Doug Phillips & Vision Forum, Doug Wilson, Failure to Report Crimes, Homeschool Movement, Ken Ham, Learn to Discern, Lourdes Torres vs Doug Phillips lawsuit, Patriarchal-Complementarian Movement, Reconstructionist-Dominion Movement, Scott Brown, Sexual Abuse/Assault and Churches, Vision Forum, Women and the Church

Queen Bees of Homeschooling Stacy McDonald and Kelly Crawford Don’t Like the “Victim” Word in the Lourdes Torres-Manteufel vs. Doug Phillips Lawsuit

***

Well-known homeschooling moms Kelly Crawford and Stacy McDonald comment regarding the “victim” word with regard to the Lourdes Torres-Manteufel vs. Doug Phillips lawsuit.

***

Doug Wilson comments as follows regarding Doug Phillips’s sexual sins against Lourdes Torres-Manteufel:

Doug Wilson, Doug Phillips lawsuit, Lourdes Torres-Manteufel Screen Shot 2014-04-21 at 9.20.41 PM

 

(Trigger warning for survivors of victimization by sexual abuse or assault, and/or spiritual abuse.) There has been a heated discussion at Doug Wilson’s blog on an article entitled Vice, Victims, and Vision Forum.

Wilson discusses why he thinks Lourdes Torres-Manteufel should not be called a “victim,” that it is prejudging the case to do so, especially because she was an adult when the sexual incidences occurred.

Here is this classic response from Wilson – someone who has no clue as to how sexual abuse victims respond:

But if his attentions were entirely unwelcome to her, and she was freaked out by the creepster, then we have to ask why she wasn’t down the road at the first opportunity — that night or the next morning — with Doug Phillips receiving notification of her opinion of what transpired via the sound of sirens. That’s not what happened, on anyone’s account, and so I don’t think we should identify her as a victim.

Presently there are 163 comments. I found the comments that affirmed Wilson’s stance repulsive – just as repulsive as this: The Real Doug Wilson Encouraged & Presided Over the Marriage of Serial Pedophile.

I think what was most infuriating to me were the comments from well-known women who are part of Christian Patriarchy Movement. Let’s start with Kelly Crawford. In a few days, she will be speaking fairly near me at a homeschooling conference. Look at the lineup of Patriarchs: Ken Ham, R.C. Sproul, Jr., Scott Brown, Israel Wayne, Marshall Foster. Doing a simple Google search of Doug Phillips’ name with any one of these men will yield multiple results and their connections together in “ministry” work.

**

Kelly Crawford, Scott Brown, Israel Wayne, Ken Ham

**

I couldn’t find much of a bio on Kelly. She is a homeschooling mom of 10. She is a speaker and blogger who once had Vision Forum affiliate ads on her blog’s sidebar. Let’s read what she has to say on Lourdes as “victim”:

Kelly Crawford, Lourdes Torres-Manteufel, Doug Phillips lawsuit Screen Shot 2014-04-21 at 9.13.31 PM

Kelly Crawford

April 18, 2014 at 2:58 pm

And finally, I breathe a big sigh of “amen” for the first, that I’ve read, of real discernment over the situation, and a wise call to hold adults responsible instead of perpetuating a “victim” culture. [Emphasis added.]

Since the first pieces started popping up on the scandal, I’m saying, “why is she a victim?” We are talking, by the way, about a confident, assertive young woman and *nothing* like the mousy allusions I’ve read. Don’t ask me how I know.

“We cannot accuse Vision Forum of treating all women like little girls, and then turn around and treat all women as little girls who can’t be expected to say no to a cad at Vision Forum.” [JA note: This sentence she quotes is from Doug Wilson’s article.]

I can’t thank you enough for saying this.

**


Here are two more comments on Doug Wilson’s article from another well-known woman in Christian Patriarchy Movement, Stacy McDonald. (Incidentally, this week her husband, Teaching Elder – another way of saying “pastor” in family-integrated churchesJames McDonald has jumped on the popular defend-the-Patriarchy bandwagon with his own article, The “P” Word.)

 

Stacy McDonald, Doug Phillips lawsuit, Lourdes Torres-Manteufel Screen Shot 2014-04-21 at 9.16.30 PM

Thank you, Pastor Wilson! You nailed it! I’ve tried to say the same thing and was accused of not having sympathy for the “victim,” which no one can prove she was at this point.

However, I absolutely DO have sympathy for the fact that she was used by a man in power – a man she had respected and revered. She was seduced into a sinful relationship by a “religious” man who represented godliness to her. I agree there is no excuse.

She said she was told that he would marry her. She said she was told that his wife would die soon and they could be together. Sickening. She said she was in love him. Why would these words have even been significant unless she felt deceived by his promises – deceived into going along with it in some way? And then realized it was never going to happen – she was being used.

Any time an insecure young woman is cajoled into a sexual relationship by a man – especially a married man, she is being used and taken advantage of. The impact is multiplied when “religion” is involved.

But, it happens all the time with men in the business world. If she was a 23-29-year old secretary for the CEO of some big corporation, it would be similar. Or perhaps an intern to the president…

That is part of the reason men are called to protect women, which makes this disgraceful thing all the more tragic.

I realize that the fact he was a Christian leader compounds the influence he had over her emotionally, but she still owns her own sin. And I still maintain that the truest victims here are his wife and children. [Emphasis added.]

And that says nothing of the public spectacle it’s become inside and outside the church or the smug satisfaction oozing from every anti-patriarchy blog out there.

Thank you again.

“By this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme.” (2 Samuel 12:14)

***************

More from Stacy McDonald:

April 19, 2014 at 9:33 am

I guess I’m confused as to how asking for $10 million dollars from him and his victimized family is a cry for help. And, if she had not gone to the media, but instead sought Christian arbitration; and, if her family, her church, and the people in her community all wound up believing her, wouldn’t that be enough? Besides, “everyone” is not going to believe her anyway.

I’m not saying there shouldn’t be some sort of restitution if her claims are proven true. But the way it is being handled is causing God’s name to be slandered among the heathen (and the church).

I think if it were me, trying the case in the court of public opinion would hardly be satisfying anyway. Everything decently and in order. Isn’t that part of why we are Presbyterian? This is chaos.

**


**

Ok, a lot of people reading articles here at Spiritual Sounding Board are connected with the Torres-Manteufel versus Phillips lawsuit. This issue of how the public views Lourdes Torres-Manteufel is important.

These two ladies – Kelly Crawford and Stacy McDonald – are highly respected in Christian Homeschooling networks, so people who adhere to Patriarchy will be inclined to follow their voices.

  • What are your thoughts on their words?
  • What do you see in their comments?
  • Is Patriarchy a safe environment for women who’ve been sexually violated?

Try putting yourself in Lourdes’ shoes and consider taking a look at the entire Doug Wilson article for yourself – Vice, Victims, and Vision Forum – and the range of comments there. (Repeat: Trigger warning for survivors of abuse.) What words of support and encouragement would you have for Lourdes here, in response to the comments about her there?

**

442 thoughts on “Queen Bees of Homeschooling Stacy McDonald and Kelly Crawford Don’t Like the “Victim” Word in the Lourdes Torres-Manteufel vs. Doug Phillips Lawsuit”

  1. Taunya,

    Although I’ve heard the “prophet, priest, king” reference, this: “No longer having a direct line to Jesus but going through their husband as their priest” has never been taught in anything I’ve read, or heard or studied, most definitely not in my church.

    Like

  2. ” It takes the very good in a person — their highest and best — and uses it against them. ”

    Yes, their total trust. Their willingness to seek to understand. To believe the best. To be fair and non judgmental. People like this are walking targets for the narcissists and sociopaths in ministry.

    And it is worse for the young who know nothing else.

    Like

  3. The definition of priest says it all Kelly! No women needs a priest! A man goes directly to God through Jesus and a woman does as well. She does not need her husband to be her mediator nor does she need him to be her prophet. She can read Scripture and the Holy Spirit resides in her just as He does her husband, no need for a husband to be her prophet! And KING? Wasn’t that addressed in the Old Testament. None of us need a king, we have that in Christ.

    Like

  4. ” googled the verse….grabbed the bulk of it, and did NOT leave out “submit to one another.” That in no way negates what I did copy. Geesh, already. I didn’t even see that verse when I was copying.”

    And that is a problem. You see, in verse 21 where it says submit to one another…. the translators added the word “submit” to verse 22. It is not in the Greek. Check an interlinear. So Kelly, IF your husband is a believer, he is to submit to you, too. Same for your pastor if he is a true believer filled with the Spirit. It is mutual for believers and follows along with the 58 or so “one another’s” through the NT.

    Ignore chapter breaks and verses. it is a LETTER and should be read like one.

    Like

  5. Furthermore it is not “God’s will” for adult daughters to live in the homes of their fathers until marriage. There is nothing biblically wrong with young women attending college, working or living on their own. This is wrong and any woman falling for this as “God’s Word” is deceived. These are cult-like teachings must like the idea that women need to wear skirts and dresses for the sake of modesty or that it is wrong to limit the number of children one has.

    Like

  6. Lydia,

    I don’t mean I’ve never seen the verse, LOL! I know the Scripture, I just mean when I went in to copy and paste it, I didn’t grab that verse…I give up. Never mind. And like I said, I’ve studied it at length. I know what the mutual submission is about. That doesn’t negate the rest of it, and other passages.

