Is This Tullian Tchividjian’s Spiritual Comeback Tour?

Tullian Tchividjian,Clergy Sex Abuse, Expastors.com, Greg Atkinson, Jonathan Merritt


***

ExPastors.com Opens the Gate

My last post was about the new article written by former pastor, Tullian Tchividjian – The Freedom in Losing It All – published at the site, ExPastors.com. (It isn’t clear yet from a preliminary ExPastors.com article or otherwise whether this publication came about at their invitation or at Tullian Tchividjian’s request to post.) As the day went on, I watched the comments and noted a familiar pattern: The blog moderators were not comfortable with comments questioning Tullian Tchividjian’s character or their integrity. They started removing comments, and posted an explanation that the comments were not meeting the blog’s intended purpose.

When they started implementing that, the comment total was at 121. As of this morning (September 30th), it appears that a total of 4 comments were outright deleted, and 2 comments are still “awaiting moderation,” so the comment count total is 117.

What is the purpose of ExPastors.com?

Our Mission:

We seek to be a place of help, healing and hope for expastors, pastors, and church leaders. We do this by hearing their stories, connecting them with people and resources, and focusing on spiritual, physical, mental, and emotional health. (Link.)

Now, obviously my blog has an intended purpose. The purpose of my blog is to expose abuse within Christian churches/organizations, and to supply a safe place for survivors of those hurt by abuse. I also have posting guidelines and will remove comments if someone is defending an abuser or if their comments make this place feel unsafe for survivors to participate.

The Victim

So, that leads me to the obvious conclusion that ExPastors.com is doing the same, but the difference here is that Tullian Tchividjian has now become the victim.

Excuse me?!?!?!!!!!!!!

Tullian Tchividjian was the perpetrator and the liar who left a trail of destruction in his wake. This celebrity pastor whose ministry collapsed because of lies and sexual sins, and now … he has reportedly turned his life around? Really????

In contributing to ExPastors.com, Tullian Tchividjian has been graced with a platform on a silver platter to share the depths of his despair, even to the point of contemplating suicide, to his large and ever-faithful following and to the regular audience there.

The Poster Boy

Tullian is a perfect poster boy for this site. What more could they want than a high-profile celebrity pastor whose tragic collapse has now been beautifully restored?

But wait … has it really? How are we to know? Are we to believe the man who publicly confessed that he had an affair only after finding out about his wife’s affair? How convenient of him to leave out that he had previously had sex with another woman who was not his wife. And how hateful for Tullian Tchividjian to blame his wife for his more recent sexual immorality. And then when Pastor Kevin Labby took him under his wing at Willow Creek Presbyterian Church in Winter Springs, Florida, Tullian Tchividjian also failed to disclose the full extent of his sexual immorality. This is not a man who has a history of telling the truth. Are we to assume that a claim of spiritual restoration means he is now telling the truth? Because he claims God has done this work, does that mean we are exempt from fact checking?

I think not.

If you aren’t convinced of the opinion that he lies, see it for yourself by reading the extensive chronology, posts, and initial analysis in this Resource Bibliography. (That resource page is due for expansion and updating soon.) Patterns of deceit, failure to be forthcoming with the truth, blame-shifting, etc., seem clear enough.

Meanwhile, it’s important to note that the goal of ExPastors.com is apparently primarily to deal with ex-pastors, not any residual fallout caused by them (i.e., any people they may have victimized), nor to verify first if ex-pastors who contribute material on their site are being truthful.

So, on Twitter, I challenged the Executive Director, Greg Atkinson, during his conversation thread with my long-time Twitter friend, Andrew, who rightly is concerned about victims. Here are screenshots of that thread:

 

gregatkinson2

x

 

Greg Atkinson, Tullian Tchividjian

x

gregatkinson3

 

gregatkinson4

 

And then I, too, was blocked.

Our exchange was … interesting, yet it aligns with their statement of What We Believe:

We believe in God. We believe in the corporate church. We believe that we all have issues. But more importantly, we believe in grace. We believe in restoration. We believe in renewed individuals fulfilling the call of God on their lives. Whether it’s serving in a pastoral or lay leadership role or as the janitor mopping floors, we believe the expastor should, once again, become reintegrated back into ministry, into a place where they are fulfilling their call.

Why do we believe this? Because we’re confident that God is not done with you yet.

Notice this important part: “[W]e believe the expastor should, once again, become reintegrated back into ministry, into a place where they are fulfilling their call.” Yikes. Imagine those harmed by Mr. Tchividjian who are now reading this.

Religion News Service/Jonathan Merritt Widens the Path

Sadly, what often happens when news of a fallen celebrity pastor makes a comeback, they are given more media attention. Sure enough, Jonathan Merritt at Religion News Service (RNS) got hold of the story and decided to extend Tchvidjian’s platform to even a larger audience. RNS posted Billy Graham’s grandson on his near suicide and whether he’s planning a comeback on September 29th.

As a sidenote, I found out later that this was not Jonathan Merritt’s first time writing about Tullian Tchividjian. He has done at least two other personal interview-type articles:

Billy Graham’s grandson takes Christians to task: An interview with Tullian Tchividjian, Religion News Service, October 2, 2013.

Billy Graham’s grandson warns of New Year’s resolutions, JonathanMerritt.com, January 2, 2015.

Back to the article posted yesterday about Billy Graham’s grandson … Good grief, my blood pressure rose as I considered the implications of this – – – scores and scores of people getting to read about their hero making a wonderful spiritual comeback – – – based on what? Just Tullian Tchividjian’s word?

So, I responded to the tweet announcing this interview article, and here’s that thread:

Yes, that’s right. It took me all of seconds to contact key people directly harmed by Tullian Tchividjian to see if he had changed, to see if he has made things right with them.

  • I contacted Pastor Kevin Labby, his former pastor and boss, and he hasn’t heard from Tullian. No one from ExPastors.com has contacted him.
  • I contacted Kim Tchividjian, his ex-wife. She also said no one from ExPastors.com has contacted her.
  • I contacted one of the women whom Tullian Tchividjian groomed sexually and then committed clergy sexual abuse with. She said that ExPastors.com did not contact her, nor has Tullian Tchividjian made any effort yet to make things right with her. She has seen no evidence from him of repentance or sorrow for the pain he caused in her family.

So, what we have going on here is a masterful show of supposed spiritual renewal by ex-pastor Tullian Tchividjian, with no fruit evidenced toward the above people he harmed, or by other I also contacted.

This how you fact check – – – you go to the people he harmed, and you do not take just a chronic liar’s word for it. It’s called “due diligence” – – – duh!!

So, sadly, now the Tullian Tchividjian fans are coming out in droves to read their hero’s words. But ExPastors.com and Jonathan Merritt failed to do due diligence when they allowed Tullian Tchividjian to uncritically report his own narrative. Someone who is truly repentant wouldn’t be taking center stage again without making sure all of his victims were okay with it. Tullian Tchividjian’s victims don’t matter to him. They are just excess baggage that gets in his way.

Wasn’t Tchividjian masterful?  He appealed to an audience who wanted to hear his side, and what a perfect setup to gain back trust from his fan base to purchase his possible upcoming book.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *

Edited 09-30-2016 to clarify that it is not yet known whether the ExPastors.com article came about at the invitation of ExPastors.com or from initiation by Tullian Tchividjian.

238 comments on “Is This Tullian Tchividjian’s Spiritual Comeback Tour?

  1. The “Under Much Grace” blogger sometimes does blog posts about how girls who grow up in very strict, cultic, or fundamentlist – type Christian churches or environments are stunted into adulthood from the teaching and socialization they receive as kids and teens, which leaves them child-like in thinking into adulthood, and unpreparded to face adulthood.

    Here is at least one post on her blog about it:

    _Bounded Choice as Another Component of Thought Reform: The Appearance of Choice with No Truly Viable Options_

    I think the blogger places most of those posts pertaining to that subject under the “bounded choice” tag or topic, but I think I’ve seen her address the subject from other angles, as well.

