Samuel Edward Schulman, 2 years at Oxford w 0 degree, PhD Yale.:
All Oxford Bachelor’s degrees can be called Master’s degrees upon the payment of a small sum to the University. This is well known in the academic world on both sides of the Atlantic. There is some reason Ive forgotten for people residing in England to do so I think having to do with entitling one to vote on certain professorships but few do, and it is regarded as ridiculous to claim it is equivalent to a separate masters program.Many American B.A.sdo the undergraduate BA at Oxford because it is more concentrated in the subject than an American BA with a major in a subject, and one says in academia that one has done a “second BA” at Oxford or Cambridge and it is generally accepted as equivalent to an MA <<IF One Goes On to do a PhD.” This gentleman has not done so. He should have said in his CV that he got a 2nd BA at Oxford, footnoted that it is generally accepted as the equivalent of a US MA, and went on to do an actual postgraduate Masters degree program at Oxford as well. But he did not –I surmise that he paid the 25£ to get the right to call his BA an MA, and peddled his perfectly honorable and impressive 2nd BAunder the new label.

IOW, if he was honest and upfront and indicated as such in his CV, he might have still been considered for the job (albeit with much less of a chance)

Samuel Edward Schulman, 2 years at Oxford w 0 degree, PhD Yale.,

It is interesting though that the ‘source of all truth’ (Wikipedia) says this:

‘The BD at Cambridge is the highest ranking bachelor’s degree, and it is so senior that it outranks the PhD.’

Dee, there really is nothing new under the sun. To expect otherwise – why would you?

With all due respect, why should he provide you with anything? If he has satisfied the requests from his board of elders and his denominational bosses — why should he provide an internet gadfly with anything? I’d tell you to shove off…but maybe I’m missing something.

“Robert Morris claimed a “doctorate.””

Only those with earned doctorates have a right to claim such titles. It is not appropriate to use Dr. Morris for honorary degrees.

“Doesn’t everyone spin their CV in their favor?”

A person will never be more perfect on this earth than what is written in their resume.

Fred Wolterstorff,

Perhaps all of the parishioners of PSC who would like to see a formal verification of Booker’s educational claims should “shove off”, as in leave PSC.

BTW Socrates apparently accepted the role of gadfly at least according to Plato. From the Apology 30e

“For if you put me to death, you will not easily find another, who, to use a rather absurd figure, attaches himself to the city as a gadfly to a horse, which, though large and well bred, is sluggish on account of his size and needs to be aroused by stinging. I think the god fastened me upon the city in some such capacity, and I go about arousing”

I’ve heard that he does not have any of his diplomas in his church study. Why does Booker keep his diplomas out of sight? Why does he always say that he “studied at Oxford” but he seems to never explain what degrees he received? There is also something about him being in two doctoral programs but then dropping out eventually? He does seem to be hiding something important.

We are not even sure if he has the converted BA to MA. I would not assume it has been awarded unless he shows the documentation for it.

Samuel Edward Schulman, 2 years at Oxford w 0 degree, PhD Yale.: one says in academia that one has done a “second BA” at Oxford or Cambridge and it is generally accepted as equivalent to an MA <<IF One Goes On to do a PhD."

This is interesting, Samuel. Can you explain this in more detail on why listing it as a MA is acceptable if one receives a phd? Why does doing the phd change the acceptability of describing it as a masters? How does the phd change it?

Also, I have to differ with you that this nomenclature is well known in academia on both sides of the Atlantic. Only certain Oxford people seem to know about it, and only those with a phd seem to have converted their BA into MAs. I’ve know very few people in academics in the US who know anything about this topic.

Booker tricked almost all of us, and the people I know took it on face value that his MA was equivalent to a typical masters at Harvard, Fuller, or Gordon-Conwell.

As an UK citizen and Oxford graduate a few years before Mark, the only slight error made was not to show his MA with (Oxon) in brackets afterwards. Technically he doesn’t have a BA from Oxford any more. Oxford and Cambridge were founded in the 11th – 13th centuries and were the only British universities until the 19th century, they have refused to update their practices for younger institutions.
When I graduated I didn’t receive a certificate I had to apply for one at a later date and I don’t have a transcript.
In the UK it is widely accepted that all undergraduate programmes are not equal in difficultly and those at Oxford and Cambridge are some of the most difficult in the UK. In the UK where you studied can count as much to employers as the grade you got when there.
Undergraduate degrees at Oxford are split in 2 parts, the first year may be skipped by those already holding a degree, but he will have studied the same second and third year subjects as UK students writing 2-3 eassays a week during term and examined for his entire degree in a set of written exams held in a single fortnight after 2 years of study.

Fred Wolterstorff,

It’s about speaking the truth!

Jon:
As an UK citizen and Oxford graduate a few years before Mark, the only slight error made was not to show his MA with (Oxon) in brackets afterwards. Technically he doesn’t have a BA from Oxford any more. Oxford and Cambridge were founded in the 11th – 13th centuries and were the only British universities until the 19th century, they have refused to update their practices for younger institutions.

When I graduated I didn’t receive a certificate I had to apply for one at a later date and I don’t have a transcript.

In the UK it is widely accepted that all undergraduate programmes are not equal in difficultly and those at Oxford and Cambridge are some of the most difficult in the UK.

All very interesting & relevant info.

And all stuff that Mark Booker ought to have clarified by adding the appropriate (Oxon) designation in his CV in the first place. And since he didn’t bother, it’s especially something he ought to have clarified in his “I’m the victim here” late Dec 2023 letter to the congregation.

He’s good at DARVO, tho. I’ll give him that.

From the university website –
“The MSt degree is awarded on the basis of two short essays, a written examination, and a dissertation in Trinity term. These assessments may require a demonstration of linguistic competence according to your field of study. There may be an oral examination (viva voce) on your dissertation topic and wider knowledge of your field of study.” (It is a 9 month course)

There doesn’t seem to be a course “Master of Arts Theology”, certainly not a 2 year one.

And as for having an “M.A.”, the following is from Wikipedia- “In the universities of Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin, Bachelors of Arts are promoted to the degree of Master of Arts or Master in Arts (MA) on application after six or seven years as members of the university, including years as an undergraduate. It is an academic rank indicating seniority and not an additional postgraduate qualification. Within these three universities there are in fact no postgraduate degrees which result in the postnominals ‘MA’.[1] No further examination or study is required for this promotion and it is equivalent to undergraduate degrees awarded by other universities.”
(Which would raise the question does he have a B.A.)
There are 2 year courses in Applied Theology available

Fact check: the universities of St Andrews, Glasgow and Aberdeen were founded in the 1400s, Edinburgh in the 1500s.. Marischal College was founded in 1593 and was merged into Aberdeen in 1860. Oxford and Cambridge were in the 1200s. We’re actually quite an educated bunch north of Hadrian’s Wall.

Jon,

lol! No worries. I’m not a prickly Scot, more a dour faced (but happy inside) Calvinist.

His high school was Air Academy High School, Colorado Springs (archives Colorado Springs Gazette Telegraph 22 May 1994, page 87). He was class president and had a slew of scholarships; he also played football. I note it also lists him as going to Rhodes College so this isn’t likely a case of another person with the same name.