    Like

  7. Taunya,

    “Furthermore it is not “God’s will” for adult daughters to live in the homes of their fathers until marriage. There is nothing biblically wrong with young women attending college, working or living on their own. This is wrong and any woman falling for this as “God’s Word” is deceived. These are cult-like teachings must like the idea that women need to wear skirts and dresses for the sake of modesty or that it is wrong to limit the number of children one has.”

    There again, our church doesn’t teach those things are wrong. There are adult women living on their own, working outside the home and going to college. And none of us only wears skirts.

    Like

  8. I must leave this conversation. My husband is making me. Just kidding. It is not the place I need to be putting my energy and strength. I fly to WA tomorrow and I need to prepare.

    I know that sin exists in every institution, in every place, in every form. I don’t believe churches who teach the simple exegesis of Ephesians, Genesis, and the rest of Scripture purposely plan to abuse women. I think abusers exist. Sin exists. Period.

    Like

  9. “And like I said, I’ve studied it at length. I know what the mutual submission is about. That doesn’t negate the rest of it, and other passages.”

    Verse 21 does not negate it. It explains it. And I have yet to meet a woman who will insist she does not want to be “respected”. :o)

    Another problem is that it seems the Philippian (and other places) couples were not told about these “roles” and “rules”. :o) Guess they did not apply to them?

    Reading scripture as a “how to” manual turns it into the letter of the law instead of the Spirit of Truth.

    Like

  10. Your church may not Kelly but you have been arguing this stuff on your blog for years. How many blogposts have you written about why it is biblical to forgo birth control? I remember many with 100’s and 100’s of comments, filled with heated discussion, following them.

    I do not know what your church believes I can only speak about what you have written Kelly. Perhaps over the years you have gotten a little carried away. Said some things a little too strongly, lifted up a personal conviction to the level of a biblical command, I don’t know. Maybe you may want to take a look at what you have written over the years and make a few disclaimers.

    Like

  11. You have to pay attention to wording. I am careful with my words. I say it is “wise” or something similar to that line of thinking, but I have never, said “it is not biblical” or “it is a sin.” In fact, I usually clarify it EVERY time I have a discussion like that. A careful reader will see that. And, admittedly, I may have used stronger words in my earlier years, when I had less wisdom.

    Like

  12. “I don’t believe churches who teach the simple exegesis of Ephesians, Genesis, and the rest of Scripture purposely plan to abuse women.”

    Simple? Are you not aware of the many interpretations of each one you mention above? Whose is right? Your pastor? Calvin? Me? Doug Wilsons? Joel Osteens? (oops, sorry, he does not use scripture much)

    Discussing them is healthy. There is nothing simple about understanding the 1st Century through our Western eyes.. Word meanings change. And Kephale was understood differently in the 1st Century than it is now. And that is HUGE when discussing that passage. It means we get it very wrong. Same with understanding Teshuqa in Gen 3.

    Nite.

    Like

  13. “I know that sin exists in every institution, in every place, in every form. I don’t believe churches who teach the simple exegesis of Ephesians, Genesis, and the rest of Scripture purposely plan to abuse women. I think abusers exist. Sin exists. Period.”

    Oh, ok. I get it. “Too bad, so sad.”

    Like

  14. Kelly, the name of your blog is disconcerting. I take it you don’t vote? “Feminists” went through quite a bit to secure the vote for us today.

    Like

  15. “Oh, ok. I get it. “Too bad, so sad.”

    Yes, it sounds much like the determinist god position.

    Like

  16. Kelly your words defending these practices have been VERY strong, leading many to feel they were not “mature Christians” if they did not agree and practice them as well. I will allow you to look over your posts, even years ago, and see what you think. You say you have changed and have “more wisdom” now. Do you think it may be wise to publically state how your beliefs have changed and why? Do you think it might be helpful to other homeschool moms who may have felt pressure to live up to this ideal you promoted so strongly? You said you are not a “queen bee” showing the world a perfect life. Do you see how strongly promoting extra-biblical practices as proof of maturity in Christ may have done just that?

    I am not asking you to give me an answer on these things, you don’t own me anything but perhaps these are things to bring before the Lord.

    Like

  17. Yikes! Does she hear herself? These responses on a spiritual abuse blog discussing sexual / pastoral abuse speak volumes!

    “Of course, abuse happens. But that’s only when men do NOT obey God’s word.” Kelly Crawford

    So we should EXPECT unbelievers to abuse? We should count on unbelievers to abuse because they aren’t faithful to God’s word? It’s a guarantee? Hide the kids from nonChristians? She is speaking total depravity here. Sorry, abuse is coming from WITHIN these camps. From leaders themselves!!! How is it unbelievers are disgusted by abuse more than some folks in these camps? Who really are the totally depraved ones? What about the unbelievers who don’t follow Christ AND don’t abuse? It doesn’t seem like she believes there is such a person. WOW! But I’ve heard this before: Only a professing Christian can do right…. Well, how many screaming examples do we need to know this isn’t true? Don’t be naïve, especially with your children.

    I disagree. It IS a formula, a system, a hierarchy being sold. A faulty one. The bubble needs to be broken. Reality is the dangers inside may be worse than what they are telling you is outside. IMO this is cult mentality: You are protected. It’s safe in here because we obey God’s Word. These leaders have got it right, all outside the camp have it wrong. Well, okay, at least MY man in the camp has it right. Hmmm.

    I observe a professing Christian the same way I would a professing unbeliever. With kindness, but understanding each can lie, cheat, steal, etc. if they want to. You’re less likely to be fooled that way. And if anyone goes off the rails, you are more likely to be objective. Every day each of us make choices for good or bad. Trust is earned. Someone’s actions tell you who they are, not their so-called beliefs. That is what we need to teach our kids.

    Like

  18. “And you’re right. I don’t know what it’s like, at all, to suffer spiritual abuse. The instructions God gives us from Scripture doesn’t allow for that, if we are obeying Him.” Kelly

    Suffering spiritual abuse yourself IS NOT a prerequisite for Christ-like compassion & justice & mercy. Those who stand against the spiritually abused stand with the abuser, IMO. I don’t care what else (and how lovely it sounds) comes out of their mouths.

    Like

  19. Ok, I have to catch up.

    You expect gentleness from me, but not from anyone else. I’m allowed to have a righteous indignation when I come across such defamatory statements by professing Christians.

    Kelly, please be careful with the “defamatory” talk. If you are saying that, then you are implying people are saying KNOWN untruths and with malice – the intent to harm. I do not believe that to be true at all.

    Can’t you see what kind of people you’re running with now? The evidence, the fruit, is so clear.”

    Wow, this is rude and condescending, Kelly.

    Like

  20. A wife should be able to tell her pastors about abuse and have them go directly to the authorities and help her. Unfortunately, I have heard of way too many instances where this does not happen. When I was a child, someone found out about the abuse in my home and went to the pastor. He then went to my parents and, of course they denied it. That was more traumatizing than the abuse itself. I had no one who valued me enough to help. We just want the church to be accountable and transparent.

    Exactly, loveoneanother. Excellent comment.

    Like

  21. “I know that sin exists in every institution, in every place, in every form. I don’t believe churches who teach the simple exegesis of Ephesians, Genesis, and the rest of Scripture purposely plan to abuse women. I think abusers exist. Sin exists. Period.” Kelly

    What would you call a hierarchy of authority in church & home where women know their role is to obey & submit so they suffer (financially/emotionally/physically/etc.) in silence? I have seen families destroyed by this system/structure/hierarchy.

    Are you saying abuse is unpreventable? You seem awfully indifferent & matter of fact about it. Reminds me of the Good Samaritan parable Jesus gave. Specifically: The priest (busy on his way) stepping over the dying, robbed man. I imagine the priest thinking, “Thieves exist. Sin exists. Period”.

    The question posed to Jesus was, “Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”. Jesus’ response? Jesus said, “Go and love like the Good Samaritan loved”.

    Like

  22. And you’re right. I don’t know what it’s like, at all, to suffer spiritual abuse. The instructions God gives us from Scripture doesn’t allow for that, if we are obeying Him. ”

    Sorry, I can see where that might be read wrong. What I mean is that when men are obeying God’s Word, there cannot be abuse, because he is “laying down his life” and imitating Christ.

    Thank you for clearing that up, Kelly. The converse is also true: if men are not obeying God’s Word, there can be abuse because he is “not laying his life” and imitating Christ. And that is the issue that we deal with here frequently – people who are so hurt by church abuse that they are having difficulty holding on to their faith. If you have not experienced this kind of pain, then perhaps read here a little while so you can see what we’re talking about. I’ve always been amazed how many people have a need to visit a place like this. Why is that? Is it because people enjoy complaining? No, it’s because people are trying to make sense what happened to them. They want to move on. They want to get back to their first love – the love that was destroyed or nearly destroyed by a wolf.

    Like

  23. I haven’t read most of this thread and I don’t intend to for various reasons. Likewise, I don’t intend to engage with anyone here because my days of allowing Internet conflicts to consume my time are over and gone. However, after someone sent me this link, I did read enough to see that I’ve been sorely misrepresented.