    Like

  2. Sorry, I just thought of something else I wanted to add.

    Above, I said:

    The “Under Much Grace” blogger sometimes does blog posts about how girls who grow up in very strict, cultic, or fundamentlist – type Christian churches or environments are stunted into adulthood from the teaching and socialization they receive as kids and teens, which leaves them child-like in thinking into adulthood, and unpreparded to face adulthood.

    I believe the same blogger also discusses a related topic.
    I cannot remember the exact term for the related topic, but it’s something about ‘second generation’ cult members(?)

    Under that topic, she talks about how if “normal” adult parents join a super strict Christian church (or a cult), the kids they have and raise while in that cult turn out to be stunted into adulthood, incapable of navigating their adult years as adults (even though their mom and dad may have had “normal” up-bringings).

    So, the kids brought up in such a church may arrive at adulthood with child-like ways of viewing the world and relationships, which leaves them as vulnerable to being abused and exploited as an actual, literal child would be.

    She has a page or two on her site under the heading of,
    “Why Good People Make Dangerous Choices”
    that probably also speaks to some of these issues as well.

    Excerpt from one of her “Bounded Choice” pages:

    <

    blockquote>Once an individual becomes a part of a closed, totalistic system, several factors work to keep them entrenched in that system, powerfully tethered to the predictable radius that is acceptable to the group.

    Members appear to have a wealth of options, but often, the group dynamics and the withholding of information and knowledge drastically limit rational choice.

    Because of distorted and absent boundaries, personal choice actually become organizational choice which constrains the member to a predetermined set of “givens.”

    Though it is true that all people do not possess an unlimited number of possibilities, the structure of totalistic groups confines them even further.

    <

    blockquote> Remember, she is writing about adults in that commentary, not children.

    I wanted to link y’all to her pages on second generational whatever that term was, but I am unable to find those pages.

    She has other pages with sub-headings such as,
    “Understanding How Dysfunctional Families Prime Children for the Experience of Shame (Leading to Victimization)”

    That was on a page called,
    _Understanding How Emotional Development in Childhood Affects Adults: Fostering Spiritual Abuse via the “Roots of Victimization”_

    As she outlines on her blog, some people arrive in adulthood child-like in some regards and / or primed to be targeted by predators, because their parents and/or church did not adequately prepare them for adulthood.

    Like

  3. Daisy,

    Bingo! I agree with you there! Especially that last sentence. I’ve been saying that for years. But no one wants to touch that one for the sake of what they call a “reconciliation process”, otherwise known, by the Calvinists as, “The Matthew 18 process”, making reconciliation a mandatory thing, thereby making the victim a perp because she refuses to forgive. It’s all twisted.

    But, I think we need to do more than to just wish that things would change, and find ways to “make it happen”, and the first thing we can do is to start a campaign that states that pastors do not have any power, therefore, do not fall for their statements that demand obedience to them.

    I hope that we have made peace with each other.

    Ed

    Like

  4. I am still without internet connection at home. My signal on my phone is sketchy. I’m posting this from church where I dropped a kid off at youth group.

    Grace’s husband was sentenced to life in prison with parole opportunity after 13 yrs, 4 mos. Grace’s impact statement was powerful. The BACA advocates read statements from the children. So many tears in that courtroom. I’m so proud of Grace. Thanks all for praying.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Ed,
    I’m not sure to which post of mine you were referring to.

    I’m not so sure we’ve made peace.

    Over at the other blog, in one breath, you say you support victims, at least Lourdes, but then turn around in another post or two there and depict women who have been seduced by pastors as being guilty of adultery or fornication.

    You seem to think that sexual abuse is not a real thing unless a state has a particular law saying so.

    I’m sorry, but no. That is not supporting victims, it is victim-blaming.

    Contrary to the cranks beating me up at that blog (that Missy M lady is truly a horrible person, and contra Ken F, I am not an “anti male bigot,” jeeze louse, where do people get this stuff from), I realize that some women may prey on pastors.

    However, in cases where a woman is going to a clergy man’s church, he has sway over her, in the same way a football coach has sway over a 15 year old kid(*), so the imbalance of power (legally recognized or not), makes the clergy or coach guilty of taking sexual advantage of a person – it is not a simple case of two people deciding to boink – it’s not a clear cut case of adultery or fornication, as you keep framing it at the other site and on this one.

    *(Yes, it’s the same dynamics, as I’ve spent the last half of this thread explaining, and with links to UMG’s site that explains it).
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    As to this comment I just made:
    Ed, you seem to think that sexual abuse, or specific types of sex abuse, is not a real thing unless a state has a particular law on the books saying so.

    Did you know that some states do NOT have laws against crush videos, Ed? That does not make crush videos okay, moral, or acceptable, and yes, the animals in those disgusting videos are victims.

    If memory serves me correctly, some nations do NOT have laws against animal-human sexual acts. Would you therefore argue that when a man has sex with a dog in that nation, that magically makes it “okay” or that it’s NOT a case of animal abuse? I would hope not.
    If your answer is no, I don’t know why you would hold a different set of criteria for pastoral abuse of women church members.

    Like

  6. Julie-Anne: Prayers and THANK YOU for being there for Grace! I was reading comments backwards from last comment-WAY TOO MUCH! Re: Comment about someone, I tried to say something was seriously wrong and could have engaged in rhetoric of words where the majority of items are for prayer; THERE ARE TIMES YOU DO SAY IT=Ezekiel 2: message. Pray God heals hearts, wounds, mind, body, soul, spirit (I’ve been where gnashed teeth at God, didn’t want to get like Miriam against Moses and that’s why took to being an advocate. “Who are we to spit him in (God) the face for who he put us under for our training”! God DOES NOT waste a thing in our lives 2 Corinthians 1:1-end (don’t understand the ugly, evil side of how/what people do to one another but get the picture of suffering thanks to Leonard Ravenhill/Arthur Katz)! Bible is our example, blue print and Jesus walk of suffering. There is Life after Death for the Widower/Widow, Divorce, Adultery, Loss and whatever impacts our lives if we DO NOT get bitter! Live in the Beatitudes and Sermon on the Mount for ending the race sweet: Psalms 27:4! Numbers 6:24-26.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Daisy,

    The Lourdes case was quite some time ago, and I haven’t blogged for quite some time until recently. If people would go back to my comments from a long time ago, you will see how I treated this case. I never once ever sided with Phillips. I always concluded that Lourdes was the victim.

    I gave my synopsis, which I really hope that you had read clearly.

    I believe that sexual abusers are to be placed in a jail cell. I believe that there are sufficient laws on the books for ALL sexual abuse cases to make that happen. So yes, I do believe that if anyone is going to accuse sexual abuse, then call the cops and get them in prison.

    Why do you not want them in prison?

    Do you want TT in behind bars, or don’t you?

    What CONCLUSION do you use to state that pastors have power differential over congregants? What are you basing that on?

    You all are diffinitively stating that if pastors have sex with a congregant, that is sexual abuse.

    What are you basing that on?

    Is it not possible that the women are not victims, and made a choice of their own free will, no different than a congregant that commits adultery with another congregant?

    Please tell me how you come to the basis of the belief that pastors have a power differential. There is no basis, or concrete evidence that there is such a thing, UNLESS that clergy is in the ROLE of a COUNSELOR.

    No, I do not buy into the belief that rules change for a church outside of the law of the land.

    Ed

    Like

  8. Ed

    Do you not even read the posts I write to you? Because I sure as heck have read most of yours (even though they make little sense and you flip flop).

    I have told you already on the other blog, I totally want TT in jail, and all other pastor abusers in jail, but some states do not have laws in place to throw them in jail.

    However, the fact that the US govt. or individual states do not regard pastor abuse of women as a crime does not make the women’s victimization adultery or fornication as you keep arguing on the other blog.

