep the cult going for fun and profit.
I just listened to this podcast. Interesting view on why TVC achier to use a law firm for their “investigation.”
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bodies-behind-the-bus/id1601586078?i=1000579435192
The person being interviewed on this podcast was a lawyer. He indicated that some of the reasons for hiring a lawyer like TVC did are:
– There is the lawyer client privilege where what TVC shares with this law firm cannot be disclosed by the firm unless the client TVC) releases this restriction.
– Concerns about legal issues and needing protection for TVC.
This lawyer also indicated that typically what TVC is sharing is probably only the tip of the iceberg of what really occurred.
Yes, there are lots of examples of this … Ted Haggard being the most obvious. The best of Bible thumpers against certain sins have been exposed for committing them.
He probably wouldn’t struggle with “unhealth” if he did that.
ishy,
“Some of the most manipulative people I have known were church leaders or married to them.”
+++++++++++++++
not sure if anyone’s still reading this thread,
but as i see it, manipulation is baked-in to ‘pastoral leadership’.
baked into the ‘curriculum’. the industry. the examples they follow.
so that even good, decent people who wear the pastor hat don’t even know how manipulative they’re being.
ES,
“when any religion goes sour it has a certain kind of sourness?”
+++++++++++++++++
could we categorize it as what a narcissist does when threatened?
let’s write a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual on religious leaders.
“Christians also are taught that women (and their bodies) are responsible for what happens if they become a sexual temptress.”
“this idea is so far from the truth that it is laughable.”
++++++++++++++
is it because you haven’t heard anyone declare the theory “women are responsible for what happens if they become a sexual temptress”?
theory and practice are 2 different things. the proof of the pudding is in the practice.
case in point: “what were you wearing?”
Bob M,
AKA “YOUR BURQA LET YOUR ANKLE SHOW!!!!!”