    All I would like to say is that I have NEVER even slightly protected, excused, minimized, or defended the actions of Doug Phillips against Lourdes, his family, the Church, and God. I have repeatedly said that what he did was reprehensible and that he should be held to account by the church. The entire ordeal has been deeply disturbing to me on a number of levels.

    Stating that I believe that it is possible Lourdes has something to repent of regarding Beall and her children in no way lessens the gravity of DP’s sin. In fact, as a leader and a minister of the Gospel, I contend that Doug Phillips has much more to answer for before God.

    I do believe that Lourdes has been used, harmed, and manipulated by the wicked desires of Doug Phillips. But I also believe that Beall and her children have been grievously sinned against by both Doug AND Lourdes, even though not to the same degree.

    That hardly means that I think Doug is “so wonderful” or “blameless,” as some here have said. Seriously?

    I find it ironic that my husband and I have been accused of supporting and defending Doug Phillips; when, in fact, we have not been in contact with him or Vision Forum for the past 4-5 years – for reasons I won’t get into. But the irony is there.

    But whatever.

    I simply would like to see Christians think through the ramifications of what seems to be a new “victim theology” – one that apparently thinks that as long as someone is a victim in some way, they are suddenly immune from being held accountable for any sin whatsoever. It creates an invincibility that no one should have. Separate subject, but still an issue.

    Lourdes was clearly manipulated and abused, but, even from her own account, we have not been told that she was restrained or forced. She was in love with him. And she was seduced and tempted with promises of his wife’s imminent death and the prospect of their future marriage. As a betrayed wife, I would find little comfort (or sympathy) in that fact.

    We have been told enough to know that she was seduced, used, and manipulated; and, she personally alleges that, at least on some occasions, she asked him to stop and he didn’t. I am praying that he will be properly held accountable for his actions, whatever the whole truth turns out to be. I am very glad that I am not the one in the position to judge it all.

    I feel sorry for this young woman and for what Doug Phillips has done to her life, but if she needs to repent as well, let her repent – don’t stand in the way of that. Because we should also feel sorry for Beall and for those innocent children – the victims no one seems to care about. I still can’t figure that out. I guess that’s what happens when people care more about being right (or an agenda) than they do about the real people who are suffering behind the scenes in real life.

    Like

  24. Thanks for stopping by Stacy.

    I need some help. Will someone please point out exactly what phrase or sentence I posted saying that Stacy or Kelly have excused, protected, minimized Doug Phillips’ roll in this sex scandal? I’m baffled as to why this has come up two times.

    And this:

    I find it ironic that my husband and I have been accused of supporting and defending Doug Phillips;

    Where is this, Stacy? On my article?

    Because we should also feel sorry for Beall and for those innocent children – the victims no one seems to care about. I still can’t figure that out. I guess that’s what happens when people care more about being right (or an agenda) than they do about the real people who are suffering behind the scenes in real life.

    Stacy, that’s rather presumptuous. At this blog, we concern ourselves with all victims. But if you’re going to blame Lourdes for not speaking out, do you excuse Beall for not speaking up when she knew what was going on for quite some time? I have posted testimony of Beall asking men to intervene when they went to Europe. That was long before Phillips stepped down from BCA.

    Like

  25. It is amazing to me, that it appears right here we have two breeds of patriarch teachings going on, within the same movement. Ha! I think the basics of the patriarch movement’s teachings are the same, but some people are ignorant to the underlying “doctrines” of the movement, just as what happens in other cults. That appears to be what is happening here in this comment portion.

    I do not know any woman in this movement, who has not been taught that her husband is the king and priest of her home and that he is in fact the go between for her and God. The woman is most definitely undermined and treated as less than the man. They use the excuse of “differing roles” for the basis of this treatment, thereby denying that the woman is less, saying her role is just different. However, most of these groups are very close to, if not cultic in nature, as they are legalistic and while they say they trust in God for salvation, they always have a list or two or twenty, with the rules for attending and maintaining a right/righteous stance before God.

    Home schooling is a mandatory requirement in some of these groups. The modesty issues are truly about women taking the responsibility for the sins of the men and if you listen closely, they will tell you this. They will say things like, “we are responsible not to lead our brothers into sin by the way we dress”, etc. This mindset, keeps these men hiding in their lust and perpetuates a legalistic view and lifestyle. There is always an element of truth in what they say, but just like satan loves to do, there is always a twist to it.

    I think it important to note, since we are addressing “unbelievers” or those who “do not obey the Word who abuse”, that one of these “Queen Bees” is a known spiritual and emotional abuser, by several people who have dealt with her. She claims to be a “victim of abuse” herself, but when compared to other victims of true abuse, she quickly esteems her abuse to have been “real and/or greater abuse”, while the other victims’ abuse, is negated, denied and downplayed by her, even though those same victims have experienced far greater abuse than “Queen Bee” claims to have suffered. She posts articles on being a victim and how women use and abuse this victim issue – yet claims herself to have bee a “victim” of abuse. She requires absolute proof of abuse from the victim, yet she has no “real proof” of any abuse having ever happened to herself. We are just supposed to believe her story, I guess because she is a “Queen Bee”, yet she has to be the abuse police for other victims. Victims have to provide her with proof and even then, she will deny that abuse is occurring. BUT, when she speaks of her own abuse, I guess she is to be believed, because…because why? Funny how true victims will believe her story, because we are just that – real victims of abuse – but she will not believe other women’s horrific stories of abuse, nor will she believe children when they tell her of the abuse. She claims to be a reliable source of information and counsel on the subject of abuse, yet for all intents and purposes, knows little to nothing about the real issues of domestic abuse. She has even made up her own categories for what abuse is and how she and her spouse determine what is abuse. Those standards do not fit with the professionals’ opinions and standards concerning abuse. The double-standards are the true “give away” as to what lies beneath this type of thought.

    Another example of this, besides her double standard for abuse, is that she has a tendency to only post comments on her blog, that are good for her and then criticizes other bloggers, for doing the same thing. The “Queen Bee” and her “Spouse”, do not allow victims to make their own determinations as to the abuse they are suffering in their own homes and when to flee for safety, “Queen Bee and Spouse” must decide that for the victims. The victim is not allowed to put the abuser out. The victim must allow the abuser to continue to abuse her and the children. They have a huge propensity for blaming the victim of abuse for “creating” fear in the children, as if children witnessing abuse and suffering their own abuse at the hands of the abuser, isn’t enough to make the children afraid! Just ridiculous! Only the “Queen Bee/Spouse” can decide if it is abuse. (They are also notorious liars and will lie all they need to, in order to cover their tracks.) The scenario, is that they run your home and they determine what goes on in your home and they determine when or if one can leave and flee for safety and – you got it – that is never going to happen. They tend to have immense power and control issues – even demanding from congregants lists of their friends they are speaking to; books they are reading; and even following congregants on FB to determine if their photos are appropriate to be posted or not – especially the younger females. The fathers are always contacted, even when the adult children are the ones that are being addressed for issues. Sons are not seen as men until they are at least 21 or 22 and daughters are forever under their father, until they are given away in marriage, as if to say the father’s property is now turned over to another owner. Very sick and godless theology. Lots of misuse of Scripture where these people are concerned.

    Like

  26. In response to Stacy McDonald’s comment, I believe there is an old post on her blog (unless she has removed it) addressing people flocking to this story, right after Phillips’ resignation. That sounds like defending Phillips, and protecting him, at least to me.

    Like

  27. Oh, to add, I believe that Doug Phillips refused to re-publish McDonald’s book and that is part of the reason that they broke contact with Phillips. I believe the other part of that had something to do with Phillips wanting McDonalds to put some kinists out of their “c”hurch and McDonalds refusing to do that. At least that is the story being told to several people.

    Like

  28. Here we go again – – that kinist subject. And see – when I thought I was getting into homeschooling years ago, I thought it was just about educating our children at home so that we could be their primary influencers and teach Bible, and invest in their lives.

    It’s interesting how along the way it became more about ideologies. There were the popular ones that everybody knows about: courtship, purity/modesty, full quiver, family-integrated churches, etc, but then dig a little deeper and you get the Kinist connection, Reconstructionism/Dominionism. Why do they leave that stuff out? Are they afraid of being honest with us? I really dislike dishonesty. It feels sneaky and disgusting.

    Like

  29. Seriously? LOL Okay – thank you for the confirmation of why I do NOT get into these fruitless online discussions…no more temptation here. Check out sometime, on the database of the mentally stable (or not), those who you allow to comment here. I recognize a scary person…

    truly.

    Like

  30. Gosh, I’m no lawyer, & I don’t pretend to know anything beyond “Business Law” at school, but if I were Lourdes’ lawyer, I think I’d be very, very tempted to put Kelly & Stacy up on the stand to babble on about how “wonderful” patriarchy is, and when they got through talking, I’d ask the jury “Hey, can you see now why my client stayed near the abuser so long? Because these women are an example of how their CULT would have treated Ms Torres-Manteufel if she had dared to breathe a peep to them about Doug Phillips Esquire (AKA “He Da MAN!!”) and his sexual predation.”
    ‘Cause basically, what I hear is Doug Wilson, Stacy MacDonald, & Kelly Crawford standing in the crowd screaming “Stone her!! Stone her!!!” right along with all the other scribes & pharisees.