Repeating what I found back in February. I used the wayback machine to see what Oxford’s theology department was stating in 2003:
***
https://web.archive.org/web/20030818182134/http://www.theology.ox.ac.uk/pg/pgcourse.shtml
“Another option for those who have already been awarded a first degree (in whatever subject) is to study the undergraduate Theology course as a ‘Senior Status’ student, completing the course in two years rather than the normal three. Although from the perspective of Oxford this is an undergradate[sic] course, potential students should note that the degree which eventually results from the course is an MA.”
***
(this was up until at least 2006)

This could very well mislead students. I could see one honestly putting down what he did on their CV after reading that though most would have corrected it after having the issue pointed out.

dee:
As for telling me to shove off, it doesn’t work that way. I am like a bad cold in the summer. I hang on and on.

SNORT!!! Dee, you crack me up!

My guess is that Mark is embarrassed that he got exposed for not correctly attributing how his MA was earned. You’ll never see the degree because it’ll show the BA that matriculated to a MA after paying a fee.

A commenter in another thread alleges that Mark actually failed out of his PhD program.

dee: “If he’s lying about this, what else is he lying about?” That proved to be the understatement of the decade.

As far as we know, Mark is only emotionally and spiritually abusive to some of his staff. However, would a man who conducts himself like this be limited to these behaviors? It’s not known at the moment, and I don’t want to suggest that Mark must be doing other things. I fear that one day there may be other stories that come out about him, especially if he has the carte blanche given to him by the elders.

Erp,

I agree that does appear misleading and doesn’t give the mitigation of it not being a proper MA. Non-UK students were than & are now an important source of income for UK universities, as their course fees are about 5 times higher than those for UK students.

So, I notice in PSC’s latest e-news that the elders voted in May to form a bylaws committee.

Did anyone in the congregation know that this was happening? This sounds really quite ominous, and something that’s unlikely to get the kind of attention that resigning pastors do.

Shouldn’t the congregation have voted on this, and also elect the people on the bylaws committee?

Members of the PSC bylaws committee are: David Rix (chair), Evan Burham, Julie Halvorsen, Sarah Schaffer Raux (Geoff Raux’s wife), Jim Bruce (consultant) and Herman Smith (consultant).

FWIW, I stayed away from PSC in 2017 because I was convinced that PSC violated their bylaws in the way Jeff Schuliger got shoved. It seemed to me that the bylaws meant whatever the leaders wanted them to mean.

Seems like you’d need another Special Meeting to discuss the elders’ decision to form this bylaws committee.

When does it end?

It is time to stop beating a dead horse when it comes to Mr Booker’s academic qualifications. The REAL issue is that Mr Booker has demonstrated, time and time again, that he has such severe charatological faults that render him Biblically unqualified to serve as an elder; that, on the other hand, he has the character faults of a reprobate.

It is Mr Booker’s job to demonstrate that he is qualified to serve as Senior Minister, not the job of his detractors to prove the converse. At this time, it is considered routine for someone in a high position to make his or her CV publicly available, at least on LinkedIn, but that can be on the organization’s web site. For over six months, numerous current and former members of Park Street Church have asked Mr Booker to do this. He has chosen not to comply. The only logical conclusion one can make is that Mr Booker is NOT QUALIFIED to serve as Senior Minister, that he does not have the relevant academic and work experience, OR that his relevant academic and/or work experience is tainted to the point that it demonstrates that he is UNQUALIFIED.

There is enough evidence that leads one to conclude that his ordination by the ANCA was likely in error. At that time, the ANCA did not require candidates for ordination to undergo a psycho-social evaluation conducted by a team of experts familiar with the ministry and familiar with mental health disorders / traits that are known to be problematic for ministers. One must question whether Mr Booker would pass such an evaluation, especially now, if the third party organization was aware of what’s going on at Park Street Church. It appears that the ANCA was unfamiliar with the peculiarities of Oxford (and Cambridge) theology degrees–that these colleges routinely issue courtesy upgrades of Bachelor’s Degrees to Master’s Degrees. With that, it is time to drop the Rev. from Mr Booker’s name.

The Bible does not require that ministers undergo academic training in order to become an elder. The qualifications for Elder are charatological. Mr Booker has demonstrated, through his behavior, that he is not Biblically qualified to serve as a minister; that he is actually a reprobate and MUST be shunned. The Park Street Five, Rev. Dr. Balboni, Rev. Perkins, Rev. Morrison, Dr Knight, etc. have given ample evidence demonstrating that Mr Booker is of bad character, that he is a reprobate. Why Park Street Church lay leadership refuses to deal with Mr Booker in an appropriate manner–termination with no severance package–is beyond my understanding.

Max: “Robert Morris claimed a “doctorate.””

Only those with earned doctorates have a right to claim such titles. It is not appropriate to use Dr. Morris for honorary degrees.

If it’s a ManaGAWD, always assume the Doctorate is Fake until proven otherwise.
Because it almost always is.

Fred Wolterstorff: masters

Fred,
The point is that there is a belief that he misrepresented himself to the search committee, which, as an HR person myself, I can tell you it would be grounds for immediate termination in most organizations. The issue is more to do with the use of deception to get the job, less whether or not Mark could have reasonably close to the same qualifications. Since this information is coming from within PSC, it is not just an issue for the bloggers here. It’s an issue being raised from within the congregation. After speaking with someone familiar with the Oxford system and the MDiv degrees here in the states, (also formally part of the leadership at PSC, but but whose name I cannot divulge) this was the synopsis I was given of the argument. It’s a long one:
_______________________________
His CV lists two master’s degrees, but the first of them is what Americans would call a Bachelor of Arts degree in Theology degree at Oxford.  At Oxford or Cambridge, they are very clear that “Master of Arts” is NOT a traditional MA degree as most of the world knows it. It is sometime called “a mark of seniority,” or a “status,” or a “rank.”  If you want to know his degree was, it was a Bachelor of Arts, Theology.

Basically, because he had matriculated about 6.5 years earlier, and because he applied for this change in status, and because he paid a 10 pound fee (or so), and because he was willing to attend another graduation ceremony (or was officially excused), he acquired the status of “Master of Arts.” He earned this Bachelor of Arts degree, with all the courses taught at the undergraduate level, in just two years rather than the usual three years in England, because he had earned another Bachelor’s degree earlier (at Rhodes College in the USA).

The second Master of Studies, Theology, was an actual graduate level degree which required one year to earn. He may have had one or two “taught courses,” such as we are used to, but in Britain they favor mostly research courses at the graduate level where the student teaches himself or herself through reading required books and articles and writes a major paper or dissertation. The grading is based on the quality of what he or she writes.
 
It’s concerning that no one has verified that they have actually seen either of his degrees including that Master of Arts document, to confirm the dates, etc., or to confirm that he actually got that before his application to Park Street (not that it matters because, as I say, it is NOT what Americans and even most British think of when they hear Master of Arts). I have no idea why with all the debating about this issue he has chosen not to just take a couple of photos and post them, or for that matter, provided a copy of his transcript.

He has claimed to have a near equivalent of the MDiv. He cannot have that since two of those years were courses at the undergraduate level. This matters, as I learned. I took first year Greek and first year Hebrew at Harvard. When I went to Gordon-Conwell, I decided to retake Greek because I had taken it four years earlier. The Greek at Gordon-Conwell, taught at a graduate level, was much more demanding and covered much more grammar, vocabulary, and actual translation. I did not take Hebrew over, because it was my last course at Harvard, but I soon learned that the students at Gordon-Conwell, who used the exact same textbook, covered more chapters and learned more grammar, etc.
 
This comparison does not matter, since the concern is not about the quality of his education. It is good enough. The concern is with his possibly intentionally misleading the Search Committee, and misleading all the rest of PSC, and continuing his misleading claims in that letter he wrote to the congregation in late December.

