Regarding the Removal of the Tenth Presbyterian Post From Last Week

Posted on by June 28, 2025avatar

I have removed the post because it caused great pain to the victim(s) of Liam Goligher. The church was not forthcoming about the identity of the victim in this instance, in my opinion. I thought, and still think, there may be further victims of Liam Goligher, given the grievous incident in 2014. I hope that the victim(s) of Goligher get justice. I apologize for not being aware of what was happening and causing anyone associated with this situation pain. I may go back and redo the post, emphasizing that Goligher is the abuser. I thank Boz Tchividjian and someone close to one of the victims.

Comments

Regarding the Removal of the Tenth Presbyterian Post From Last Week — 28 Comments

  3. Dee, thank you for listening to Boz and the person close to the survivor. Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse is frequently mislabeled and misunderstood yet causes catastrophic harm to the victim(s), spouse(s), families, churches, and communities. The more we learn about this terrible, common form of abuse, the safer our churches will become, perpetrators will be held accountable, and survivors will find healing and justice. It may be helpful for you to explore & explain ACSA when you post again about Goligher’s abuse. Thank you for your courage to take down your post. Many ACSA survivors and advocates are grateful.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  6. dee,

    I believe the issue is not only naming the victim, but also the flippant, harmful way you described the nature of his ASCA violations. Whether you knew the identity of the victim or not, any sexualized action a person with spiritual authority takes with a congregant or staff – anyone under his scope of spiritual care – is a violation of his fiduciary duties and an abuse of his power. The violations, described as tulip frolicking, or whatever minimizing language that was used, were just the tip of the iceberg of months or years of predatory grooming and manipulation & abuse of power. The tone and words used regarding his abusive actions contribute to common misunderstandings of Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse rather than protecting victims and exposed a gap in ACSA awareness expected in a trusted whistleblower.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  10. dee,

    It was quite clear that the only focus of the post was Liam Goligher and his “adultery” as defined by the Westminster Standards he and his denomination profess to follow.: according to the ACSA leaflet it wasn’t “adultery” because it assumes that both parties were consenting adults. Such a definition is the opposite of what Scripture teaches.

    AnglicanWatch have recently posted an excellent article on the whole affair.

    The only other point of interest for me is whether or not Grace is real and in any way related to GRACE the organisation as I noticed the name “Boz” in one of the comments at one point.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  13. Grace: The violations, described as tulip frolicking, or whatever minimizing language that was used,

    I believe the original post used the term “tulip frolicking” sarcastically in response to a denial that the incident in the park was sexual (and thus not sexual abuse at all). The minimization was entirely on the side of the perpetrator and his defenders (if I remember the deleted post correctly).

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  14. A grieved survivor: I’m sorry but I never said I was damaged.

    You said: “but nothing will make up for the damage done. It’s wise to have your facts straight before hurting victims so deeply.” If you are not the victim in this case (as your comments imply), then you ought to tell us how you have such certain knowledge of the victim’s inner state of being. Your accusation of intentional wrongdoing by Dee is pretty strong and yet unsupported.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  15. Luckyforward,

    Aha but not only that. It’s time to right the tone. And THAT TAKES TIME AND NOT HURRY.

    1 ) What did this have to do with lipstick?

    2 ) Why does Dee assume – and assume we’ll assume – and assume the public should assume – bad religion favours boys?

    Perps in deed and speech use EXACTLY that VERY same phrase. EXACTLY.

    There are real boys – does Dee remember? We actually WERE alarmed and IN GRIEF, EVERY time girls and women were attacked and threatened, and aspersions cast on our peers in salacious speech from authority. EVERY “darn” time. ALL our long lives long, AND now the good younger ones after us.

    Lowlandseer at 03:32 has stated the matter properly, accurately and in clear focus.

    Bad religion is manic-depressive leading to convolutions in substance. Dee should stop trying to beat them at their own game, leading to convoluted presentation.

    Dee – Elastigirl and Sandy look up to you as an authority.

    A grieved survivor,

    I am with you entirely. The perceiving was (incidentally) by another party but a “heck” of a lot of us were damaged by Dee’s convolutions.

    Dee: you should use more original vocabulary and not your slogans. How about “seen by someone as saying”, which is both attributive AND owning.

    You don’t have to post like clockwork – you appear to have got the idea you have got to be “dutiful”.

    Why not get your “sub” or “fill-in” Todd to give us one of his understated numbers? His headlines are always respectful.