    Like

  31. Stacy – Who are you addressing? Are you a mental health professional and if so, can you determine someone’s mental status by a comment or two? If not, then I feel your comment is out of line.

    Like

  32. Oh wow, I just read everything in one sitting. I appreciate all of you for writing so much of exactly what I think too, and great answers to Kelly and Stacy.

    I think it is just appalling that Lourdes involvement in this situation was brought up at all. It made me nauseous and it was triggering. I spent 15 years in silent agony, not telling anyone about date rape by a Bible thumper because of many of the same spiritually abusive teachings that he and I were raised with. I even kept dating the creep and it happened again. The healing didn’t come for me until I was 30 and for the first time I learned that their is not two sides to every story. My Christian counselor got me to see my behavior as separate from the rapist’s behavior. I always thought I had a part in my abuse because ‘I got myself ‘ ‘into the situation.’ Blech! What did Lourdes’ behavior have to do with Doug’s? Not unless it could be proven that she planned his downfall for his money or something, I think she is his victim plain and simple. I think wives want to place some blame on girls because to think that our own husbands could be capable of such utter rejection against us all by themselves is too much for our egos to handle.

    Like

  33. Patti, you are so right. It is necessary for those in this cult (& I use the word deliberately) to make up ways to blame the victim, in order to convince themselves that their own husbands are entirely incapable of acting like DP.
    It’s not just their egos talking, however; it’s also their worst nightmares. (I daresay that Beall Phillips would once have said all the same things about her husband…..and we see what happened there.

    God bless you on you road to healing.

    Like

  34. Wow, it got busy here last night! I have much respect for you all, staying gracious and yet relentlessly clear.

    I knew I inhabited JA’s threads for a reason w00t

    Like

  35. Stacy (22.9:57pm), in this comment, you attach to us a set of opinions that we don’t hold, and then knock them down. Doing that is non-productive.

    I’ll take the one in your last para:
    “…we should also feel sorry for Beall and for those innocent children – the victims no one seems to care about. I still can’t figure that out. I guess that’s what happens when people care more about being right (or an agenda) than they do about the real people who are suffering behind the scenes in real life.”

    You made the same complaint at Wilson’s blog and I specifically and clearly addressed it in a comment to you. Their wretched situation has been discussed here, too. You might have ignored my comment and you might not have read this blog, but to leap to a smear of us does you no credit.

    As to idea of “victim theology”, it is sad that this phrase is flung about in Christianity, a religion that, by it’s very name, celebrates the quintessential human victim, and the triumph of that victim over the damage in the world.

    The church would do well to recognize that it is in the being/process of victims (in their damage as well as in their paths to healing), that the central issues of our faith are made very clear. It is an apt metaphor which, if set next to the other metaphors in our faith, could bring us much needed depth and breadth.

    Like

  36. “Likewise, I don’t intend to engage with anyone here because my days of allowing Internet conflicts to consume my time are over and gone.”

    Which makes you a drive-by commentary. It’s your way or the highway. You’re right and no other voice is allowed. There’s Patriarchy right there. What more needs to be said?

    Like

  37. When you go back and read the old comments… Stacy you did defend DP and then you back peddled to cover your backside.

    Stacy and Kelly,

    Not trying to be hurtful but you talk out both sides of your mouth. Unless you know the facts or what this girl has been through maybe it would be wise to not go to a blog (namely DW blog) and publicly give your opinion in the first place, then you would not be in the position your in right now, just saying.

    Stacy, What if this was your daughter?

    Like

  38. “Check out sometime, on the database of the mentally stable (or not), those who you allow to comment here. I recognize a scary person…”

    Translation: “I can’t win in this environment where I can’t control what you people say or believe, so I’m just going to call you names and insult you. Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.”

    Like

  39. “Seriously? LOL Okay – thank you for the confirmation of why I do NOT get into these fruitless online discussions…no more temptation here. Check out sometime, on the database of the mentally stable (or not), those who you allow to comment here. I recognize a scary person…”

    This is usually how it goes in that movement and I hope those who are in it take a long look at the above comment. This is what it will be like for you if you ever go off the reservation. These are the tactics used. A vague poisonous gossipy dart meant to “deflect” from the issue at hand. It did not take long for the claws to come out.

    Stacy, Aren’t women of courage and truth usually more specfic?

    Actually, in my book you are the ‘scary’ one.

    Like

  40. I haven’t yet read the comments and I’m certain someone (many people) have already said this, but it bears repeating. If you think that talking publicly about issues of sexual abuse and exploitation is worse than said sexual abuse and exploitation, then you are a horrible person. The name of Jesus isn’t demeaned by ‘heathens’ (feel the love in the use of that word) because we talk about and try and address abuse within Christian circles, it’s demeaned when we suppress those issues, when we demonise the victims, when we care more about the reputation of the church than the hurt of those who suffered. There is no care, no compassion, no love of Christ in the words of McDonald, Crawford, or Wilson. None.

    Like

  41. In JA’s post, Stacy’s second comment is interesting. Her proposal for how Lourdes should handle herself contains a series of “ifs” that has little relationship to the actual situation, and then she ends it with a vague threat: “Besides, “everyone” is not going to believe her anyway.” That would certainly convince me of her proposal, yah.

    Stacy further writes: “I think if it were me, trying the case in the court of public opinion would hardly be satisfying anyway. Everything decently and in order. Isn’t that part of why we are Presbyterian? This is chaos.”

    I don’t know what Stacy’s satisfaction has to do with Lourdes, but she wants everything “decently and in orderly”. “Public opinion” is apparently indecent and disorderly. Am I spying a slip of elitist superiority?

    Anyway…Must. Keep. Chaos. At. Bay. This is a root of patriarchy, an intense phobia of the uncertain and the unknown. It is a defense mechanism against life. It tries to evade the requirement that we live by faith by foisting order onto things too big for us to understand, by forcing into simple hard structures all that is complex and messy.

    Legalism can never work because it is built on fear. Plus it encourages egotism in those who come to believe they have succeeded in rote obedience, encouraging them to think they can condemn others who they perceive to be less good than them. IMO, that’s why the rampant rudeness.

    Like

  42. joelfrederick,

    Both very good questions. Followers of Christ would do well to keep those questions in the very front of their thoughts and actions.

    JA I don’t like using B in my name. I just went through a wicked divorce from a very abusive man and changed my name. Is R available?

    [JA note: Absolutely! I don’t even know how we came up with B. I’ll change them.]

    Like

  43. Lydia, yes. I am glad these two women came here because their aggression, contempt, and bad logic make plain what people inside the system have to bear.

    And if all else fails for them, they smear people’s mental health. That’s the cherry on the nasty cake since those who have been abused in the church spend some time reeling in emotional, spiritual and mental pain, feeling like they’re going crazy.

    They act worse than the “scary” “heathen”, beginning to end. Pffft.

    Like

  44. “We cannot accuse Vision Forum of treating all women like little girls, and then turn around and treat all women as little girls who can’t be expected to say no to a cad at Vision Forum.”

    Absolutely true. But we are not treating “all women” as girls who cannot say no, only those who actually had a steady diet of patriarchy messages that tells them they should be obedient little girls. Women who do not have the resources, in the patriarchy enviroment, to get away from predators.

    “Since the first pieces started popping up on the scandal, I’m saying, “why is she a victim?” “I … was accused of not having sympathy for the “victim,” which no one can prove she was at this point.”

    If you actually read her words, you would see a lot of things she did not consent to and asked him to not do. Even with a narrow definition of victim, that makes her a victim, provided she speaks the truth.

    “I realize that the fact he was a Christian leader compounds the influence he had over her emotionally, but she still owns her own sin.”

    By Old Testament Patriarchy thinking, adultery is sexual activity with a woman who is someone else’s wife. Wives were not, in OT patriarchy, acquired by a ceremony, but by sleeping with an un-betrothed woman. If you did, you could be forced to marry her – with or without having other wives. As such, if a woman believe that a man is making a marriage commitment, she will not be in sin by going along with this marriage proposal. Under Old Testament law, she really did no wrong. And that is probably the teaching Lordes would have learned – Phillips did teach, from the Old Testament, that adulterers should be stoned. (And if he actually would have gone into a polygamous marriage with her, he would not, by OT law, have done wrong.) I reason from OT law here even though I do not follow it, because DP taught it, and am considering the actions of both participants by what he taught, and probably would have taught her.

    “Any time an insecure young woman is cajoled into a sexual relationship by a man – especially a married man, she is being used and taken advantage of. … it happens all the time …That is part of the reason men are called to protect women…”

    Foxes eat chickens all the time. That is why foxes are called to protect the henhouse, and why we teach our chickens to obey foxes.

    “if she had not gone to the media, but instead sought Christian arbitration; and, if her family, her church, and the people in her community all wound up believing her, wouldn’t that be enough?”

    No. People should be judged by their fruit. And everything that is covered shall be revealed. (Luk. 12:2)

    “the way it is being handled is causing God’s name to be slandered among the heathen”

    Is it “the way this is handled” that causes the slander, or “what he did” that causes it. Suppose something like this happened and it was treated in another way with only a few heathen hearing of it, which told it to their friends and the Internet secondhand. Or suppose the exact opposite happened and a Christian leader was totally honorable, and this totally honorable behaviour was leaked to the media and handled this way. I suggest the bad behaviour, not the way the behaviour was handled, is the cause of any blasphemy.
    That is to say, provided there is blasphemy. Right now, I cannot think of one person cursing God. I can think of people cursing Patriarchy or even Christians, but not God.