Really, all he needed to say was that he forgot to tell the search committee that the Master of Arts at Oxford is similar to what Americans would call a Bachelor of Arts. It did not require any more education, any more courses, any more exams than what he did at the undergraduate level to earn his Bachelor of Arts degree. The Master of Studies degree on his CV was a graduate level Master’s degree like we understand it.

Oxford is very clear that in their usage “Master of Arts” is not a degree. They offer many different Masters degrees, as anyone can find online, but they have never offered a “Masters of Arts” degree. What he earned was a Bachelor of Arts degree. The “Master of Arts” designation is an honorary status that means that he can vote in university elections. Oxford is clear that if a graduate lists this, they are not supposed add a subject area (like computer science or theology), because you cannot get the Master of Arts in a subject. Graduates are also not supposed to mention a “First” because even the worst students, or even a janitor who never was a student can be granted this honorary status and no one gets a better status  (a “First”) than anyone else. A “First” implies that the student or individual earned a 70% or better grade. But there is no grading for their “Master of Arts” status since there were no exams and no papers on which a grade could be computed. If the graduate wants to inform an employer of his subject area and the fact that he did very well, which Mark did (in England they do not have grade inflation like we do, a 70% is comparable to “cum laude” in America, if not “magna cum laude.” So he did well, but in his CV he mislead all Americans and 60% of all Brits! 

The problem for Mark is not a poor education. He had a great education. The problem is his character/morals. He failed at a crucial point when, supposedly, he was eager to discern, as PSC was, that the Lord was calling him to Park Street. But if the Lord wanted to call him, he would not have needed a deception to make it happen.
___________________________________

Elizabeth Klein:
So, I notice in PSC’s latest e-news that the elders voted in May to form a bylaws committee.

Did anyone in the congregation know that this was happening? This sounds really quite ominous, and something that’s unlikely to get the kind of attention that resigning pastors do.

Shouldn’t the congregation have voted on this, and also elect the people on the bylaws committee?

Members of the PSC bylaws committee are: David Rix (chair), Evan Burham, Julie Halvorsen, Sarah Schaffer Raux (Geoff Raux’s wife), Jim Bruce (consultant) and Herman Smith (consultant).

Definitely feels like an after-the-fact disclosure
“Oh, by the way, we decided to start this 2 months ago”

Bridget: By-lawsvarwcaxwaybto do this.

I swear that a keyboard gremlin changes my text.

That should read:

By-laws are a way they can do this.

Susan Lane:

The problem for Mark is not a poor education. He had a great education. The problem is his character/morals. He failed at a crucial point when, supposedly, he was eager to discern, as PSC was, that the Lord was calling him to Park Street. But if the Lord wanted to call him, he would not have needed a deception to make it happen.
___________________________________

This is the crux of the issue, perfectly stated. Susan, you have great eloquence & grace for someone so personally mistreated by this regime.

Given that Oxford (and Cambridge) are two of the most prestigious universities in the world, if I had a degree from either, I would post it for the entire world to see.

Then ask God to forgive me for the sin of pride.

Elizabeth Klein: So, I notice in PSC’s latest e-news that the elders voted in May to form a bylaws committee.

Did anyone in the congregation know that this was happening? This sounds really quite ominous, and something that’s unlikely to get the kind of attention that resigning pastors do.

What does the church constitution say about changing the bylaws?
Although churches get special treatment in many areas of the law, I believe that as a state-recognized nonprofit, they legally have to abide by their bylaws.

Janiceg:
I am concern to about any by-law change to. Mark/loyal followers want to make it so the congregation can not question any bofe decision. That is my guess on why it is happening. I am stillbaffled that no one has look at all that has happened and found all by-laws that have not been followed. This information needs to be to the attorney general office for a formal investigation.

Hi Janiceg
—-and I also wish to ask Dee— this question:

Is this kind of corporate misconduct a legal issue which the Attorney General of Massachusetts is officially authorized to or responsible for investigate and regulate?

dee,

I am indeed new here, I stumbled on your site after the Robert Morris story (which was quite incredible).

Thanks for going easy on me. I guess I just see the PSC as an internal squabble and the diplomas something for the board of elders to adjudicate. I guess I have some sympathy for Mark. From what I’ve picked up, PSC needed a change of course and there’s always resistance to change. BUT, I have not followed this story closely and he could be in the wrong.

Anyways, thanks for your work.

Fred Wolterstorff: I stumbled on your site after the Robert Morris story (which was quite incredible).

Keep coming back! I stumbled onto this site several years ago and have followed several “incredible” stories of abusive ministers and ministries posted here. TWW exists because the American church is in “incredible” condition … fortunately, there are several “incredible” commenters here who love the Lord Jesus enough to speak into the mess.

mle bire,

Thank goodness there are people at Park Street who actually care enough about the bylaws to read them – if only the current Elders were among them.

Fred Wolterstorff:
dee,

I am indeed new here, I stumbled on your site after the Robert Morris story (which was quite incredible).

Thanks for going easy on me. I guess I just see the PSC as an internal squabble and the diplomas something for the board of elders to adjudicate. I guess I have some sympathy for Mark. From what I’ve picked up, PSC needed a change of course and there’s always resistance to change. BUT, I have not followed this story closely and he could be in the wrong.

Anyways, thanks for your work.

Fred, I really appreciate your response here.

There is so much going on here at PSC besides some sort of internal conflict/squabble, and so much more than even this most recent blogpost about PSC at TWW. I think Dee has written 10? or so blogposts on TWW about PSC, beginning in late January 2024. It’s really worth checking all of them out.

IMO, PSC is showing classic signs of spiritual abuse. I’ve read several books this year on spiritual abuse, out of concern for what’s going on at PSC (I was a member there for 20 years, 1997-2017). I highly recommend Michael Kruger’s book Bully Pulpit. When I read that book, I saw PSC leaders’ behavior on practically every page.

This PSC mess isn’t about just Mark Booker vs. Michael Balboni.

Newly resigned elder Leslie Liu said (in Christianity Today) that allegations of spiritual abuse by Mark Booker should have been properly investigated after receiving 3-4 complaints.

Five PSC ministers besides Michael Balboni have risked their vocations and financial security by speaking out (3 of whom — Ray Kam, Julian Linnell and Damian Long, have recently resigned, without any call lined up).

The petitioners, who’d legitimately called for a Special Meeting under PSC’s bylaws, were ignored and sidelined for 8+ months.

VOCA Center consultants were brought in, under the assumption that Mark Booker only had management issues (not sinful, abuse of authority issues). Staff ministers were interviewed by VOCA, even though there was no job protection at all for The Five who’d spoken out about concerns with Mark Booker & PSC leadership — so how accurate do you think the VOCA data would be? Plus, unlike orgs such as GRACE (netgrace.org), VOCA admitted that they were not even doing an investigation into spiritual abuse, and their final report was kept confidential from the congregation.

There has been an alarming uptick in secretive, executive sessions of PSC elders, which was the original impetus for the PSC Petitioners, even before Michael Balboni was fired. Lots of decisions were already being made without the knowledge & approval of the congregation (how is this congregational polity?). Meanwhile, PSC’s personnel committee has been going rogue & making decisions on their own, really without the oversight of the elders, in violation of PSC’s current bylaws.

FWIW, abuse of PSC’s bylaws is what I sensed as a red flag in PSC’s church government back in 2017, and part of why I left & didn’t come back. Which is why this new (pro-Mark) bylaws committee formed by the elders this past May concerns me.

Anyway, do go and read Dee’s past TWW posts on PSC, if it interests you.