    These women are basically rape victims. Why do you keep depicting rape victims as being adulterers or fornicators? Doing so is depraved.

    Ed said, “You all are diffinitively stating that if pastors have sex with a congregant, that is sexual abuse.”

    I’ve said it depends on the context.

    You said,

    “Please tell me how you come to the basis of the belief that pastors have a power differential. There is no basis, or concrete evidence that there is such a thing, UNLESS that clergy is in the ROLE of a COUNSELOR.”

    Because women go to these idiots trusting them for help, and instead, the pastor preys on them in a time of weakness, the way secular psychiatrists may do a women client who comes to see them.

    In other cases, the clergy man may target the woman to sleep with her, and slowly groom her over time, as Kim explained in the video on the other blog, did you listen to her testimony?

    (In Kim’s case, she mentioned she had a lot of bad things going on in her life, job stress, health problems, and left over problems from childhood she shared with the pastor. The pastor used her vulnerability to start grooming her.)

    These women feel the preacher would surely never do anything wrong to them, he is a shepherd of God who is there to help them – the grooming is a slow process, sometimes weeks or months. It escalates.

    Pedos also target children in this manner, they choose kid targets who come from broken homes and are looking for love and attention.

    A person does not have to be working in official capacity in a counselor role to have influence over another person, (but certainly, some of these pastors do choose to hit on women who come to them for pastoral care). Why do you not grasp this?

    Why do you keep making excuses for pastors who violate and exploit hurting, confused, or depressed women????

    Like

  9. I feel it’s important to share these posts from the other blog, because it shows your reasoning:
    ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~
    Ed Chapman wrote:
    Does the bible not tell us to not commit fornication and adultery or not? Does the bible state that adulterers and fornicators do not inherit the kingdom of God or not?
    ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~
    My reply to Ed:
    A woman who has been seduced by a pastor, especially if she’s gone to him for guidance or advice, is a sex abuse victim – she was not engaging in fornication or adultery, as you are defining it or depicting it. You continue to blur the lines.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
    You keep portraying victimization of women by their skeevy pastors as adultery or fornication, which I think is demented.

    Like

  10. Daisy,

    You have now declared these women to be rape victims.

    What is your basis for that belief? Just because a pastor had sex with them? That just does not cut the mustard, Daisy.

    Are there not laws on the books outside of the church against rape? You allege rape.

    If so, call the cops. Rape is a criminal act, against the law, prosecutable, and the word, “Pastor” has nothing to do with it.

    Ed

    Like

  11. I know, huh. I can’t believe that I am even awake. Way past my bedtime. My batteries are running low, and I can’t keep up with all the Ed bashing. It’s overwhelming.

    Like

  12. Ed, you are just not getting it – not connecting the dots or something, even after Daisy’s well-articulated explanation. 😦 Willfull blindness or what?

    Like

  13. Pingback: Wednesday Link List | Thinking Out Loud

  14. “Grace’s husband was sentenced to life in prison with parole opportunity after 13 yrs, 4 mos. Grace’s impact statement was powerful. The BACA advocates read statements from the children. So many tears in that courtroom. I’m so proud of Grace. Thanks all for prayi”

    Now praying for speedy divorce! And gratitude for BACA.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. “Ed, you are just not getting it – not connecting the dots or something, even after Daisy’s well-articulated explanation.  Willfull blindness or what?”

    From a purely legal POV in the ‘Tullian the snake’ situation, not clear on what you think can be done?

    Like

  16. FWIW,

    I thoroughly enjoy reading the ping pong match between Daisy and Ed.

    And would pay good money to watch a debate in real life.

    (With popcorn)

    Liked by 1 person

  17. chapmaned24 said,

    Daisy,
    You have now declared these women to be rape victims.

    What is your basis for that belief? Just because a pastor had sex with them? That just does not cut the mustard, Daisy.

    Are there not laws on the books outside of the church against rape? You allege rape.

    If so, call the cops. Rape is a criminal act, against the law, prosecutable, and the word, “Pastor” has nothing to do with it.

    Ed

    Yes, it’s not consensual sex in the way a “normal affair” is, Ed.

    It’s the same as a Pedo having sexual relations with a child – it’s not consensual sex.

    Yes, women should call the police in regards to this.

    But there are reason even non-clergy rape vics don’t call cops, such as feelings of shame, fear of not being believed, too emotionally traumatized to reach out, etc.

    So, you are now admitting that what these clergy do to women is wrong and sexual abuse, only you think they should call cops (me too!) – so stop calling it consensual, stop saying, “it’s adultery / fornication” etc. It’s not.

    Like

  18. My comment above to Ed is sitting in moderation.

    In the meantime…..

    CSA = “Clergy Sexual Abuse”
    (Note, Ed: it’s called “Sexual Abuse” and considered to be sexual abuse, not “Consensual Sex” or “Adultery” or “Fornication”)
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    Predatory Pastors (Resource Links page)
    http://www.predatorypastors.com/resources.html

    I’ve found all kinds of web pages discussing CSA (Clergy Sexual Abuse) of adult women.

    It’s A Crime Not An Affair
    Via the site “Adults Abused by Clergy”
    http://www.adultsabusedbyclergy.org/statelaws.html

    Snippet:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    Caregivers are prohibited by state criminal statutes, fiduciary duty laws and by codes of ethics from exploiting their clients or patients to meet their own emotional and psychological needs.

    … Only thirteen states and the District of Columbia have penal statutes that, in at least some circumstances, support the criminal prosecution of clergypersons engaged in sexual misconduct with congregants or parishioners.

    These statutes, enacted by Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Dakota, Texas, South Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin and the District of Columbia turn on various linguistic formulations, including, most commonly, the specification that the misconduct occur within the confines of the counseling relationship.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    I don’t think I have much time to be on the internet this morning of afternoon, because I might have to run out on some errands – if I can. If it storms, I might have to stay put.

    I don’t think I have the time now to read or respond to all posts left since I was left here.

    Like

  19. Blaming Women for the Sexually Abusive Male Pastor
    http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=959

    The term “adultery” does not adequately define male ministers’ sexual involvement with female parishioners.

    Marie Fortune, executive director of the Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence in Seattle, suggests that a male pastor’s sexual advances toward a woman that occur while he performs his professional duties are better understood as “sexual abuse.”

    Whereas the term “adultery” implies that both participants are consenting equals, the term “sexual abuse” assumes that a person has used personal, social or physical power to coerce sexual intimacy.

    Like

  20. Sex with a pastor: An affair or abuse?
    http://www.ourstoriesuntold.com/sex-pastor-affair-abuse/

    Snippet:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    A woman went to her pastor for advice.

    Not for sex.

    She never imagined her pastor would do something so egregious as to manipulate her into having sex with him.

    The worst part was that because they were both adults, the woman blamed herself for having an “affair” with her pastor and then hid silently in her shame.

    But it was not an affair.

    It was an abuse of power.

    Sex between two parties where there is a power differential is not and can never be labeled “an affair.”

    Sex between persons with unequal power is not even about sex. It’s about power and control over someone with less power.

    If approached by a stranger at a party, the sexual advances would have been obvious to the woman. But when her pastor became amorous, the woman was caught completely off guard. She thought she was making more out of the situation than her pastor intended.

    She ignored her screaming intuition, warning her that something was terribly wrong. It was not easy to rebuff her pastor, whom she held in the high esteem afforded by his position.

    She didn’t want to offend her pastor by refusing his pastoral hug the first time and it became increasingly awkward to refuse to hug him each time after that.

    Like

  21. Soul Stealing: Power Relations in Pastoral Sexual Abuse
    http://www.snapnetwork.org/psych_effects/soul_stealing_1.htm

    Snippets:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    As with rape, a pastor’s sexual or romantic involvement with a parishioner is not primarily a matter of sex or sexuality but of power and control.

    For this reason I call it pastoral sexual abuse rather than “pastor-parishioner relations” or, worse, a matter of private activity between consenting adults (which is almost always how the perpetrator will describe it).