    Like

  45. “Lydia, yes. I am glad these two women came here because their aggression, contempt, and bad logic make plain what people inside the system have to bear.”

    Yes. This is what friends of mine refer to as the “big fish in a small pond” syndrome. In their own circles these women have “position” and people listen to them. They get special privileges being married to leaders in these movements. However, take them out of the adulation of their pond, and, lo and behold, people have the audacity to question and critique their point of view. They can’t handle it. Out come the claws.

    Like

  46. After reading Stacy’s replies – which are terrifying in their own way – I feel the need to modify my original statement.

    I initially stated that I thought most of the voices of women who were condemning Lourdes were women who were deeply afraid of how this could affect their lives.

    In Stacy’s case, I was very wrong. I see no evidence of reflection, humility, sympathy or even pity for Lourdes from Stacy. I do see a lot of defensiveness, arrogance and condemnation which do not make the list of Christian virtues.

    Like

  47. Lydia said, “This is usually how it goes in that movement and I hope those who are in it take a long look at the above comment. This is what it will be like for you if you ever go off the reservation. These are the tactics used. A vague poisonous gossipy dart meant to “deflect” from the issue at hand. It did not take long for the claws to come out.”

    So true. In this movement, if you bring the truth, or speak about a “problem”, you become “the problem”. This is a sure sign of SPIRITUAL ABUSE. A good read for the “REAL” problem gong in here, is “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse”. Once you confront the real problem, (ie in this dialogue, Stacy and Kelly) then YOU become the problem. They are so spiritually blind, that they cannot see their error.

    Stacy’s comment that Julie should decide “who” to allow to comment on her blog, because she sees someone “scary”, is Serious Power/Control Issues 101. That statement, to healthy people, is a huge red flag. In other words, Stacy is declaring herself to be a mental health expert, although she has no training. She apparently can diagnose someone, without even knowing them. Like here, she can know what Lourdes should feel and do, even though she has no expertise in this area- at all! It also proves the comment above that states that Stacy only publishes comments on her blog that are good for her and that she thinks will promote her. She obviously screens her comments on her blog – not posting those that would confront her serious issues.

    If Stacy had been thrown one of those same “vague poisonous gossipy darts”, it would have been determined to be the sin of gossip and if it had come from someone within the “c”hurch, you can pretty well bet, that person would have been brought before the elders, to face their punishment for saying anything about the infamous woman – even if she was at fault. No leveling the playing field when it comes to infamous men and women. Hence her response here.

    Now I shall have to address the whole “leveling the playing field with abuse” issue that appears to exist in Stacy’s comment as well. Is this just a Presbyterian CPC denomination doctrine, that her and her husband started, or do all people believe this? I think what she is saying here, is that if someone is raped, then that someone needs to repent for their part in the rape. Saying that in the context of this situation, is like saying that a 7 year old who has been groomed by a predatory uncle for years, is guilty of some form of sin, when that same uncle finally molests the child. The list Stacy provides would most likely include that the child should have reported it or gotten away from the predator. She may also say that the child loved her uncle, and for some reason, after years of grooming, that would be the child’s fault. She should have known better. Move it up the age scale, and that is what you have here with Lourdes. A man, in a position of power, who grooms his victim for years, indoctrinates her mind in the ways of cultic patriarchy, promises her rose gardens after his wife dies, then waits for her to become of age, so she can be considered an adult and blamed by the Stacy McDonalds of the world, and then molests and sexually abuses her for years, all because he has that kind of power over his victim. This not only happens in these kind of sexual abuse situations, but men in positions of power in “c”hurches, also abuse the sheep and then blame and shame the sheep. While Stacy seems to want to make this into a “his blame/her blame” game and also into an adult woman with an adult man, that is not the case here at all. Any person who has an ounce of psychological sense, can see it clearly. While Stacy tries to spiritualize this mess, there is no Spirit here at all. This is just one lost man, abusing a woman, beginning when she was just a young daughter.

    If this had in fact been one of Stacy’s or Kelly’s daughters, you all know the situation would be much different, than what it is here now. I agree with the comment above, that we are dealing with an “elitist” mindset here.

    Like

  48. @JulieAnne:

    Here we go again – – that kinist subject.

    Isn’t “Kinism” just a Christianese coat of paint over Aryan Master Race White Supremacy?

    Like

  49. “I have enormous sympathy for those who are abused.”

    Gosh you have a strange method of demonstrating that sympathy, why if I didn’t know about your profoundly enormous sympathy, merely based upon your actions here and on Mr. Wilson’s blog, I think I’d assume you had little or no sympathy. I’d even assume you were just piling on and contributing to the abuse of a young lady who was groomed for exploitation by a malignant narcissist from the time she was a child, then subsequently defiled in a most repulsive and vicious way. Thanks so much, Ms Crawford, for clearing that one up.

    Like

  50. @BTDT re a commenting Queen Bee:

    “Check out sometime, on the database of the mentally stable (or not), those who you allow to comment here. I recognize a scary person…”

    Translation: “I can’t win in this environment where I can’t control what you people say or believe, so I’m just going to call you names and insult you. Nanny, nanny, boo, boo.”

    Or: “I am always Right and You are Always WRONG and once you realize I Am Always Right and YOU are Always WRONG and agree with me in everything, we won’t have a problem, Will We?”

    Like

  51. Julie Anne, I posted the following at Doug Wilson’s site yesterday, in response to Angela’s comments, to underscore the fact that since even the state of California acknowledges that some fiduciary (trust-based) relationships are so lopsided, that current clients/patients (and I’ll add congregants) are not only sexually off-limits, but most even remain off-limits, despite their “adult” status.

    Kelly, a quick perusal of California law (Business and professions Code 729) reveals that even the government acknowledges that professional “fiduciary responsibilities” exist which means that the trust inherent in some professional relationships absolutely prohibits any sexual involvement between patient/client and physician/therapist/counselor. Some professional relationships are in fact so lopsided in the trust/authority realm that sexual contact is prohibited or restricted with FORMER patients/clients. An excerpt from this statute:

    Any physician and surgeon, psychotherapist, alcohol and
    drug abuse counselor or any person holding himself or herself out to
    be a physician and surgeon, psychotherapist, or alcohol and drug
    abuse counselor, who engages in an act of sexual intercourse, sodomy,
    oral copulation, or sexual contact with a patient or client, or with
    a former patient or client…is guilty of sexual exploitation.

    So if you’re saying the competence and scope of “pastor” does not rise to that of an alcohol and drug abuse counselor, you have a point. But if you maintain that Douglas Philips did not break the law because his victim was a legal adult, you have maintained that the Church is exempted from a responsibility that secular professionals willingly hold themselves to. I hate it when the “world” rightfully makes the church look really, really bad.

    Like

  52. “I have enormous sympathy for those who are abused.”

    Word-for-word Party Line of abusers and their enablers/courtiers.

    Sociopaths like to ooze Concern and Compassion and Sympathy(TM). Nobody is as Concerned as a sociopath, as Compassionate as a sociopath, as Sympathetic as a sociopath, as Sincere as a sociopath. Until the instant you have outlived your usefulness.

    Like

  53. “Check out sometime, on the database of the mentally stable (or not), those who you allow to comment here. I recognize a scary person…”

    There you go. Knew that one was coming.

    Like

  54. Maybe that person is “scary” to Stacy, because they are telling the truth? In the patriarch’s world, anyone who eventually tells the truth about the abuse they suffered at the hands of their pastor/wife or elder/wife or leadership people, gets labeled, “rebellious” “unbelieving” “non-submissive” “mentally unstable” or “scary”. Just watch, that will probably happen to Lourdes at some point too. It is just another attempt to cover up the truth and make the victim take the blame and shame for the perpetrator’s abuse.

    Like

  55. You know, Patriarchy has had a platform in the Homeschool Movement for the last 2+ decades. I am certain there were many who went to the conferences because they were labeled as Christian and the topic was homeschooling. There were no other options for conferences, a place to connect with families from across your own state, to put your hands on and peruse homeschool curricula, to meet these brave parents who had been homeschooling their own kids before there were safe laws in effect. They were the bold and brave and we got to hear from them. We also got to hear/learn about Patriarchy there. And then the homeschool magazines and homeschool forums also perpetuated the same Patriarchy message.

    Women like Stacy and Kelly somehow got in the public spotlight to continue talking from a platform = whether that platform was at a conference (like Kelly is enroute to today in my own state of WA) or an online platform in the form of a blog, forum, etc. Many of us changed to look more like them, thinking since they were doing the homeschooling (the right way), surely their other ideologies must be right. (That was a mistake on my part – not standing on my own 2 feet and relying on God’s word to guide me, rather than man.)

    Take a look at Steadfast Daughters, a blog where both Stacy and Kelly contribute:

    These are the categories:
    A Biblical Self Image
    Abuse
    Biblical Authority
    Book Reviews
    Grace and Forgiveness
    Legalism
    Parenting
    Quiverfull

    These are the popular article titles:

    All that Quivers is not Told
    Christy’s Review
    Should “She, Obey Him?”
    What is Abuse?
    When All You Have is A Hammer
    A Future and a Hope
    Legalism: Yours, Mine, and Ours
    My Parents are Sinners, Too!