I believe that spiritual abuse (abuse of spiritual authority) is a big problem in American evangelicalism in general, and at PSC in particular.

shellshocked: This is the crux of the issue, perfectly stated. Susan, you have great eloquence & grace for someone so personally mistreated by this regime.

Thank you, but those aren’t my words. I was quoting the person I sought for advice on this. They are a very eloquent person.

Guys,
During our annual meeting, there was an argument over some of the bylaws that the petitioners wanted to change, and Brian Lacey raised the issue that the bylaws had been put together very carefully and that they should be reviewed altogether, that we shouldn’t be making a decision during the annual meeting to change a bylaw. He was very emotional about it, and although I have a lot of respect for him, I completely did not agree. I think we have the right to raise the issue as to whether or not the bylaw needs to change, and then to work out the details of the bylaw afterward. His attitude was that if you change it bylaw, there are so many processes and potential things that are connected to that bylaw that would have to change behind the scenes that we’re not aware of and it requires a committee to go over it. My point being that if the congregation deems a bylaw a problem, especially something that is an immediate problem, we can identify that at the annual meeting, address what we think the issue is, and then go to committees on the finer details. The bottom line is the congregation has the right to review the actions and decisions of the SM and the Elder Board and any part of the governance, including the bylaws. Brian Lacey putting the Kabash on changing anything at the annual meeting was taking that power away from the congregation. I don’t think that was his intent, but he was also very emotional.

He was also upset that people were getting very angry at Jason Abraham for shutting people down from speaking with very poor excuses, or if they even just had something negative to say about Mark or the BoE, but he wasn’t recognizing that Jason Abraham was behaving very unprofessionally and unobjectively in his role as a moderator. That was the case, in the special meeting as well, from my understanding. JA needs to be disciplined for this, and truly, the congregation should be allowed to say that we need to have a different person running the next special meeting, but the elder board refuses to acknowledge that Jason did any wrong in spite of many, many complaints about him. It’s not Jason‘s job to be Mark’s personal pitbull. It’s Jason‘s job to represent the elder board in as unbiased and objective fashion as possible to mediate disputes between the leadership and the congregation. He very much did the opposite and just antagonized the whole situation, galvanizing himself with Mark.

Susan Lane: The bottom line is the congregation has the right to review the actions and decisions of the SM and the Elder Board and any part of the governance, including the bylaws.

100%

Susan Lane: Compare the way David Rix handled annual meetings versus the way Jason handles them. David certainly dealt with plenty of contentious arguments, especially during the senior minister search, and we stuck him through the fire on that, but he never behaved unprofessionally and always fielded congregant concerns with care and dignity. I’m not saying I agreed with him on everything nor do I agree with everything he’s ever done, but at least I trusted him to behave as objectively as possible, and to give an honest answer or to get me one if he didn’t know it.

I agree that Jason is a bully (you know this first-hand!) and David is more diplomatic. However, David has been aiding and abetting Mark since he started. Remember that during the special meeting he tried to cast blame on Gordon. I’m sorry but I just don’t trust any of these people at this point. They all seem so fake to me.

Any updates on Goligher’s sleeping his way to Gomorrah? Or did he get stranded in Gonorrhea?

Any updates on Jon “Grab her in the pu$$y” Payne?

PCAProblems: Any updates on Goligher’s sleeping his way to Gomorrah? Or did he get stranded in Gonorrhea?

The Clap is SOOOOOOOO Old-Fashioned.
What’s Trending is Herpes, Chlamydia, AIDS, HPV, and maybe Monkeypox.

Has anyone seen the Park Street Church Wikipedia page? While people are free to share information, there are statements there that are clearly biased. There are no mentions of allegations of spiritual abuse and the writing makes it seem as though everything is due to finances or disgruntled staff and members. The amount of spin on it is very disturbing.

Does anyone know if there is a way to dispute the language there? I can see that anyone can log in and edit but want to make sure it’s approached the right way.

Found at the end of the History section of the Park Street Wikipedia page:

“A significant transition period under the direction of Senior Minister Mark Booker began in 2020 due in part to an unsustainable financial profile after the tenure of Senior Minister Gordon Hugenberger. Long-simmering transition tensions resulted in the firing of a disgruntled associate minister in 2023, boiling over into the public domain after negative campaigning by the associate minister and sympathizers. Nevertheless, Senior Pastor Booker received a non-binding confirmation vote of two-thirds of the congregation at the Annual Meeting in February 2024.[12] At a Special Meeting in June 2024, a majority of the congregation (56%) voted that to ensure fairness the Board of Elders should be entrusted to re-visit a July 2023 decision regarding the aforementioned associate minister, adding to previous reviews by internal and outside objective leadership.

Because of Park Street’s great influence and visibility both in the Boston region and in global missions this church-family transition has attracted coverage from non-involved entities, some inaccurate or exaggerated, e.g., Dee Parsons, “A Majority of Park Street Members Vote Against Affirming Mark Booker as Senior Pastor. The Hot Potato Passes to the Stunned Elders,” The Wartburg Watch, June 3, 2024, https://thewartburgwatch.com/2024/06/03/a-majority-of-park-street-church-members-vote-against-affirming-mark-booker-as-senior-pastor-the-hot-potato-passes-to-the-stunned-elders/.”

Elizabeth Klein: I highly recommend Michael Kruger’s book Bully Pulpit. When I read that book, I saw PSC leaders’ behavior on practically every page.

Kruger also notes “even when a victim of abuse comes forward and is heard by the leadership body, the problem is often downplayed and minimized– it’s viewed as a conflict that is inevitable in any ministry… but there is a difference with abusive pastors. The relational debris field of an abusive pastor is different not only in volume of conflicts but also the depth of those conflicts… Sadly sometimes elders don’t see the dead bodies simply because they don’t want to.”

Now, see the latest addition to the Park Street Church Wikipedia entry (edits dated July 6-7, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Park_Street_Church):

“A significant transition period under the direction of Senior Minister Mark Booker began in 2020 due in part to an unsustainable financial profile after the tenure of Senior Minister Gordon Hugenberger. Long-simmering transition tensions resulted in the firing of a disgruntled associate minister in 2023, boiling over into the public domain after negative campaigning by the associate minister and sympathizers. Nevertheless, Senior Pastor Booker received a non-binding confirmation vote of two-thirds of the congregation at the Annual Meeting in February 2024.[12] At a Special Meeting in June 2024, a majority of the congregation (56%) voted that to ensure fairness the Board of Elders should be entrusted to re-visit a July 2023 decision regarding the aforementioned associate minister, adding to previous reviews by internal and outside objective leadership.

Because of Park Street’s great influence and visibility both in the Boston region and in global missions this church-family transition has attracted coverage from non-involved entities, some inaccurate or exaggerated, e.g., Dee Parsons, “A Majority of Park Street Members Vote Against Affirming Mark Booker as Senior Pastor. The Hot Potato Passes to the Stunned Elders,” The Wartburg Watch, June 3, 2024″

Blame previous senior minister for hard problems? Check
Slander victims of spiritual abuse? Check
Skew half-truths in favor of the abuser? Check
Twist events to play down unfavorable outcomes? Check
Sprinkle in clearly biased adjectives? Check
Attack those who are trying to bring light to the silenced congregation? Check

The ongoing defense of the institution over the actual people in this church is unbelievable. How long, God?!

Also, the Park Street Church Wikipedia page must have been edited recently by one of non-pastor / CEO Mark Booker’s sycophants… it wasn’t long ago that the same page called out Mark for abusive behavior.