    Even when adultery is involved, unfaithfullness is not the primary issue. I have found that ministers enter into romantic or sexual relationships with parishioners primarily because there is an imbalance of power between them at the outset and because they need to reinforce and heighten the intensity of that power dynamic.

    This is need is driven by internal forces and Is reinforced by societaly conditioned expectations that women will function as a nurturing, sexual servant class.

    WHY SHOULD these relationships be considered abuse? If both the minister and the parishioner are single (usually not the case), what’s wrong with their having a relationship?

    As Fortune has outlined, there can be no authentic consent in a relationship involving unequal power.

    And no matter how egalitarian a pastor’s style of ministry, he carries an authority that cannot be ignored. I deliberately use the term “he” because, as in domestic violence, the vast preponderance of these cases involve male clergy.

    …The clergy role carries a great deal of power in and of itself, and one of the most insidious aspects of that power is the role of “man of God.”

    In some sense the minister carries ultimate spiritual authority, particularly in the eyes of a trusting parishioner who looks to him for spiritual guidance and support.

    But the male minister also possesses other forms of power: as a man, he carries the power society confers upon men and socializes them to hold over women, often in the guise of being their protectors. He is often physically stronger and more imposing.

    He may be an employer. He may also assume a teaching or mentoring role which encourages women to listen to his advice and correction. Often he also functions as a counselor, with all the transference inherent in such a relationship.

    Like

  22. Silent sufferers: Female clergy sexual abuse
    http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/145861.pdf

    This page discusses female clergy in training who are preyed upon by male clergy, but this can apply to non-clergy women who attend a church:

    Snippets:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    Every clergy or minister is a symbol of religious authority. By virtue of the pastoral office, the minister interprets religious truth, the meaning of life, the way of faith, and even the reality of God (Chibnall, Wolf, & Duckro, 1998; Poling, 2005; Robinson, 2004).

    Add to that status the power of the pastor’s presence through ministry, and the special influence a minister holds among his or her congregation.

    In addition, female clergy supervised by senior male clergy may develop a special trust that can lead to openness and vulnerability.
    Feeling bonds of trust and affirmation, female clergy may bring the vulnerable, wounded, and intimate sides of themselves into the relationship, seeking acceptance, emotional support, and a role model.

    When the male clergy exploits his privileged position for personal sexual satisfaction, he violates a sacred trust that is contrary to Christian morals, doctrine, and canon laws.

    Because of the respect and even reverence the position carries, there is an imbalance of power and hence a vulnerability inherent in the ministerial
    relationship
    (Chibnall, Wolf, & Duckro, 1998; Poling, 2005; Robinson, 2004).

    In these circumstances, this imbalance of power makes it the responsibility of the church leader to maintain appropriate emotional and sexual boundaries with colleagues.

    Once violated, the female clergy may feel deep shame or self condemnation.

    She may be afraid others will not believe her or fear being blamed…

    Like

  23. Salty said,

    FWIW,

    I thoroughly enjoy reading the ping pong match between Daisy and Ed.

    And would pay good money to watch a debate in real life.

    (With popcorn)

    I’m not enjoying it at all.

    I’d be relieved if someone else steps up and takes Ed on.

    I don’t like getting into prolonged back and forth debates with people.

    I find it tedious, and his views on these topics are sickening to me.

    I am really skeeved and grossed out that he doesn’t see how pastors, who are regarded by many as being authoritative or influential, prey on weak, naive, or hurting women, which is sexual abuse, not an affair / adultery / fornication in the strictest sense of those words.

    Not all states have laws against pastors sexually preying on women (one site said there are currently only 13 states that have them), so it would appear that women calling the police for this may not come to anything.

    So, my understanding of Ed’s positions is that Ed is okay with letting these pervy, predatory pastors off the hook and regarding their sexual abuse of women as being simply “adultery” or “fornication,” and as though the women are always equally at fault.

    I don’t know how much I will be on the internet today, barring storms and all. I have errands I need to run. I really do not enjoy posting about this stuff and wish Ed would drop it or someone else would talk sense to him.

    Like

  24. Hey, Ed
    You’re talking to a 40 year old virgin – saving myself until marriage to have sex, and I stuck to this behavior due in part to my former Christian beliefs.
    Therefore, Ed, what do you think I think the Bible teaches about sex and marriage, hmm?

    An adult willingly and knowingly choosing to have consensual sex with another adult is not the same thing as a woman who is coerced, duped, or pressured into having sex with a man who is in a position of trust, and/or perceived, legal, and/or assumed authority above her.

    What does the Bible say about those in authority taking advantage of those under them, or the strong opposing the weak, Ed?

    What does the Bible say about sexual assault and rape, Ed?

    You act as though verses such as these do not exist:

    2 Tim 3:5-6

    5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
    6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….

    Like

  25. Daisy,

    Well then we can’t use the term, “normal affair”, then can we? The rules for Sex outside of marriage is exclusive, and the same for everyone, regardless of status.

    God is not a respecter of persons. How many times is that stated in the bible?

    Ed

    Like

  26. 2 Tim 3:5-6

    5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
    6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….

    Is there a verse in the NT about women gaining control over gullible men, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….?

    Like

  27. Ed said,

    chapmaned24 Daisy,

    Well then we can’t use the term, “normal affair”, then can we? The rules for Sex outside of marriage is exclusive, and the same for everyone, regardless of status.

    God is not a respecter of persons. How many times is that stated in the bible?

    Where there is a power imbalance in a relationship, it’s not consensual sex, so it does not fall neatly into the realms of “fornication” or “adultery.”

    Rape – sex w/o consent – can happen when a man has sex with a woman not his wife against her will – you would define that as being the same thing as “adultery” or “fornication” which it is not.

    You continue to victim-blame sex abuse victims, which is really disgusting.

    Like

  28. Hey, Q,
    I hold female sexual predators to the same standards as I do male sexual predators, which I have explained a few times on this blog, and/or on the other thread about this topic on the other blog (which I have linked to several times).

    I do not condone female sexual predatory behavior anymore than I do male sexual predatory behavior.

    If it’s a female clergy preying on male congregants, that would be just as wrong and bad – and it would be sexual abuse, not “fornication” or “adultery”

    BTW, Q, I consider your behavior to be obnoxious, jerky, and rude, so I’d rather not read your posts or reply to them. Feel free to ignore my posts and scroll past them without reading or commenting.

    Like

  29. One of my comments above to Ed is in moderation – time stamp of
    OCTOBER 5, 2016 @ 12:32 PM
    Just for Ed’s info. (I don’t know if Julie Anne needs to know that)

    Like

  30. Of course you do, no one likes to be corrected.

    So the answer to is no to –

    “Is there a verse in the NT about women gaining control over gullible men, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….?

    Like

  31. Q said-

    Of course you do, no one likes to be corrected.

    So the answer to is no to –
    “Is there a verse in the NT about women gaining control over gullible men, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….?”

    I don’t have a problem with being “corrected,”

    But I do take issue with your rude and condescending attitude, which was again on display in that very post.

    The Bible contains verses telling believers not to lord authority over each other, not to take advantage of one another, and the strong should not take advantage of the weak.

    I don’t think these instructions need to have gendered commands attached to them – to think they do shows a naive reading of the Bible, IMO.

    By the way, I don’t get the point you are hammering away on.

    I regard a situation of a clergy person (gender irrelevant) using his or her position to trick, coerce, or pressure a person (whether male or female) under their care into a sexual act, to be a sin, to be wrong, a form of sexual abuse (not a normal affair), and the Bible does not support it.

    Like

  32. The bible is gender specific because God wanted it that way.

    And no, I am not hammering, but you may be. I have only posted, what, 3 times, once pointing out a logical fallacy and twice I asked a simple question. And that has been labeled obnoxious, jerky, rude, condecending and hammering. I think that is called shaming tactic.