    Their agenda is out there and plain for all to see.

    James and Stacy McDonald have been keynote speakers at the following conferences.

    APHEA – Alaska State Convention
    Christian Heritage – Washington State Convention
    Covenant Presbyterian Church – California Family Camp
    Renewing the Family – New Mexico
    MCHE – Montana State Convention
    NTHEN – North Texas Convention
    NICHE – Iowa State Convention
    MCHE – Missouri State Convention
    INCH – Michigan State Convention
    CHEF-AL – Alabama State Convention
    Mass HOPE – Massachusetts State Convention
    LEAH – New York State Convention
    CHENH – New Hampshire State Convention
    OCHEC – Ontario Province Convention

    You only get to be a Keynote speaker when the ideology of your talk matches up with the ideology of the leaders at the homeschool group. Stacy and James have been highly influential in the homeschool arena for years, having published a popular homeschool magazine.

    Here is Stacy’s blog: Your Sacred Calling. Her current article is her husband’s on Patriarchy. Further down she has an article on having glee when a leader falls. Where did we hear that from? Doug Wilson. He had posted about the Phillips story and linked the glee part to my blog. Are we gleeful here about moral failure? Is that what we do?

    Like

  56. The definition of priest says it all Kelly! No women needs a priest! A man goes directly to God through Jesus and a woman does as well. And KING?

    This statement made me think of RC Sproul JR’s response after his daughter (Darby) just got married. He commented on a wedding photo of the new couple and said “Darby and her lord” sigh.

    I just want to come in here and say…….we go to a FIC church. We have visited several others (SB, TN). We have NOT been to BCA, but we have many many connections there. Deep & close connections. Let me just say here……that NOT all FIC’s are the same. Not all are quiverfull minded and extreme with the modesty (or dresses only). Not all are daughters staying home and no college. Believe it or not, not all are extreme like BCA. BCA IS extreme. There are several copycats (SB, Geoff Botkin in TN) but they still aren’t as extreme as BCA. So please be careful of doing a “broad brushed” assessment of the NCFIC movement. Not all of them have people like Doug…….that sue people at a blink if they don’t obey etc. Not all make you sign a covenant or if you leave the church, they make it impossible to worship anywhere else.

    Although I do not agree with what Kelly C said, I do think we have to be careful of making rash judgments that they are the same as BCA & DP. We have interacted with many of the heavy hitters in the movement and there are some that are trying to be like Doug but many that aren’t.

    Also, about Lourdes. Stacy & Kelly can make their opinions known but they are definitely on the outside circle and I don’t believe they know really how BCA and Doug works with the spiritual abuse. Like you said JA, you could tell by Kelly’s statement that she really doesn’t understand what it means to be under control by your abuser. We have also met and talked to Lourdes & her family. I still don’t know WHY that the Torres family would have given permission for her to live in the DP home but that should have never happened.

    another thing as well………..yes Doug is guilty………but he has told more LIES than anything. He is going to purge himself (saying that it was “mostly emotional and through the internet”)………this is going to be interesting. VERY interesting.

    Oh and another thing (lol), Lourdes DID tell him to stop. MANY times, she told him no (can you say rape?). Doug kept going while he was fulfilling his adult p*rn fantasy………but that’s Doug. Doug has lived in a perpetual state of fantasy with all of these trips, trips to the moon…………..all about Doug. Not about his family, his church, his business OR the interns (with NO supervision)…….it’s been about Doug. A true Narcassist.

    Like

  57. HUG, you said: “Sociopaths like to ooze Concern and Compassion and Sympathy(TM). Nobody is as Concerned as a sociopath, as Compassionate as a sociopath, as Sympathetic as a sociopath, as Sincere as a sociopath. Until the instant you have outlived your usefulness”.
    Isn’t that the truth? Funny how some folks show up, make a drive-by post (or 167 of the same), & then whine about how “scary” we are when we answer them back. But they are pleased to hang out with a bunch of _________[MOD removed words] like DP, and never bat an eye.

    Like

  58. IMB:

    The instability…scary accusation is a very common method of abusers or enablers. I’ve seen it so many times, you come to expect it (see my comment just above). Normally, people don’t react that way, even when pushed to the limits in a debate, they only start suggesting mental instability when given ample evidence, when seeing that the pattern of behavior they’re considering fits within a common pattern of those whom they’ve previously known to be mentally unstable or “scary”. For example, the many who are suggesting Mr. Phillips might be personality disordered are doing so on the basis of ample documented evidence.

    Unless someone is truly irrational, making no sense at all, you just don’t do that, just don’t call them “crazy” or “scary” based on a few posts, even posts that are condemning you personally. But certain types of people do, those who are abusive do it out of a sense of sadism and self-preservation (have experienced that personally when confronting some really abusive church leaders, they do it to defame you, they do it out of pleasure).

    Those who are supremely insecure do it also when confronted with something that truly disturbs them, that nagging voice they’ve tried to suppress, the one telling them they’re wrong and foolish and misguided, they’re putting themselves in harm’s way, those they love as well, the one that’s now echoing through some post on a blog. And you project onto the posters your own discomfiting feelings of insecurity, instability. Just a hunch that this is what we’re getting from Ms McDonald and Ms Crawford.

    Like

  59. Just to comment concerning Stacy’s comment about her diagnosis of someone being mentally unstable.

    Jesus was also thought to be mentally unstable and crazy, was thrown out of the church, was mocked and ridiculed for telling the truth, and was eventually put to death for His claims. I feel right at home. Being persecuted and abused by Pharisees and false teachers in positions of power, for having true faith, is hard, But I rejoice to have been one who has shared in the sufferings of my Savior. He has been great comfort and strength to me and I pray and know that He will be that to Lourdes as well, and to all who write here, who have experienced these same forms of abuse. Spiritual leaders should be able to be trusted. When they cannot be trusted, in God’s Book, they are NOT His spiritual leaders at all, but false teachers/shepherds who have crept in and placed themselves in a position of power. These false teachers never repent for their sin nor own their abuse of the sheep.

    Like

  60. EnoughOppression, from over here in the Methodist amen corner, may I say AMEN!! and again, AMEN!!!

    Like

  61. Truth Detector. Thanks for this. I can see now, that is exactly what is going on. I have suffered heinous abuse at the hands of McDonald, but have yet to tell my full story. I think you are right. There is abusiveness there and her response is to label someone “crazy” or “mentally unstable”, so that others will not listen to the victim when they tell the truth.

    I did not know it, but I now know and see that this is very common in domestic abuse as well as church spiritual abuse. The abuser starts a chain of “my spouse (or the congregant) is mentally unstable”, so that others will not believe her claims. The victim has kept silence for decades and when she finally breaks that silence, the abuser has much to fear and the only way to stop her claims from being heard and believed, is to say that she is “crazy”, “mentally ill”, etc. I think that is exactly what McDonald is doing here as well. Thanks for the input.

    Like

  62. JA wrote: “Further down she has an article on having glee when a leader falls. Where did we hear that from? Doug Wilson. He had posted about the Phillips story and linked the glee part to my blog. Are we gleeful here about moral failure? Is that what we do?”

    Exactly. People who spread this codswollop reveal themselves to be lovers of power above all else.

    They do not think enough of those who were damaged to be glad when justice finally begins. They are not relieved that more people will not be damaged. They are not happy that, finally, a wound in the church can be cleaned, and healing can begin so that we all can get on with our work.

    No, they think the *only* Christian emotion is sadness for the fallen leaders. “How awful that these leaders have to be so humiliated! We shouldn’t talk because we are just like them! They should be given utmost privacy to repent. It doesn’t matter that the destructiveness has spilt across denominations and the internet–it’s a personal matter. We must forgive them the minute they send out an odor of possible regret.”

    “Oh no,” they say, “how will these men now make livings for their families?” It doesn’t occur to them that those damaged may have lost their ability to support/maintain families through no fault of their own. They don’t consider that their primary responsibility is to support their damaged brothers/sisters, and help them back on their feet.

    They say, “When can we have the pastors come back? He brings God’s word!” It never even enters their minds to ask, “What do we need to learn from these damaged people who have had to learn terrible lessons in such painful ways?”

    Like

  63. IamMyBeloved’s:

    I thought her “crazy” accusation was simply a lazy method of insulting the other people who posted on this site.

    Using the “crazy” accusation as a power-play against people she has hurt isn’t lazy – it is callous, vindictive, manipulative and sadistic.

    If this is what the leaders of this movement are like, I am deeply afraid for their followers.

    Like

  64. Quite honestly, both Kelly & Stacy McD need to understand what “grooming” is. I highly recommend a book called “Confessions of a pedophile”…….a powerful book on the subject. Unfortunately, the things that abusers say are almost identical. This is once again ANOTHER case associated with Moscow, ID! ANOTHER ONE!