I’ll see if I can view the history of edits on the Wikipedia page…. it’s not the first time a Wikipedia page has been a battleground. This is why some of them get locked and cannot be edited.

Perhaps that way back machine internet archive website thing could be helpful in this…

Friend of Park Street Church: Also, the Park Street Church Wikipedia page must have been edited recently by one of non-pastor / CEO Mark Booker’s sycophants… it wasn’t long ago that the same page called out Mark for abusive behavior.
I’ll see if I can view the history of edits on the Wikipedia page…. it’s not the first time a Wikipedia page has been a battleground. This is why some of them get locked and cannot be edited.

Found it! This Wikipedia user has been editing the Park Street Church page often since 2023! They removed much of the information about CEO Booker’s abuse of others. Now to unmask them….

User 2603:6011:DF01:C073:B89F:EE36:AFA:873

Friend of Park Street Church: What a sad, sad chapter in Park Street Church history.And more case studies for future spiritual abuse textbooks.

I absolutely agree.

I’ve read 2 excellent books on spiritual abuse lately (Bully Pulpit by Michael Kruger, and Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse by Dr. Lisa Oakley & Justin Humphreys).

I recognized the behavior of PSC leadership on page after page.

Elizabeth Klein: As of Friday, there has been no response to the petitioners’ request for a Special Meeting.

Three weeks so far, and no response.

It has been painfully clear that Pastor Booker is going to do what Pastor Booker wants to do, regardless of the wishes of the congregation, regardless of the pushback he receives from his ministry staff, and regardless of the pushback he receives from Elders, several of which stepped down from the BoE being too disgusted with the lack of ethics found there.

Pastor Booker, and the BoE that remain, aren’t even bothering to be sly about their disrespect of the congregation, as you can see by the fact that they don’t even give the dignity of a response to the recent petition of 117 congregants – roughly 10% of the congregation. They think they are there to dictate to the congregation, and, apparently, do not think their decisions need to be held accountable to the ignorant mass that is the congregation. They apparently think they’re smarter, wiser, and better conduits of the Holy Spirit than any of us. “Mark has a calling,” some of them would say, but they forget that God can also remove that calling if one behaves in a way that brings shame to God. “But Mark was chosen and affirmed by the congregation,” others will say, yet they forget that affirmation can be removed. And so it HAS been, as 55% of members at a special meeting stated that the Board of Elders needed to go back to the table on their decision that Mark was NOT biblically unqualified for his position because 55% of the congregation believes there are significant reasons that he is (or may be, pending investigation.) 55% of members at that meeting felt there are significant ethical concerns that the BoE has glossed over, based on the testimonies of several ministers and former elders with whom we have long-standing relationships. Mark and the Elder Board forgot that it is THE CONGREGATION who pays Mark’s salary, and paid the salaries of the ministers he either terminated or pushed out. Mark and the elder board also forgot that it was the congregation paid that $100,000 for the VOCA investigation which delineated specific parameters surrounding reconciliation measures between the SM and the ministry staff, which Mark signed off on, and then decided to ignore.

It is clear that Pastor Booker is flagrantly disregarding our congregational process, trying to undermine it, by removing ministers who were in a position to give him pushback, and setting himself up to micromanage every committee so that no one can contest him. He and the BoE are flagrantly disregarding the voice of this congregation, which has risen up against him and demanded his removal, or at the very least, a leave of absence while his actions are investigated. He and the BOE have flagrantly disregarded the enormous amount of money the church has expended on investigating the poor leadership of Pastor Booker, and all the collateral damage of his poor interpersonal relations with his ministry staff – and I mean the staff that are more equal to him in power, not the administrative assistants who think he’s cute.

Their strategy is simple. Ignore them and they’ll go away. Trying to destroy our democratic process with blatant silence, Pastor Booker? Trying to give our church back to the King of England and his Anglican friends with all their pomp and ceremony when our Puritan forefathers ran screaming from them in the first place with good reason? Trying to bring our church back to a time where the voices of women were repressed (though they be the majority of churchgoers) because of male pride, not God‘s real intent for his daughters? Work like a devil to suppress the voice of those who oppose you online, even soliciting Wikipedia to paint you in a more glorious light?

Well, it seems obvious that the leadership of Park Street refuses to fight fair. Perhaps it’s time for a public protest. And by the way, Pastor Booker, where there is corruption there is no promise of confidentiality nor loyalty. When you behave unethically, no one is required to protect your reputation, nor the reputation of Park Street.

And whence comes the reply from Jason Abraham just hours after my call for a public (albeit peaceful) protest. I summarize: He apologized to Ray and Karolyn, the lead petitioners on the latest petition, stating that the Clerk had verified that a sufficient number of the signers of the petition were members and they reviewed it this past week at the first Board meeting since it was authenticated essentially, and they will respond shortly.

Now, while I severely dislike the SM and the members of the BoE that protect him rather than doing their job and being an objective governing body, I do try to be a person of integrity, so I have to admit that I erred when I stated that Jason did not respond at all since the submission of the most recent petition, it was the prior petition, where it was asked that Mark be sent on a leave and an interim pastor be hired while the allegations of spiritual abuse were investigated. It was also requested that ministers Damien, Ray and Julien be allowed to continue their employment without fear of retaliation while the matter was investigated. THAT Jason did not give the dignity of a response to, and THAT was a highly critical petition to protect the talent that our church had invested in and whom we have established trust for MANY years. Jason INTENTIONALLY ignored that. My guess is that they will give two excuses: 1. They will state that “they were not given sufficient time according to blah, blah, blah rule,” which is simply a technicality. The severity of the issue at hand required a speedy response, and as humble servants of the congregation, they should have given serious consideration to the petition, and, at the VERY LEAST, a response as to why they would not comply. 2. They will state that it was a “Human Resources issue, and they therefore had to respect the employees’ confidentiality.” However, all 3 ministers gave written statements to the congregation that they were resigning because Mark refused to abide by the parameters surrounding the measures of reconciliation established by the VOCA firm, which Mark and the ministers ALL signed off on, and which this congregation paid $100,000 for. Therefore, the ministers made it our business and gave us leave to discuss the matter publicly, and since we foot the bill for that firm’s mediation, you better believe it’s our business. So, I call your bluff, Park Street BoE.

THEN, Jason has the audacity to tell us that, “they just got to our petition” now that the investigation by the CCCC’s Vicinage Council is essentially complete, as I understand it. They will cite “process,” but they have long known of the discord over the VC’s weak and biased investigation of Pastor Booker prior, and a summary of Pastor Booker so glowing that his grandmother could have written it. The CCCC made Pastor Booker look pristine and infallible, all the while telling us that the church was imploding for some reason. (Probably due to factors long before Pastor Booker, of course.) We had some attrition during our difficult SM search, and we’ve certainly had our conflicts, but we have never had nearly an entire ministry staff rise up against one of the SM’s citing instances of unethical behavior, nor have we ever seen a congregation so divided, nor tithing withheld at such a level due to disapproval of the leadership. The CCCC straight up lied to save Mark Booker’s hindside, the congregation knows it, and the BoE still wants to play cute and pretend that it’s all just a misunderstanding.

Curiously enough, I called Ron Hamilton, Director of the CCCC, myself, on July 2nd, which I already posted about. He listened to me at length but stated that he had to cut off the conversation because he had “already been threatened with legal action” if he discussed the investigation. Mind you, he did not say, “I am under legal obligation not to disclose information…” he said, “I have already been threatened with legal action…” So, who is threatening him? Isn’t the point of having an umbrella organization like the CCCC so that we can discuss our concerns about our individual churches? Isn’t the point of involving the Vicinage Council from the CCCC to hear and mediate these concerns? So, if he’s under threat not to discuss things, then I can only assume that certain church leaders are dictating whom the CCCC may speak to, and that is not an honest investigation. Also, if you’re a transparent organization, why is the church threatening legal action for simply discussing the investigation process with a congregant?