    Like

  33. “The bible is gender specific because God wanted it that way.” No, Q. MEN wrote the Bible and MEN wanted it that way. Men like you.

    Like

  34. God wrote the Bible by inspiring human men. And thanks for the compliment but I’m not sure you’re right about that.

    Like

  35. Here is where the arguments fail, no person should be in a position that TT was in. It is an exalted position that can’t be biblically supported, hence there should not have been some type of authority position and then it ‘would have’ been fornication or adultery. Because this church structure has been accepted for so long it is hard not to see church in this way. If people want to lift a person “pastor” to such an unbiblical exalted position they are making a mistake.

    The New Calvinist’s et al., have attempted to own the gospel, push changing culture to their twisted view of scripture and have become cultural SJW for Christ Jesus and with that came Complementarianism (to fight feminism)…

    The mistake Egalitarians are making is wanting to be part of the same unbiblical structure. Believing they will be as “good” at it and less authoritarian. They are also SJW for Christ Jesus.

    Neither are what God intended for the church and both are working on their own projects not Christ’s!

    Maybe there should be more emphasis on looking at what the church should really look like and less on who gets to be in charge. I good way to start is to stop twisting scripture, both are doing it.

    Like

  36. Q said,

    The bible is gender specific because God wanted it that way.

    And no, I am not hammering, but you may be. I have only posted, what, 3 times, once pointing out a logical fallacy and twice I asked a simple question. And that has been labeled obnoxious, jerky, rude, condecending and hammering. I think that is called shaming tactic.

    Nope, not trying to” shame” you.

    Trying to paint yourself as a victim doesn’t work. I grew up in a family that was big into shaming, as you probably know since you likely lurk at this blog and have read my posts before. Not buying it.

    You really come across to me as being rude and condescending. That’s my honest impression of your posts and is not a “shaming” tactic.

    I did not commit any logical fallacies that I am aware of.

    I disagree with gender complementarianism, so I don’t agree that gender is as big a deal as comps do, if you are a comp.

    When the Bible tells believers things like help the poor, to love your neighbor as yourself and so on, those types of commands are not gender specific.

    Such directives are aimed at all believers, both male and female. They are not aimed at only one gender or the other, so in that sense, the Bible is not “gender specific.”

    I have no idea what your point is. You have us going down these other rabbit trails now.

    One of the original topics under discussion was CSA (clergy sex abuse). I maintain that when a person uses their position to entice sex from someone else, it’s a form of sexual abuse, and not cut and dried fornication or adultery.

    Like

  37. Q said,

    The mistake Egalitarians are making is wanting to be part of the same unbiblical structure. Believing they will be as “good” at it and less authoritarian. They are also SJW for Christ Jesus.

    Nope.

    You should be aware that not all Christian egalitarians are SJWs, liberals, or Democrats.

    There are many Christian gender egalitarians who are right of center, pro-life concerning abortion, vote Republican, etc.

    I don’t know what label I give myself, but I am not pro-gender complementarian, but I am not a S.J.W, I am not Democrat nor am I a left winger.

    Your view sounds very similar to ChapmenEd’s.

    Concerning the issue of CSA, Ed lives in the land of Idealism rather than Reality.

    The fact is, pastors are indeed perceived by many church members as having authority, and some dishonest men who work as pastors use that perceived authority to dupe women (and sometimes men) under their care.

    You can argue ’til the cows come how awful and un-biblical it is that this is the situation, that pastors have all this authority, but that’s missing the point in the context of CSA.

    Trying to make your theological nit-picky point about pastors not having this much power granted them via the Bible, while doing so at the expense of the women who are prey (sexual abuse victims) to these creeps is a huge, insensitive dis-service to them.

    Like

  38. One other thing I wanted to add:

    Q said,

    Here is where the arguments fail, no person should be in a position that TT was in. It is an exalted position that can’t be biblically supported, hence there should not have been some type of authority position..

    That horse has already left the barn.

    That ship has sailed.

    The genie cannot go back into the bottle.

    Your view on that subject is not going to help the women who have already been exploited by TT and guys such as him.

    Like

  39. Daisy,

    You had said:
    “Where there is a power imbalance in a relationship, it’s not consensual sex, so it does not fall neatly into the realms of “fornication” or “adultery.”

    Rape – sex w/o consent – can happen when a man has sex with a woman not his wife against her will – you would define that as being the same thing as “adultery” or “fornication” which it is not.”

    My response:
    First off, you have yet to convince me that any of the women were victims. Your only conclusion of them being victims is because a pastor had sex with them, and I don’t find any evidence that this is what classifies as a victim, unless that counselor hat was on.

    So, I do not victim blame. How can I victim blame when I see no evidence of a victim?

    I know you abhor me mentioning OT stuff, but please humor me for a moment.

    The penalty for rape in the OT was death.

    If Moses, a leader, raped someone, would his penalty be more than death?

    Death Plus? Or, just death?

    Is his punishment the same as someone who committed adultery?

    God is not a respecter of persons. Status means nothing to God, whether you are a leader or not.

    IF these women were raped, molested, then YES, they are victims. I don’t victim blame. But if your only evidence of sexual abuse is that a pastor had sex with them, that does not classify them as victims.

    I don’t victim blame. Never have on this blog.

    I will say no more to you Daisy.

    Ed

    Like

  40. The penalty for rape was death, Ed? Wasn’t it often just pay the bride price or marry the girl?

    The mistake Egalitarians are making is wanting to be part of the same unbiblical structure. Believing they will be as “good” at it and less authoritarian.

    I don’t see this at all. I’m not sure where you are getting that.

    Like

  41. Ed said,

    My response:
    First off, you have yet to convince me that any of the women were victims. Your only conclusion of them being victims is because a pastor had sex with them, and I don’t find any evidence that this is what classifies as a victim, unless that counselor hat was on.

    I gave you two examples on the other blog.
    It depends on the context.

    I’ll paste it here for you:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    The “counselor hat” does not always have to be on for the pastor to entice a vulnerable women into diddling with him, Ed.

    Take me for instance.

    My mother dropped dead years ago.

    I was beside myself with grief at the time. Started a new church about a year later. Word got around the church my Mom was dead because I confided in several church women there.

    SCENARIO 1.
    Had the pastor of that church been skeevy with ulterior motives, he could’ve heard about my grief and tried to exploit what he knew about my vulnerability to get to know me better, cozy up to me, and “win me over,” present himself as a caring friend.
    All of which could’ve created a situation in which I would’ve been open and receptive to a tumble in the sheets, to receive care, attention, affection.

    SCENARIO 2.

    That is not the same thing as me now, years later, largely over much of the grief, walking into a church, seeing a pastor who I think is a cutie and going out of my way to flirt up a storm, and slipping him a hotel room key.

    Two very different sets of circumstances.
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
    Scenario 1 is sexual abuse / exploitation. Not adultery or fornication.

    Scenario 2, falls more into the good old fashioned, consensual noogie category, hence, that one qualifies more for adultery / fornication.

    Like

  42. Lea,
    Deu 22:
    25 “But if in the open country a man meets a young woman who is betrothed, and the man seizes her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die.

    This is what I was referring to. There is death of the one who raped her, and she was seized, against her will. The woman does not die.

    Ed

    Like

  43. Daisy,

    You had said:
    “The “counselor hat” does not always have to be on for the pastor to entice a vulnerable women into diddling with him, Ed.”

    My response:
    The congregation does not get to entice vulnerable women into diddling with them, either, so that Pastor status has no bearing at all.

    Like

  44. No, not painting myself as a victim just pointing out what you have claimed about my comments (obnoxious, jerky, rude, condescending and hammering) which you call behavior. I think you are projecting.

    No, I haven’t read many of your comments and don’t wish to. I read a few comments and saw Ed attacked with ad hominem instead of good argument with no moderation and thought I would point it out. I didn’t think that was allowed.