    Sandy,

    See above. Dee was becoming intentionally unintentional and “grieved survivor” is not far from the mark, and is helping you as well as me.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  17. “…pretty strong and yet unsupported”

    Well Dee’s Excuse was that she couldn’t have known the identity of the victim(s), despite the fact that her own article (in quoting other articles) named, and mocked (“Tiptoe through the tulips episode”), one of the victims multiple times.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  18. I want to assure everyone that I am reading every comment. I am profoundly sorry for the blog post and have spoken with and apologized to a relative of one of the parties involved.

    -My intent was always to focus on Goligher as the predator.

    -I became concerned that there were some involved with the church who did not think Goligher did anything serious. I then, in a poor manner, went after him, stressing that what he did was not something to laugh about by using sarcasm. My attempt failed miserably.

    -I believed that there were possibly other victims. Such actions rarely happen as a one-time occurrence.

    -Adultery, as defined by several denominations, does not mean that both individuals are guilty. I have since learned that some other materials say differently. Given my tradition, I believe Goligher is not only a clerical abuser but also an adulterer. That does not mean the victim is one.

    -Because I believed that there were others involved, I did not know the person involved initially was the victim. Perhaps that seems stupid, but I have heard too many instances in which such actions have occurred when a person has gone on to have a long-term relationship with what I would call an abuser and did not believe they were victims. I hesitated to claim the victim in this instance was one since the Presbytery statement was not clear, and I understand why. As soon as I was informed on Friday that she was the victim, I removed her name from all my posts since, until this point, I do not post the names of victims unless they wish to be identified.

    -I hope justice will happen in this situation. I hope all parties involved will consider taking legal action against Goligher.

    Again, I apologize, and I am learning a great deal from what is written. I do not plan to make any further comments. However, if you believe a dialogue with me is necessary, please email me.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  20. Hi Dee. Thank you for your openness & honesty. I also don’t see anything for you to apologize for yet I also don’t know all the facts of the case. In light of that, you have done the gracious thing.

    It seemed like you had taken a post on another blog and actually softened it, raising a very good question: where is the line between clergy sexual abuse and adultery with another very good question: who is guilty in this particular case? Both are excellent and rather pressing questions.

    I doubt we will ever get the facts of the case to truly know or decide for ourselves as Sessions and Presbyteries tend to be very tight lipped although there is a review process at multiple levels after the fact at least. And in that kind of a situation, we’re all left to speculate. My family and I are convinced, though, from our own direct and personal observations, that there are multiple victims, some directly and many more indirectly. May I encourage prayer for the recovery of the victims and the repentance of anyone who sinned against another or the Lord? He is quick to forgive. It is my prayer that He will be quick to redeem and restore thise damaged by others.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  21. Michael in UK,

    i admire dee for giving an enormous part of her life and livelihood over many years to taking a stand against abuses of power and standing up for the one harmed.

    I admire her for giving of her time, more than any of us would ever imagine, in the midst of other demands in active compassion for survivors/victims.

    all very much at her own expense.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  25. Scott:
    I doubt we will ever get the facts of the case to truly know or decide for ourselves as Sessions and Presbyteries tend to be very tight lippedalthough there is a review process at multiple levels after the fact at least. And in that kind of a situation, we’re all left to speculate. My family and I are convinced, though, from our own direct and personal observations, that there are multiple victims, some directly and many more indirectly. May I encourage prayer for the recovery of the victims and the repentance of anyone who sinned against another or the Lord? He is quick to forgive. It is my prayer that He will be quick to redeem and restore thise damaged by others.

    if you have direct observations about other victims shouldn’t you report these to the Presbytery or the church? Why wouldn’t you report them?

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

  28. Scott,

    You are really onto something here. Bonding wrongly by bypassing reason and executive function. From what I read that may have been happening (in religion) around Billy Sunday and it certainly was happening among the Nazi cult.

    A mid to century “evangelical” reaction was – instead of ensuring well informed and mutually respected all round solid believers – Proselytising Lite.

    The good hearted contingent in secular affairs, let alone religion, no longer found themselves upheld.

    At my last two mainstream churches, the gossip in front of our faces was “we want you to have what we call freedom in worship” when what if we have stiff arms, and “that was anointed wasn’t it” referring to the Amplifying Pastor obliterating the (real) talent of the musicians and singers for the compulsory 50 minutes.

    In our cases we had the loss of i – half, ii – three quarters of the congregations respectively.

    In the Tenth Presbyterian case, in my opinion it appears the Presbytery may have “felt” that the accustomed “way we did things here” was of a piece with their resulting convolutions.

      (Reply & quote selected text)  (Reply to this comment)

Leave a comment - Click here for our commenting rules

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