Something’s a little shady over at Park Street, I say. Come clean kiddos. It’s clear that our petitions are falling on deaf ears or are being slyly sidelined/ignored. Start listening to your congregation or we will commence protesting publicly (albeit, peacefully.) Just don’t read my picket sign.

Susan Lane: And whence comes the reply from Jason Abraham just hours after my call for a public (albeit peaceful) protest.

Can someone post a link to this letter? Thanks so much!

Friend of Park Street Church: Can someone post a link to this letter? Thanks so much!

Dear Friend of PSC
Here is a copy of that letter-________________________

Jason Abraham
Fri, Jul 19, 7:19 PM (2 days ago)
to Raymond, Alana, Alex, Andrea, Bailey, Betty, Bill, Brian, Brian, Bunny, Caroline, Catherine, Chenchen, Christina, Cindy, Clerk, Courtney, Daeun, Dan, David, David, David, Howard, Elders-PSC, Elisabeth, Eunjeong, Evangeline, Gigisvocals@gmail.com, Grant, Kai, Jamie, Janet, Jason, Jennifer, Sophia, Joel, John, Jonathan, Jonathan, Jooseppi, Julia, Kai, Karen, Karolyn, Kevin, Kwang-Soo, Lisa, Lois, Lora, M, Marisa, Mary, Nakyung, PDSpine@outlook.com, PETER, Paulina, Pebble, Peter, Rafael, Rob, Ruthie, S, Saara, Saireudee, Sally, Sang, Shaji, Sze, Tianyu, Todd, Victor, Violette, Xiaoyu, Yannick, Yingshu, a.fusaro12@gmail.com, awf26@aol.com, bewilford, bftaylor526@gmail.com, chetkunz3@yahoo.com, cmyjlu@gmail.com, cynthiasalerno@gmail.com, deSolas, derek.bediakoh01@gmail.com, dglvas@aol.com, dmhkunz@gmail.com, donaldcutlip@gmail.com, elizabethm599@gmail.com, ethanygliu@gmail.com, eunjeonglee@ieee.org, gdalton15@aol.com, me, hvassos@comcast.net, icwchan, jesuschristthekingofkings@hotmail.com, joe_avilo@msn.com, kimberlydawes4@gmail.com, lakiluo@gmail.com, limzke@gmail.com, llhsiao2015@gmail.com, madawes4@gmail.com, mel@melix.info, mindelynn@hotmail.com, njbrunner@aol.com, refinedsilver101@gmail.com, susanemackie@gmail.com, yjkyoung@aol.com

Dear Ray and Karolyn,

Apologies for my delayed response. The Clerk previously confirmed the membership status of the requisite number of members. The Board’s first meeting since the petition was submitted was this past Wednesday. The matter was addressed at the meeting, and a response should be forthcoming.

Blessings,
Jason

Friend of Park Street Church: Can someone post a link to this letter? Thanks so much!

Friend of Park Street Church: Can someone post a link to this letter? Thanks so much!

Friend of Park Street Church,

Friend of Park Street Church,

Friend of Park Street Church,

Friend of Park Street Church,

Friend of Park Street Church: Can someone post a link to this letter? Thanks so much!

Friend of Park Street Church:
Thought of the situation at Park Street Church…

… I’m still trying to figure out what I think about patriarchy… a result of the Fall? A biblical pattern for all societies? A temporary pattern set aside in Christ?

A biblical case can be made for complementarianism, but IMO, it’s just not a coherent theology that holds all of Scripture together.

IOW, sure, you can pick out verses, string them together and arrive at complementarianism (and earnest scholars of Hebrew & Greek have done just that). But you can’t pull this off without seriously distorting other, far bigger categories of theology, such as:

– creation & Christian anthropology
– ecclesiology
– eschatology
– pneumatology & spiritual gifts
– exousiology
– & even soteriology

Also, just as a practical matter, it’s impossible for a church to be governed by BOTH complementarian & egalitarian theology. Sure, you can & should be charitable towards brothers & sisters who disagree with you on this. But at the end of the day, your church either recognizes women’s freedom in Christ to serve the church with any of their Spirit-gifted callings – or it does not. It’s one or the other.

And since PSC by 2019 policy keeps the Senior Minister male, and a majority of the elder board male, it is a complementarian church.

There are so many wonderful egalitarian, biblical scholars out there. Some of my faves are: Kevin Giles, Lucy Peppiatt, Marg Mowczko, Nijay Gupta, Aida Spencer…

And the abuse at Park Street Church is given a green light to continue on… the buddies of CEO Mark Booker got the old band back together in the reconvened Vicinage Council. Still loyal to a fellow pastor-dude, you won’t be surprised to hear that they again exonerated him.
.
This time they also praised themselves for being qualified to investigate spiritual abuse… because they are also pastors… so they know the cancer of systemic spiritual abuse because they studied the Bible and preach it. (Turns out I’m a dentist who can detect oral cancer because I have teeth and brush them! Who knew?!) Basically, if you studied the Bible at the graduate level and can translate Greek and Hebrew, you are bestowed with honorary degrees in law, forensic science, psychology, victim protection, and conflict resolution. Who knew seminary was a shortcut to so much expertise in so many fields! Gordon Conwell should start advertising at McLean Mental Hospital and the local law schools. I’m sure the tuition at Gordon Conwell is less than those inferior universities that only teach law and psychology and victim protection-related skills. And many of the degrees at Gordon Conwell are shorter than all those silly years of other degrees!
.
I’ll post all the links to the disgusting letters and reports soon.
.
And I don’t compare this to cancer lightly! It is literally spreading the abuse to other local churches by roping in more leaders as both enablers and co-abusers.

Subject: What is spiritual abuse, and is it happening at Park Street Church?
.
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024
.
Dear Park Street Elders, Ministers, and Members,
.
I’m writing to pass along a letter from a Park Street member of more than 10 years. This member wishes to remain anonymous, but has been actively involved in several key PSC ministries, is a therapist, and has studied extensively about spiritual abuse within a home and within a church. In my opinion, everything this member has written is sadly true for Park Street now. Please read this member’s thoughtful, well-researched letter, and consider it prayerfully.
.
In Christ,
[name withheld for privacy]
.
———————————–
.
This has been a difficult time for everyone. At the last special meeting, someone asked for a definition of spiritual abuse – but the question was shut down.
.
Spiritual abuse is a complex term and a difficult term to define. Let’s break the word down. Most people associate abuse with examples such as physical abuse and sexual abuse as that has so often been highlighted in media and is much easier to see. However, there are also other aspects of abuse such as emotional abuse, financial or material abuse, psychological abuse. What ties all abuse together is the attempt to gain and maintain power and control through various means. While emotional and psychological abuse can happen outside of a religious context, spiritual abuse is a form of emotional and psychological abuse in a religious context like churches in which a religious leader uses religion and scripture to gain power and control even if they think they are doing it for the greater good. However, spiritual abuse can also happen within homes and be a part of domestic abuse. That being said, abusers never abuse everyone, they only abuse some, usually those who disagree with them. Let’s take an example of someone robbing a home. Even if the neighbors say that the person never robbed them, it does not mean this person never robbed this particular home.
.
Here are some examples of emotional and psychological abuse that can occur within spiritual abuse:
.
–Gaslighting
–Manipulation
–lack of real awareness and apology
–use of coercion and threats
–blaming others
–silencing others, isolating others, or intimidating others
–denying accountability for their actions
.
Below are some quotes from others who have a much better working definition of spiritual abuse and examples of it within the church.
.
What is spiritual abuse?
.
“Spiritual abuse is a form of emotional and psychological abuse. It is characterized by a systematic pattern of coercive and controlling behaviour in a religious context. Spiritual abuse can have a deeply damaging impact on those who experience it. This abuse may include: manipulation and exploitation, enforced accountability, censorship of decision making, requirements for secrecy and silence, coercion to conform, control through the use of sacred texts or teaching, requirement of obedience to the abuser, the suggestion that the abuser has a ‘divine’ position, isolation as a means of punishment, and superiority and elitism.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse, by Dr. Lisa Oakley and Justin Humphreys)
.