    I did read somewhere that you are not a Christian? I hope one day you become a believer and become saved. It wouldn’t be wise to judge a religion by how some practice it but on who founded it. Jesus made claims no one else has e.g., “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me”, so logically if he is telling the truth no need to look elsewhere.

    Like

  45. My intentions are not to add more spit to the fire, however, I do see this as a legitimate question amongst those who profess complementarianism as absolutely Biblical. I believe this could be applied to Tullian’s situation.

    Visible Christianity often backs itself into a corner through the use of double standards. I have read so called conservative religious blogs written by men who blame the wife for the husband’s infidelity….it’s her fault because she’s not submitting to his needs/authority/desires/masculinity/dominionism/headship/his rights/his ownership…whatever the male chooses to call it.

    The wife is blamed for the husband’s adultery/his sexual sin because she is supposed to meet all of his needs/be his all in all.

    So then, if it is true that Tullian’s wife engaged in an adulterous relationship and the pastor man chose to make a public statement regarding his wife’s behavior……

    is it safe to say that the reason Tullian’s wife had an adulterous relationship, is because Tullian didn’t fulfill his godly role as a good husband? Should he not have met all of her needs as a human being/a woman?

    Should not the man, Tullian in this case, be BLAMED for his wife’s infidelity then?

    The double standards within the visible church are just boggling to the mind and as the enemy has used man to make a big issue out of gender/gender roles/gender competition to conquer and divide what our LORD has already established through Jesus Christ.

    Seems like that satan is prowling around like a roaring lion seeking to devour people who are taking their eyes/hearts/minds off of Christ.

    And Daisy may be on the mark more that we realize here folks.

    Like

  46. Ed said
    The congregation does not get to entice vulnerable women into diddling with them, either, so that Pastor status has no bearing at all.

    The congregations are a person’s peer, not above them in power or authority as is a pastor, Ed. Huge diff. Pastor status is at the heart of the matter.

    Like

  47. Q said,
    “No, not painting myself as a victim just pointing out what you have claimed about my comments (obnoxious, jerky, rude, condescending and hammering) which you call behavior. I think you are projecting.”
    ~ ~ ~ ~~
    No. I’m not projecting. I’m not guilty of doing those things.

    Considering the snarky comments I’ve gotten here and the other blog off several people, I think I’ve restrained myself pretty well.

    I was “saved” as a kid when I put saving faith in Jesus.
    I now wonder if the whole enterprise or most of it is total bunk.

    I did not attack Ed with ad hominem, but you went out of your way to use my single status as a dig, which was a cruddy thing to do.

    Like

  48. Katy, that’s a good point.

    Which is complementarians often blame a wife for a husband’s sin (whether it’s infidelity or abuse), but you don’t see them usually holding the husband to the same standard.

    I’ve seen a lot of complementarian preachers blame a husband’s affair on the wife either not supposedly being attractive enough, or not having enough sex with the husband.

    There are some facets of complementarianism that do husband-blame (such as Strachan referring to unemployed fathers as “man fails”) but usually, the lion’s share of blame is doled out on to women, both married and single.

    Like

  49. Ed,

    God is not a respecter of persons. Status means nothing to God, whether you are a leader or not.

    Then why does St. James state that those who teach will be judged more strictly?

    Liked by 2 people

  50. WOW, Salty: I want some Popcorn also; I’ll take back-row seats though (I’m NOT getting in that verbiage war). This has been interesting to say the least.

    Daisy, sad to say in all my OVER 40 years of taking church situations public have yet to see what your saying gets prosecuted=false church; government are in bed together so to speak. Example: Charles Grassley, Senator who wasted tax-payers money on investigating corrupt preacher’s and their abuse issues in money; abuses were there in the News, on Dateline; in books. Trinity Foundation, Dallas, TX did their job and so many others and yet wonder who paid him off.

    Sexual side is worse though; Susan Forward, Ph.D. can tell you it’s written throughout her books hardly ever gets prosecuted=something very wrong and EVIL with the system (seen it over and over and over again). In her book “Incest, Molestation, and It’s Devastation; one example: the inept/inane system makes a child look bad in Court and NOT THE Perpetrator (that judge/lawyer should have been investigated); seen that over and over and over again (or things get removed, files disappear).
    Do a Spread Sheet on all these guys (if want) and where they are now (there’s your free idea for a book). Majority are still in pulpits or some type of ministry and or making money off off people=sheeple who DON’T GET IT; like they’re under a spell. What you want is Justice and Accountability and out of the Pulpit period and whatever else and that MEN in Christendom will stand up to the plate and do something and being Jehu’s instead of Ahab’s=money/power corrupts absolutely. Daisy, look at ALL the items taken public regarding Benny Hinn/Paul Crouch-TBN and they still in ministry=SO VERY SAD! Even though Crouch Sr., deceased; regime still raking in money exist and worth how many Billions (what own/worth)? Trinity Foundation, Dallas TX has been at it for YEARS; ask them how much of it has been accountable after Exposed in News!
    Ed: Agree with you Lourdes was the victim and my two cents perpetrator (one, violated marriage vows major) should NEVER be in Ministry at all (something wrong with his wife also); can’t recall Lourdes age it started? Nite!

    Like

  51. THOT! said,

    Do a Spread Sheet on all these guys (if want) and where they are now (there’s your free idea for a book). Majority are still in pulpits or some type of ministry and or making money off off people=sheeple who DON’T GET IT

    (And much of the rest of your post). That is very sad and frustrating.

    I think the laity out there just puts up with it, and it’s puzzling.

    If Christians would stop giving these guys money (tithes) that might help.

    I saw an accurate meme Tweeted by people that was attributed to Boz T. that said something like, “Churches extend grace to abusers but issue Law to victims and wonder why people are quitting church in large numbers
    – something like that.

    There are more recent examples – such as Mark Driscoll, this Tullian guy who is under discussion in this thread, Perry Noble – and on and on. These guys get involved in misdeeds, or are very sexist, financially rip off their church members, or whatever, but Christians keep giving these guys a pass, and they are not held to account (or it seems, very rarely).

    There was an IFB pastor who is in jail for sexual relations with a teen girl from his church. I always forget how to spell his name, I think it’s Jack Schaap?? He’s in jail for what he did, at least.

    I think Jim Baker did jail time for financial flim flammery he committed while a TV preacher or what not.

    So preachers who do wrong are occasionally are reprimanded, but it doesn’t seem to happen often enough.

    Like

  52. THOT, speaking of TBN, Orange County newspaper sometimes covers them and their shenanigans.

    Their articles have discussed allegations that various Crouch family members cover up child sexual abuse, one of them allegedly waved a gun around to threaten another Crouch family member who was going to go public with financial wrong doing, etc, etc.

    Here is one story from this summer about TBN from the Orange County paper:

    ‘Very clear signs of trouble’ at Trinity Broadcasting Network as revenue shrinks, attractions close

    This comes as Trinity’s revenue has taken a precipitous dive, from $207 million in 2006 to $121.5 million in 2014, according to a Register review of its most recent tax filings. More on that in a minute.

    Like

  53. It was wasn’t it! That’s the point, it shouldn’t been done to Ed, that is the point.

    I could drive it further –

    Oh my word, Daisy. You’d give the Eveready [sic] Bunny a run for its money.

    Like

  54. Q, I am the one who insulted Ed, not Daisy. I ‘own’ any criticism for that act.
    Daisy just happens to be giving him solid, well-researched information that should cause him to re-think his stand on the topic. Daisy, I am impressed that you’ve taken all the time and trouble to do that, although I get the impression that he’s got his hands over his eyes when it comes to analyzing the topic – pastors who should KNOW BETTER than to get involved with parishioners (the onus is on THEM to keep the line firmly drawn) and his refusal to see that by painting women as jezebels, he’s firmly establishing the patriarch.