    I was molested as a young teen. A man living under my parent’s roof, paying his rent by helping with the remodeling of our home, in training at Greyfriar’s Seminary to become a pastor , groomed me, sexually abused me, and molested me from the time I was 13 until I was 16 years old. He was 10 years older than me. A true monster; I was made to feel worthless, as though no one but he would ever love me. I was told that if I ever told anyone, it would ruin his life because people simply wouldn’t understand what we shared. I became an expert at lying to my parents. I was forced into sexual acts time and time again that no young girl should ever be subjected to.

    http://natalierose-livewithpassion.blogspot.com/2010/07/no-more-tape-over-my-mouth.html

    I think Stacy is getting SO much flack that she’s back peddling and digging herself under that huge hole she has gotten herself into!

    Like

  65. notsurprised: For both Kelly and Stacy to post the victim-blaming comments and thanking Doug Wilson for his article really says it all for those of us who understand systems of abuse. Wilson is connected with 2 cases of sex abuse and wrote the book on marital rape telling people that in the marital bed a man conquers and penetrates and the wife surrenders and accepts. I’m sorry, but really, do we need to say much more than that?

    If they want to align themselves with this kind of trash, allow women to continue to be abused in their own homes because of his words as a church leader, then they will have to answer for their own words. Taunya is right – they are brainwashed into this ideology that has become far more important than real people. Jesus was not like that. He heard about someone in mourning and he went to them. He stopped everything to comfort those who needed comforting. I want to be like Jesus.

    Like

  66. “I just want to come in here and say…….we go to a FIC church. We have visited several others (SB, TN). We have NOT been to BCA, but we have many many connections there. Deep & close connections. Let me just say here……that NOT all FIC’s are the same.”

    I think notsurprised makes a very good point here. I would add that not all Pentecostal, Baptist, Reformed (don’t flame me), Catholic, or (insert denomination) churches are the same. I hope I can pull my thoughts together for this comment.

    I’ve spent the last few days watching some of the safety videos on MInistrySafe dot com. I doubt many people, including myself, are fully aware of just how prevalent abuse is in our churches. I listened to the measures that Greg and his wife outline as necessary to protect, primarily, children. IMO, most authoritarian churches with a central locus of control are never going to implement such measures, because it decentralizes the control factor. For instance, nobody should be exempt from the screening process because they were grandfathered in or because of their “position.” My former cult would never go for such preventative measures. They are automatically a risky institution. You don’t just say. “Abuse happens. Period.” You ask, “What can we do to minimize the risks? When it does occur, what are the proper steps to take?” Why wouldn’t a Christian, or anybody, be willing to do that?

    Some churches are obviously taking proactive measures. Some churches do care. I may or may not agree with all of their theology, but that’s not the point. Do they care enough to protect people? Do they care for people? Or are they simply controlling people? I think Patriarchy leans toward the latter. That makes it a risk. Period. That doesn’t mean every person in a Patriarchal church will experience abuse. It just means there is an increased risk.

    Like

  67. notsurprised – WHOA!!!! Your story is horrific. I’m so sorry to hear of what abuse you went through and then to have your family, church, and court system betray you. I don’t understand why this happens so much. I went back to read the comments and was shocked to read that this happened at Doug Wilson’s church. Would you be okay if I shared your story in a blog article? If so, can you contact me by e-mail in case I have more questions? Your story must be told. This is ridiculous. First the Sitler story of Wilson marrying a pedophile and now this? UNBELIEVABLE!!!

    Like

  68. “I was molested as a young teen.”

    notsurprised, is that your story? Hugs to you. I am so sorry that perv did that to you.

    Like

  69. JA: just to clarify……this was NOT my story. This is ANOTHER story that I found that is linked to the one and only DW…………YES I am hoping that you do another blog/post story about DW…………This poor girl (Natalie Rose) has endured enough and needs our support………I am completely flabbergasted that there’s a pattern here with Doug Wilson (and people still listen to and support the man???? big sigh). Not only that I was struck by one of another comments on the blog:

    “Now I see him once every week or two and though I no longer attend the church in which it all took place, many of the friends I still associate are friends with he and his family. While on facebook today I received an invitation to attend the baptism celebration for his most recent child. Years ago, I received letters from the church after I left telling me I was under church discipline and could no longer take communion there, meanwhile my abuser was welcomed back into the fold with open, loving arms…And people wonder why I left.”

    Like

  70. Regarding Ms McDonald and Ms Crawford, one has to wonder about the mindset of one who blows in here, acts that way, accuses others of instability, crazy, scariness, one who makes so many strawman arguments, uses so much ad hominem, talks about themselves in such glowing terms–their house is a house of laughter and love and all things wonderful, they are “a normal, loving, compassionate person….” Folks, who refers to themselves in that manner? I have never known a Christian, or at least one who I believed to be a Christian, even one under attack, vicious attack, ever refer to themselves in that way.

    I’ve never heard anyone refer to their house in that way. People who have a bit of honesty and self awareness do not refer to themselves in that way, they’re more like “My house? Oh my goodness it’s madness. My kids drive me nuts. And I yell yell yell. But thank God He loves me and them in spite of ourselves.” That’s more like what I would associate with a Christian response. It sure sounds a lot more like what Paul thought of himself in Romans 7.

    Just an indication of what we’re dealing with. The fraud of it all.

    Like

  71. I want to thank Kelly for stopping by. I do not know her, but I think she is feeling somewhat hurt and confused about statements made about her. I don’t sense an aggressive spirit in her as much as a desire to defend her lifestyle and family. I do not agree with her opinions, but don’t feel she wants to disparage Lourdes (unless I missed something!). I think it is a form of self protection, a way to feel immune to the possibility of something similar happening in her family. Stacy, on the other hand seems more harsh in her views. I tried to ask her questions and commented on her site last week. She wouldn’t publish it or respond, whereas JA is gracious enough to allow her to rant over here. Stacy seems to have a take no prisoners approach and limited empathy to victims. Yes Stacy, there is a “victim mentality” in our culture, but that doesn’t lessen the trauma experienced by real victims. You seem to group both together. There seems to be a detachment towards Lourdes’ pain. I understand the pain of adultery, but Lourdes broke no vows. “Cheating is not about who you lie with, but whom you lie to.” I would hesitate to group Kelly and Stacy together. However, Doug is a lying, cheating waste of space and I hope justice is served! 🙂

    Like

  72. Ok, thanks for that clarification, notsurprised. I think I just left a comment there. I better go back and check. I really would like to cover this story and get more details.

    Thanks for bringing this to my attention. So, are we noticing a pattern yet?

    Like

  73. I’m glad Kelly and Stacy spoke up publicly…it allows the many of us quietly following these matters to know to stay far, far away from any place they are speaking or writing and to encourage anyone we know to do the same.

    In what I would read as a bid for prestige and influence within their own tiny and insignificant community, they have totally lost all credibility anywhere else.

    “But the way it is being handled is causing God’s name to be slandered among the heathen (and the church)” They are talking about themselves.

    In the book of Esther, Hamaan proudly and presumptuously prepared a punishment for another. But it turned out to be his own hanging.

    Like

  74. “I thought her “crazy” accusation was simply a lazy method of insulting the other people who posted on this site.

    Using the “crazy” accusation as a power-play against people she has hurt isn’t lazy – it is callous, vindictive, manipulative and sadistic. ”

    That, it is. It was also done to me without my knowledge in an email to over 100 people. All because I would not go along with a high level power play in a seeker mega church. I would not take sides in the behind the stage stuff so I was not a “team player”. The only reason I knew about the email sent out the day after I left is because ONE person on the list actually sent it to me to ask what happened.

    And it is quite a powerful method of marginalization if done with feigned concern. “She is emotionally unstable right now and we ask you pray for her as we are very concerned”.

    I guess I am naïve because such a tactic would never have occurred to me from those quarters. I really thought such people would fear God more than that!~ I really can understand people who respond to such things wrongly but I will NEVER understand “Christians” who proactively premeditate such evil to poison the well against someone personally.

    It is evil on steroids because it uses Jesus to perpetuate evil. This is not just sinners saved by grace who are sinning folks. It is premeditated evil in the Name of Jesus. Why more people do not find that “scary” I do not know. It is not Christianity.

    Such a tactic was very popular in the USSR. They used it with dissidents and party leaders in power struggles. It is weird to recall reading history and then seeing such tactics done in the Name of Jesus.

    Whoever Stacy was talking about here if you exist, I have your back.

    Like

  75. I’ve just updated the Resource post on the lawsuit with some additional material plus sources on “Bounded Choice” (thanks for your overview comments, Cindy K!). I find the following new quote on “Total Institutions” relevant to the issue in this thread of labeling people with mental disorders.

    * * * * * *

    See also the Wikipedia article on the Asylums book. This quote from Loren Mosher, another critique of the 1950s version of mental asylums as a total institution, is quite telling about some of the critical techniques used to achieve subjugation to the system:

    American psychiatrist Loren Mosher noticed that the psychiatric institution itself gave him master classes in the art of the “total institution”: labeling, unnecessary dependency, the induction and perpetuation of powerlessness, the degradation ceremony, authoritarianism, and the primacy of institutional needs over those of the persons it was ostensibly there to serve-the patients.

    Like

  76. And while I’m at it, if a technique used in “total institutions” is labeling as “mentally ill,” that potentially leads right into “gaslighting,” a more active form of conditioning a person to think they truly are mentally ill. From the Wikipedia article on Gaslighting:

    Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making a victim doubt his or her own memory, perception and sanity.[1] Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.