“Spiritual abuse is when a spiritual leader—such as a pastor, elder, or head of a Christian organization—wields his position of spiritual authority in such a way that he manipulates, domineers, bullies, and intimidates those under him as a means of maintaining his own power and control, even if he is convinced he is seeking biblical and kingdom-related goals.” (Bully Pulpit: Confronting the Problem of Spiritual Abuse in the Church, by Michael J. Kruger)
.
What might it look like?
–“Fauxnerability is a twisted form of vulnerability. It has the appearance of transparency but serves only to conceal one’s deepest struggles.” (When Narcissism Comes to the Church, by Chuck DeGroat)
.
–“Spiritual abuse might include: manipulation and exploitation, accountability enforced by threats, censorship of decision-making, coercion to conform, and the inability to ask questions or voice disagreement. The abuser might suggest they are in a “divine’ position and therefore require your obedience.” (Recognizing Warning Signs of Spiritual Abuse in the Church -from Crosswalk.com)
.
–“The only way abusive pastors can survive as long as they do is if they are able to manipulate the system in such a way that they are protected and their victims are silenced. The first kind of manipulation is structural. Abusers often make sure certain practices are in place to preserve their authority. An example is the notorious ‘personnel committee,’ which is typically a subset of an elder board. By making sure all conflicts are handled discretely in this committee, years of conflict can go unnoticed by the larger governing body.” (Bully Pulpit)
.
–“Relational manipulation has a significant payoff for the abusive leader. For one, it generates the kind of loyalty he might need at a later point if ever accusations are made against him. In addition, abusive pastors often use this sort of influence to get other leaders in the church (usually elders) to engage in bullying behavior on their behalf. In numerous cases I studied—ranging from the West coast to the Southeast—the bully pastor was known to send other elders or pastors to confront anyone he saw as a threat, to accuse them and keep them in line (usually under the auspices of ‘shepherding’). At this point, the abuse had become systemic, now involving more than the senior pastor alone.” (Bully Pulpit)
.
–“Spiritual abusers may behave in faith that they are doing just good and godly training to help the others; spiritual abuse can happen even when the abuser has a good heart – they genuinely think they are helping the victim.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse)
.
–“Most assume that if their pastor doesn’t scream and swear at people, then he must not be abusive. But there are more subtle ways to be cruel to people. While some abusive pastors use ‘fire’ to hurt their victims, others use ‘ice’—they turn cold, quietly cutting off the person from the ministry of the church and from the relationships therein.” (Bully Pulpit)
.
–“Abusers typically have what appears to be a fruitful, gospel-centered ministry with a track record of success. Abuse often happens for years, leaving a long ‘debris field’ of broken relationships before it finally catches up with the abuser. Abuse involves domineering, bullying behavior, leaving the abused in genuine fear, especially if the abuse involves threats of church discipline. Reports of abuse rarely lead to accountability, as friends defend the abuser and the board…provides alternative explanations. The victims of the abuse are typically forced out and charged as troublemakers who are attacking a faithful pastor just doing his job.” (Bully Pulpit)
.
Here is an example from another church…
“Eerily similar is the case of Mark Driscoll’s former assistant, Karen Schaeffer. After Driscoll abruptly fired her for ‘heresy,’ merely for suggesting he needed more people around him who could genuinely challenge him, he said to her, ‘Trust is really hard to earn, and it’s really easy to lose.’ Then in a later sermon, Driscoll talked about how he had been ‘betrayed’ by someone close to him and repeated the same line he had spoken to Schaeffer. Knowing she was being directly targeted from the pulpit, Schaeffer immediately left the sanctuary in tears, never to return.” (Bully Pulpit – about the spiritual abuse within Mars Hill Church in Seattle)
.
No one wants to be a victim of any kind of abuse. And it is hard to see abuse when it is not happening to you or even when it is happening to you.However, we must keep an open eye and wonder if the stories we have heard and read about Park Street reflect any of the above. We should wonder if there were and are even more events or stories that we may not be aware of that could reflect those listed above. Instead of just listening to stories from second or third party sources, we should hear directly from first party sources. It does not even have to include everything listed above and it may even include things not listed above as the above list is not an exhaustive list by any means. However, if even some people are experiencing several of what is listed above or there are changes happening to the church in which more governing bodies include “yes-men”, then as a church, we should consider the very real possibility of spiritual abuse.
.
What is an appropriate next step for the church if abuse is present?
There should be no room for abuse within the church. There needs to be an increase in accountability and transparency on all levels and parts. For those who wonder about trust – trust is built on these levels of accountability, transparency, AND clear communication. With that, true repentance is needed for those who are abusing others and on our collective pride – before God and before each other. And with repentance, we can then move to repentance WITH a change in structure in place so that the hurtful action does not continue and then reconciliation when those who have been deeply hurt are ready. Once these things have occurred, there is much more the church should do to be a safe place for all and a church that cares well for those who are hurting.
.
Here are some quotes from others:
–“If we truly want to create healthy cultures, we need to ensure that appropriate procedures, monitoring and supervision are embedded and applied to all.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse)
.
–“It will require us to move out of defence or self-protection mode and into a place of transparency, respect and openness.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse)
.
–“it is really important that the wider Church becomes much better at operating the highest standards of response and prevention and in a much more transparent manner. Responding to disclosures of abuse should always put the person at the centre and operate in a manner which seeks to protect the individual not the institution.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse)
.
As for ministers, we need to look at character:
–“A pastor’s words can be either disproportionately encouraging or disproportionately damaging. Pastors effectively have a “pulpit” inside people’s heads. This is precisely why character matters so much when it comes to whether a person is qualified for the ministry.” (Bully Pulpit)
.
–“Willingness to open oneself up to scrutiny and challenge is a mark of good character and one that recognizes one’s own limitations, weaknesses and inherent flaws. Modeling this with our teams and congregations is a positive mechanism that will assist in preventing the misuse of our own power (and that of others) and promoting equal value.” (Escaping the Maze of Spiritual Abuse)

Has there been any thought to contacting the reporter from the Globe who did the original story back in February – perhaps to do a follow up? This continues to sadden me a great deal.

I just wanted to mention the organization Pastors’ Hope Network (PHN) in this thread. Some of the first descriptions one would see on their homepage are “Help & hope for pastors who have been fired or forced to resign” and “PHN is like paramedics for hurting pastors.”

This group was helpful to me in my family’s church-trauma aftermath a few years ago, and I have since viewed them as a worthwhile organization for us to financially donate to, when possible.