    I was at work yesterday and couldn’t reply to your inquiry about why your comments take on a whole different insidiousness if you are female. Here’s why:
    It is obvious why men would want to reinforce and maintain the patriarchal system – it’s extremely beneficial for them. When women do it, it’s completely mind-boggling and even more infuriating. I don’t know how you have missed the underlying premise in most of Julie Anne’s posts – she is an advocate for women who have been abused, hurt, and taken advantage of by things that happen in the patriarchal system of churches (and – it could be argued – society in general).

    Liked by 1 person

  55. Daisy:
    Yes, exactly WHY isn’t the money going away on all these Charlatans, why isn’t it drying up? PDH told me when he left TBN (over 15-20 years ago) and brutally confronted them they were worth over 14 Billion if not more and said they were bigger than a lot of News Networks Combined and we as people aren’t researching that and knowing that! For all the items that have been exposed on B. Hinn also (he still exist is absolutely amazing=total corruption; seen the items). WHY ISN’T THE MONEY DRYING UP, why are the people still giving, attending, throwing money at these regimes?
    I’m NOT going to list all the men exposed in sexual misconduct (worse violating their marriage vows) and or homosexual affairs like T. Haggard, *Paul Crouch Sr., R. Liardon to name a few and they were still in Ministry! Read “Don’t Call Me Brother” by Austin Miles about Jim Bakker’s Homosexual affair(s) and you never heard about that when empire crashed at all!
    I had a lot of people to tell me to watch TBN, grandaughter’s interview with Jackie Alnor for Jan taking out Billion Dollars and other items (exposing dirty laundry). Haven’t finished The Fleecing of Christianity by Jackie Alnor yet, her husband (William-Bill also wrote a book(s) haven’t read).
    *Losing My Religion by William Lobdell writes that well (library should have a copy). It should be in every church library (very well written and heart felt): he was equally frustrated for all the years being Los Angeles Times, Religion Writer and one of the best. He also has Video (1 hr.3 minute) but definitely read the book! Will send to Pastor Jeff Crippen.
    Note: TBN’s donor money might be down but it’s what they own, worth, property; over 60 homes and ranches=9/19-20/2004 LATimes archives. What do they ALL have in their bank accounts that we NEVER hear about and don’t research!
    Book idea: Friend showed me a book on all these Agency’s like March of Dimes, United Way, Muscular Dystrophy etc., a book mind you and the book exposed that all the donations; the real cause raising money for, only gets 10%.
    Book: Handbook of Denominations, if author would go one step further and publish their 501c3 report and everything hidden and oversea’s in Swiss Bank Accounts etc., EVERYTHING OWNED, money takes in. Trinity Foundation, Dallas-Texas been going after that for a very long time (Joyce Meyer, Billy Graham, Kenneth Copeland, Creflo Dollar, TBN Empire, B. Hinn, and so many); that’s what they investigate and try and take pubic; also God T.V., had his scandal and was being blackmailed, should be in his wiki page or scandal of founder-read it).
    It would be interesting if people didn’t give TBN another dime (they could probably exist off all their interest of money they have)!
    P.S. Wrote the I.R.S./Secretary of State (who holds 501c3 records), requested reports as supposed to be public record; haven’t received one to date, at all! Worked for a non-profit, we had one report we gave the public (info wasn’t all in that report). I.R.S., has to get all correct information or fines, penalties and interest!
    Why isn’t the News or Charisma publishing these items? Case in point: stupid, inept, inane, biased Media wants Trumps Tax Records; well, what about B. Hinn, T.B.N. and ALL Ministries (Trinity Foundation can’t get the truth on them either call them and ask and they’ve been at it for years=Pete Evans/Ole Anthony).

    Like

  56. Q,
    I did not personally attack Ed, not about his personal background.

    Someone else brought it up.
    All I did was say in response, “Oh, I didn’t know that information.”

    I did not say anything cruel, heartless, or mean about his personal background.

    The other poster, I take it, was trying to explain Ed’s motive for why he is so doggedly insistent on these threads at discounting the testimonies of women who have been preyed upon by clergy.

    I made no judgement one way or the other about his wife or ex-wife or other family. I did not insult Ed over any of it or call him bad names over his family life.

    You chose to use something personal about me to make a point, though.

    I’m really tired of talking about all this and had planned on staying off the blogs today, but here I am.

    Like

  57. @ Carmen

    Q, I am the one who insulted Ed, not Daisy. I ‘own’ any criticism for that act.

    Daisy just happens to be giving him solid, well-researched information that should cause him to re-think his stand on the topic.

    Daisy, I am impressed that you’ve taken all the time and trouble to do that, although I get the impression that he’s got his hands over his eyes when it comes to analyzing the topic – pastors who should KNOW BETTER than to get involved with parishioners (the onus is on THEM to keep the line firmly drawn) and his refusal to see that by painting women as jezebels, he’s firmly establishing the patriarch.

    I get the impression he did not look at any of the several articles I linked him to about the topic, by experts on the issue of CSA (Clergy Sexual Abuse) who say everything we’ve been telling him in these threads.

    What’s really funny (or sad), is that I conceded at the other blog (and maybe here) that I realize that sometimes women do flirt with pastors, and sometimes normal affairs happen as a result – I never denied that can happen, but it depends on the context-

    but-
    1. Ed and his friends at the other blog keep acting as though I think it has never happened, or is not a possibility, and that they think I think all women every where are innocent and clean as the freshly driven snow.

    (One woman at the other blog who is quite nasty and rude did that to me -she attributed views to me I don’t hold-, when I called her on it, she got even more rude and catty with me over there, and denied she did that and claims I did so to her – I did not. I would be thrilled if that lady never, ever replied to me ever again.)

    Ed doesn’t concede that most often (not always, but usually), these sexual relations between a lady congregant and a male pastor is abuse on the face of it, because of the power differential and trust people impart to the position of pastor (the way kids place trust in school teachers), so both parties are not always equally responsible.

    A few folks at the other blog also said they are having a hard time following his points.

    This poster did a nice job of summarizing the confusing nature of Ed’s posts:
    http://thewartburgwatch.com/2016/10/03/its-clergy-sex-abuse-not-an-affair/comment-page-1/#comment-287153

    Anyway, because of the nature of the pastoral position, it is incumbent on the pastors to keep the boundaries in place.

    And most pastors have to know that a lot of church people “look up to them” or trust them, which makes confused or emotionally wounded people ten times more easy to manipulate.

    You can’t get the Eds of the world to grasp this, or they don’t care to factor it in, or he gets into weird rabbit trails about how pastors don’t ‘really’ have any power, women who are sexually abused by a pastor should call the police, or he starts asking you things like, “does the Bible condone adultery,” and other seemingly irrelevant points that have no bearing on CSA.

    Ed and guys like him at the other blog seem heck-bent on turning a blind eye to the dynamics that can lead a church member to be conned into a sexual relationship with a clergy person. They are bound and determined to chalk up every case to nothing but old-fashioned adultery and to stick the blame to the victims of predatory pastors. It’s really disturbing and warped and rather naive.

    As to it being naive, it reminds me how many Christians side with child molesters in churches.

    Some Christians will do things like sit with the Pedo at court dates at the court house but not sit with the child victim, or the churches who insist the child victim should “apologize” to the man who fondled them.

    Many Christians will scold and pressure wives who are being abused by their Christian husbands to submit to him more and keep forgiving him – which only enables the abuse to keep going on.

    Christians often side with the guilty party and “spit on” the victims! They get it entirely backwards. Some of them are doing this very thing in these CSA cases.

    Like

  58. I guess, Daisy, that I try to put myself in Julie Anne’s position – someone who tries so desperately hard to bring awareness to these issues and effectively stops at nothing – and wonder how she must feel to have a MAN (indeed, many men and some women) trying to pound away with the patriarchal hammer on her onerous labours. I certainly step over the line as far as diplomacy is concerned – I take full responsibility for that (I don’t blame the ‘debbil’ – wink!) ) and have before. I certainly do not fault Julie Anne in her admonishments to me personally – after all, she makes every effort to run a respectable blog and has thousands of readers. But I cannot stand to read about someone essentially arguing to maintain the social order of male dominance: patriarchy. For someone who has been reading JA as long as Ed has, it disappoints (infuriates?) me that he would disrespect her so. He really ought to know better.