    Like

  77. Natalie’s story is so horrific, first in the abuse and second in how the church failed her. I note that Doug Wilson sat on the abuser’s side of the courtroom not with Natalie. Boz Tchividjian says that in his career as a prosecutor, NOT ONCE did he and his colleagues ever see a clergyman sitting with the victim and his or her family; it was always with the perpetrator and his.

    Like

  78. Marsha,

    That is exactly why we who have been abused don’t tell. Why go through the abuse all over again when your pastor doesn’t even believe you.

    Like

  79. “Boz Tchividjian says that in his career as a prosecutor, NOT ONCE did he and his colleagues ever see a clergyman sitting with the victim and his or her family; it was always with the perpetrator and his.”

    This. Breaks my heart.

    No wonder this community is undergoing such a housecleaning. God is not mocked.

    Like

  80. Brad/futuristguy: this — “Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making a victim doubt his or her own memory, perception and sanity.[1] Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim”

    — is exactly what has happened to me, over and over again. There were many other abuses as well, but I think this was these particular abusers’ favorite one. I am very familiar with gaslighting. It also can involve painting a picture for others, with false information or half truths provided by the abusers about the victim, and then making out like the victim is crazy, and spreading that lie around – but the truth is, only a portion of the story is presented by the abusers, and it is a set up a/k/a a witch-hunt, meant to keep the victim quiet, so that no one else will believe the truth. I actually wrote an article about this over at a Cry For Justice blog. Thanks for reminding me, that it is happening all over again – here today.

    One day, I am going to tell my story, because I believe God wants it known.

    Like

  81. One day, I am going to tell my story, because I believe God wants it known.

    It’s very powerful to share your story. If you’d like me to share it here, you know where to find me. In your time, though.

    Like

  82. CindyK:
    Earlier today, I explained the concept of Bounded Choice to a reporter. Those who are not raised in a high demand setting don’t realize all of the internal resources, experience and encouragement that that they take for granted — things that are never afforded to people who grew up with blanket training and other types of high control environments. When all major decisions are governed by parents and are submitted for their approval, young people fail to develop the experience and full ability to discern matters for themselves. Under extreme stress, they tend to freeze like a deer in the headlights — which is actually an adaptive response that helps them survive trauma.

    This makes so much sense! I can see why I was attracted to this lifestyle — I was raised by very controlling parents. Doesn’t matter whether they were believers or not — as a matter of fact, they weren’t — but they were certainly control freaks. Even as an older adult, I have a terrible time making a decision, and am often frozen by doubt or fear of making the wrong choice.

    Thank you for this insight.

    Like

  83. I was 21 before I finally told my parents that I had been molested by a family member. Why? Because, as victim, you take responsibility for what happened to you. And you think, “If I tell, I’ll be responsible for destroying that person’s life.” Of course, that’s a lie. They are responsible for their actions and the consequences. But, it takes a LONG time. A very LONG time to understand that you are not responsible for what happens to that person when you tell. They, and only they, are responsible. But, you might face repercussions and need to be prepared.

    I remember in college my roommate and I had about 20 of us girls packed into our apartment. One of every three of us has either been raped or molested. One third! Think about that as you go through your day. 1 of every 3 or 4 girls you see has been sexually abused.

    One of my friends the abuse was on-going, and I finally got her to go to the police and get a protection order. She did. He violated it, by coming to our apartment while she was staying there for a quiet place to study. Let’s just say the police were not very nice to him when I called. She wouldn’t call.

    We have got to have each other’s back. We have got to help and support the victims. We have to bring this into the light – not only in the church, but in society as a whole. We have to talk about how bad and rotten and evil this is. I think we need to do a better job exposing this problem to EVERYONE. It seems to me society as a whole does not talk about this problem very much either. Maybe they do in public schools, but not when I was in school. It wasn’t until I saw an after-school special at 14 that I began to understand what had happened to me was wrong. And then, I was so confused and ashamed I didn’t tell. And it wasn’t until college that I realized I needed help dealing with it.

    Like

  84. “Boz Tchividjian says that in his career as a prosecutor, NOT ONCE did he and his colleagues ever see a clergyman sitting with the victim and his or her family; it was always with the perpetrator and his.”

    I have an old college friend who happens to be a judge. He is also an atheist. He once asked me how it is the Christians pack the courtrooms over zoning hearings for porn shops but then come to court to give a character witness for a pedophile or child porn perv in their church and even have the nerve to beg for leniency in sentencing……..with the victim sitting right there! It made no sense to him. It makes no sense to me, either.

    It is called “cheap grace”.

    Like

  85. So … if we start piecing all these patterns together, from the individual to relational to organizational to political, maybe this is the picture we start seeing emerge:

    Grooming — intentional psychological conditioning of someone’s thought life, emotions, worldview — which leads toward …

    Victimization — intentional misuse of power dynamics (emotional leverage, physical strength, religious or political position of authority, etc.) in a relationship between unequal “partners” to perpetrate abuse — which leads toward …

    Bounded Choice — a basic psycho-social conditioning that keeps someone constrained to a particular relational and cultural terrain such that even when they no longer need to be tethered to that system, they self-constrain themselves to negate any doubts, objections, or questions — which leads toward …

    Total Institution — an organization based on a closed system which attempts to assert complete control over its inhabitants’ paradigm, including their entire worldview interpretation of reality, self-perception, organizational roles, social relationships, cultural lifestyles, political isolation (or attempts at domination), media access, etc. — which leads toward …

    Authoritarian State — a sociological “cult” (regardless of whether it is a religious group or not) with a psychology of totalism that crosses generations and controls the conditioning of all its citizens from childhood onward, with severe punishments for disobedient behaviors, dissenting views, or any other form of difference that supposedly threatens the “unity” of the movement or state.

    I’m sure there are other kinds of examples and increments in between various steps towards systematic control of people, but maybe this is at least a start for seeing how the pieces of the control puzzle link together.

    As I’ve attempted to suggest in many of my writings on spiritual abuse over the past seven years, part of what makes current situations so insidious is that they represent the intersection of many belief movements, each of which embodies some poisonous patterns, such as: labeling, learned helplessness, elitism, celebrity culture, subjugation, orbiting around a supposedly “inerrant theological system,” control by compliance and/or chaos and/or charisma, etc. This malignant “ministry” has created a toxic cocktail that infects far too many Christians who should be living in freedom, determining for themselves the directions the Spirit is leading them, who can discern the differences between true biblical mandates and human “wisdom” masquerading as truth, etc.

    But I do believe we’re seeing these systems starting to get de-amplified by exposure online. They can no longer so easily hide their deeds in the dark. They cannot as easily lure in naive converts who desire to please God and are tricked into believing that human leaders can dictate to them exactly His plan for them. And there is hope for change. It seems no little deep personal change happens without something to shake us up. And the farther along we are in that chain from Grooming to Authoritarian State, probably the more dramatic and traumatic the shake-up of our world must be to catalyze true transformation.

    I suspect some tsunami-level shockwaves are coming, with the lawsuit of Lourdes Torres-Manteufel versus Doug Phillips, Vision Forum, Inc., and Vision Forum Ministries. With the exposure and corrosion in the alleged Mars Hill Church culture of authoritarian leadership and numerous questionable practices. With the forthcoming criminal trial of Nathan Morales and the implications it has about the alleged culture-of-coverup at Sovereign Grace Ministries. With the substantial documentation involving decades of alleged sexual improprieties and harassment by Bill Gothard.

    I take no glee in the likely destruction of humans-as-idols in such situations and institutions. It will be excruciating for them, their families, the churches and organizations they’ve been supported by, the Church. But can we express gladness that the onset of light and the significant shake-ups that are happening could ultimately bring people from error into truth, and from bondage into freedom?

    Like

  86. “Ok, thanks for that clarification, not surprised. I think I just left a comment there. I better go back and check. I really would like to cover this story and get more details.

    Thanks for bringing this to my attention. So, are we noticing a pattern yet?”

    I will send you some links. Here’s one to get started.

    http://newwest.net/main/article/two_child_molestation_scandals_break_over_moscows_christ_church/

    I am sure you know of others. TWW posted re: Sitler’s wedding in July of 2012, iirc.

    Like

  87. Brad, that sure looks like an article to me. I think we need to make it into a searchable article. There is just too much good information there to be hidden away in a comment. What say you? I can do it on the weekend.

    Like

  88. Gaslighting…poisoning the well.

    Happened to me and spouse also at more than one church; you prove you’re not a team player, you stand up and call someone in power on doing something really awful to another in the name of Jesus, then you find out what people are all about. In one case the pastor set up a special meeting of the elders to tell them about my insanity. At another church the head pastor started spreading such slander about my wife that friends at church would be visibly shaken and turn away when she passed them. In one case when I went to pick up our baby from nursery after the service, the childcare volunteer that week (one of the insiders in the church) instinctively yanked our baby away, as if to protecting her from my “evil influence”, I had to reach out and yank baby away before the worker finally gave way. What could pastor have been saying behind our backs? Very evil stuff.

    Like

  89. I have a page opened right now to collect links. Thanks, Diane. I added it. Now, will someone please donate any extra time they have to me? I need more hours in a day.

    Like

Thanks for participating in the SSB community. Please be sure to leave a name/pseudonym (not "Anonymous"). Thx :)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s