If anyone has personal contact with the ministers who have been forced out of PSC, perhaps you can share this resource with them.

https://pastorshopenetwork.org/#services
* This page section summarizes some of the services provided by PHN, including résumé assistance, career counseling, financial guidance, partially-subsidized counseling, …
* Further down on this page is an FAQ, with questions like “Do you only help pastors?
No. In addition to pastors and their families, Pastors’ Hope Network serves those who have been fired or forced to resign from a variety of ministry positions.”

https://pastorshopenetwork.org/request-help/
* Site visitors can request help via this page. (“NOTE: At this time, Pastors’ Hope Network works only throughout North America.”)

https://pastorshopenetwork.org/blog/
* They have nearly finished posting a 5-part blog series on “Understanding Pastoral Termination,” and the most recent Part 4 is an overview of “The Long-Term Effects of Forced Termination.”

https://pastorshopenetwork.org/a-proposal-for-all-church-leaders/
* A bit of an aside, but this is an article addressing the importance of mental healthcare for ministers.

Deanna Harrison, the pastor’s wife who started PHN, also wrote a book, “Moving On: Surviving the Grief of Forced Termination” (paperback or Kindle): https://a.co/d/0tyl8xy

(Apologies for any horrific formatting the above post may have!)

Friend if Park Street Church:
And the abuse at Park Street Church is given a green light to continue on… the buddies of CEO Mark Booker got the old band back together in the reconvened Vicinage Council…

This time they also praised themselves for being qualified to investigate spiritual abuse… because they are also pastors… so they know the cancer of systemic spiritual abuse because they studied the Bible and preach it. (Turns out I’m a dentist who can detect oral cancer because I have teeth and brush them!Who knew?!) Basically, if you studied the Bible at the graduate level and can translate Greek and Hebrew, you are bestowed with honorary degrees in law, forensic science, psychology, victim protection, and conflict resolution. Who knew seminary was a shortcut to so much expertise in so many fields! Gordon-Conwell should start advertising at McLean Mental Hospital and the local law schools. I’m sure the tuition at Gordon-Conwell is less than those inferior universities that only teach law and psychology and victim protection-related skills. And many of the degrees at Gordon-Conwell are shorter than all those silly years of other degrees!

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary alum here (MASF ’17).

I love GCTS. But you are SPOT ON in your concerns. At least 4 out of the 7 members of the Vicinage Council have GCTS ties.

– Tom Petter is GCTS faculty.
– Nick Granitsas has taught courses in CCCC polity at GCTS.
– Peter Balentine is a GCTS alum.
– Terry Shanahan is a GCTS alum, and currently serves on GCTS’s Thriving in Ministry Team.

Note: Terry Shanahan’s GCTS bio says, “He is trained in Biblical Peacemaking principals and has been a part of numerous Pastoral Care teams to help restore pastors to ministry.”

https://www.gordonconwell.edu/alumni/thriving-in-ministry/thriving-in-ministry-team/

“Biblical Peacemaking” can sometimes look like peacekeeping at victims’ expense. And a lot of evangelicalism is a whole lot more concerned with “restoring pastors to ministry” than honesty, justice and healing for victims of abuse.

Even among GCTS faculty, I see bad theology related to abuse (particularly areas related to unity, peacemaking, forgiveness and reconciliation).

I also see a lot of ignorance about abuse. It’s interesting, in my 2 pastoral counseling courses, I came across a dizzying array of mental problems that pastors are basically ill-equipped to handle. So what’s the response?

Go to the experts. Have lists of counselors available. You are not trained in these fields.

GCTS faculty need to do the same on matters of abuse. And they need to encourage their students to do the same.

Elizabeth Klein: “Biblical Peacemaking” can sometimes look like peacekeeping at victims’ expense. And a lot of evangelicalism is a whole lot more concerned with “restoring pastors to ministry” than honesty, justice and healing for victims of abuse.

.
Thank you so much for pointing this out! It’s a form of systemic abuse!
.
.

Elizabeth Klein: Even among GCTS faculty, I see bad theology related to abuse (particularly areas related to unity, peacemaking, forgiveness and reconciliation).
I also see a lot of ignorance about abuse. It’s interesting, in my 2 pastoral counseling courses, I came across a dizzying array of mental problems that pastors are basically ill-equipped to handle. So what’s the response?
.
Go to the experts. Have lists of counselors available. You are not trained in these fields.
.
GCTS faculty need to do the same on matters of abuse. And they need to encourage their students to do the same.

.
Some if this makes me wonder about licensure for pastors. Is there such a thing? If so, what is the process for revoking it?
.
Within medical fields, providers know not to attempt care beyond their current “scope of practice” to which they are licensed.*
.
It seems like the Vicinage Council is operating way, way beyond their scope of practice. It’s unethical to hold oneself out to the public as capable of a practice for which they have no training.
.
For example, a lifeguard rescues a swimmer in distress to keep them from drowning, but knows to give the person over to the EMTs when they arrive. The EMTs, in turn, give the person to the hospital team members. If the person needs surgery, those providers trained in the necessary procedures get to work. It’s basic teamwork for between each group and within each group.
.
Each group of providers know what they are licensed to do and NOT do. They do not act beyond their scope of practice.
.
Why is it so difficult for pastors / preachers to do the analogous thing?! It’s not complicated. It doesn’t require a great feat of intellect.
.
It’s prideful to think you are capable of doing something that you have never been trained to do. I continue to be shocked and saddened by the pride of the Vicinage Council members! They are not investigators, lawyers, therapists, or victim-survivors advocates. They have NO business getting involved in allegations of abuse… even if it is spiritual abuse!
.
This bunch of men could investigate CEO Booker’s exegesis and homiletics… but that’s not what everyone is complaining about. For the sake of the Gospel, and the wellness of everyone involved, and everyone watching, stay in your lane! Have some humility! And show some respect for other professions!
.
.
* “Scope of practice describes the procedures, actions, and processes that a healthcare practitioner is permitted to undertake in keeping with the terms of their professional license. The scope of practice is limited to that which the law allows for specific education and experience, and specific demonstrated competency. Each jurisdiction has laws, licensing bodies, and regulations that describe requirements for education and training, and define scope of practice.” From Wikipedia, accessed 23 July 2024 at 2:56 pm. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scope_of_practice

This puts the nail in the coffin of any hope that this “church” will hold spiritual abuse accountable. If you continue to raise questions, you are part of the “opposition” or worse, helping the “evil one.” The Bylaws Committee will undoubtedly propose amendments that give the SM more power, make it harder to challenge the elders, and make it easier to remove members.

If you are still at Park St and disagree with this direction, you need to leave. If you feel comfortable, make them excommunicate you for “breaking” your membership covenant. Turn the tables and make good trouble on your way out, they need to see the chaos that’s ahead of them. If not, try joining the group that meets on Saturdays. I’m sure this will turn into a new church at some point. If you’re an insider, please talk to the press. Don’t let the story die here.

The best thing you can do is to make Mark and Jason look out at empty pews and dwindling giving. There is very little hope for internal/congregational resolution at this point.

Observant Outsider:
If you are still at Park St and disagree with this direction, you need to leave.

Going to disagree with this specifically. The bylaws have not yet been changed, and cannot be changed unless approved by members at the next annual meeting. Next annual meeting, 1/3 of the elder board will turn over. This last year, the petitioners were unable to get their candidates elected, but the sentiment in the pews seems to be turning against the elder board and the SM. If these “rebels” (some would say true Park Streeters) can perservere for a few years, things may start looking very different on the elder board then they do now.

I do agree with you that everyone should stop 100% of their giving to the church if they have not already. That is the most powerful protest we have, other than putting up alternate candidate slates by petition.