    Liked by 1 person

  59. Carmen regarding your post of OCTOBER 6, 2016 @ 9:26 AM

    But I cannot stand to read about someone essentially arguing to maintain the social order of male dominance: patriarchy. For someone who has been reading JA as long as Ed has, it disappoints (infuriates?) me that he would disrespect her so. He really ought to know better.

    Yeah, I get it. Believe you me, I understand.

    I see how by siding with abusive male clergy (by blaming the victims) they’re sort of re-enforcing sexism and patriarchy.

    (By the way, I do want to reiterate that I am opposed to women who abuse positions of power to prey on males under their care or rank. -But most clergy is male, not female, so I think most of these stories end up being male- on- female incidents.)

    I also find it strange that we have people who regularly visit this blog, a blog that covers spiritual abuse by churches, but on some specific topics under that heading, refuse to call abuse for what it is – abuse.

    These same folks might otherwise agree that churches shouldn’t bully church members over secondary doctrine, or they shouldn’t keep using teaching that enables domestic violence, etc, but all the sudden, on CSA, slam on the brakes and let’s hold the victims equally culpable.

    Ed is over at the other blog today posting more about all this. A few people over there are replying. I’ve not read all the new posts. I don’t know if I’ll keep replying in that thread over there about this, because I confess to being very worn out about it.

    I honestly did plan on staying off these blogs today. I apologize to anyone if I seem to be a Comment Hog. Everyone must be tired of seeing my comments and name pop up. 🙂

    Like

  60. Daisy, I appreciate that you take the time to develop insightful commentary on issues. I usually don’t have that kind of time – for instance, I’m leaving in a short while to pick up a few grandchildren at school to go on a hayride this afternoon; it’s a brilliant day here! – so no, I’m certainly not tired of seeing your name. It takes many voices to counter the negative effects of patriarchy; Julie Anne cannot do it alone. Although she certainly makes a valiant effort. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  61. “The mistake Egalitarians are making is wanting to be part of the same unbiblical structure. Believing they will be as “good” at it and less authoritarian. They are also SJW for Christ Jesus.”

    Are you referring to a specific egalitarian movement or group OR to the concept itself that is mutualism as described in Galatians?

    Like

  62. I have one or two errands I need to get into today, but I did take a peek at some of the posts at the other blog a moment ago.

    Ed’s responses show a lack of compassion for victims over there.

    I had told him yesterday that a lot of women victims perceive clergy as being trustworthy and authoritative (which can cause them to fall into being taken advantage of by dishonest clergy), and he shot back with this awful comment:

    Nope! I don’t care how it is viewed by women. It’s a false statement. The women need to be corrected in their understanding of it, because based on what Brad is posting, you also seem to dismiss the counselor hat in those as well, concluding that pastors are counselors by default.

    The guy is very ignorant about abusive dynamics.

    You can read my reply to him here, if you like:
    My Reply, on the other blog

    Liked by 1 person

  63. “Is there a verse in the NT about women gaining control over gullible men, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires….?”

    That would have been tough to work out in the first century in any real way. :o). The closest we can find to anything resembling such a thing is the Temple of Diana cult in Ephesus. It is the basis and backdrop for Paul’s respone in 1 Timothy. The fertility cult taught that Eve was created first and tbe temple rituals protected women in childbirth. It was the only occasion in Scripture Paul used “authenteo”. But it was basically a cult based on the fear of dying during childbirth which was not a rare thing.

    Like

  64. Are you referring to a specific egalitarian movement or group OR to the concept itself that is mutualism as described in Galatians?

    I wondered about that comment too, Lydia, but I think it got lost in all the other stuff.

    There is very much a ‘they did it too’ tendency and I would rather hear specifics because that has not been the experience at my egalitarian church thus far.

    Like

  65. I got back from my brief errands.

    Well, Salty, Ed is digging himself into a deeper hole on this subject at the other blog about all this.

    At least over there, a few different people are taking him on, not just me (in the thread entitled “It’s Clergy Sex Abuse, Not An Affair”).

    Amazingly, Ed’s responses seem to have gotten even more unsympathetic towards victims, as he’s continued posting about this into last night or today.
    I haven’t even worked my way through the additional 1 billion new posts there folks have made.

    At the other blog, he scoffed at my use of links to sites by psychologists and sites that are dedicated to helping victims of CSA.

    -As if to say I and everyone should ignore the mountains of personal testimonies by victims of CSA and studies by mental health professionals, to take his word for the real deal about CSA. It’s like talking to someone who is in deep, deep denial.

    If CSA were not a real thing, why do at least 13 states have laws against it, to punish clergy who do engage in it???

    Like

  66. Julie Anne, I understand if you are too busy to look at this or reply here or at the other site, but Ed brought you up by name at the other blog in a way that I feel is in a way, harmful to victims of abuse.

    I replied to Ed’s post where he mentioned you here:
    _My Reply at other blog Re: Julie Anne mention_

    You may disagree with my observations that I made in that post, I don’t know.

    I am taken aback at Ed’s inability to understand that not everyone responds to stress, tragedy, and abuse in the same way.

    He writes off people who can’t cope mentally with abuse or stress as well as others have done as being filled with self-pity. I think that is unfair and rather heartless.

    Like

  67. Thank you, Julie Anne.

    I saw your post over there. I thought you might be interested that your name was being used in that way.

    He’s gone on to make several more posts there that, IMO, show a huge lack of understanding, empathy, etc., about abuse dynamics, or understanding towards victims.

    He seems to hold victims of CSA responsible for their exploitation, or in other posts, he come across as denying that there even is such a thing as CSA.

    Like

  68. Daisy: I’m glad you kinda picked it up because when confronted that something was wrong; I offended some toes! I’m TOO OLD AND TIRED and too much on plate and I thought Julie-Anne confronted it well about victims, haven’t read much after that (look in from time to time @ community=glance). Had great brother in the Lord, taken out by a hit and run DUI (caught the guy), dealing with ALL OF THAT (cemetery was seminary training and this was my first DUI to hit home; we all got robbed except I know he went home to Glory. Giving the gospel message was such an intrinsic part of his life; he would have wanted assailant to come to the saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ! It brings to mind, you NEVER know and I’ve been thinking, have too much stuff and all of that hit home. Ironically brought all friends together to celebrate everyone’s birthday’s for the year, four days before (so glad everyone was there; four days later=reality happened=1 Corinthians 15:26!
    Thank you for the TBN info (site); started to read!

    By the way, TBN can cry wolf regarding finances are down and it’s crying wolf (all they know is to be used religion salesmen selling THEIR DEAD religion). George Barna wrote a book about Church being the Frog in Kettle/Boiling Water and exposing Paul Crouch Sr., atrocities and cursing people that came against his ministry as on David Wilkerson’s worldchallenge.org website (video is there and so many other’s). Let them go defunct because it’s not about God, Jesus, Holy Spirit and or the Gospel Message it’s about being a Corporation=CORPSE=Business to be kept in THEIR LIFESTYLES (as seeing and hearing for years)! THIS HAS ALL BEEN EXPOSED FOR YEARS, DECADES and people still give money (who is giving them the money). At this point, would say if you’re giving money to TBN, B. Hinn, God T.V., etc., false ministries you/we/I are in complete and utter rebellion=Holy vs. Profane!

    Like

  69. Pingback: Weekly reads – notes

  70. I don’t agree with much information that I have read about Tullian T. Basically, this man needs to get right with GOD. He needs to get down and honest with GOD and himself. GOD’s word, the Bible is very clear on adultery, remarriage and position in the Church. He should not even be an elder/ Deacon, let alone come back as a minister. Make things right with all persons involved and move on. I would never trust again, a man who was in his position and did the things he did, not once but twice. Who knows if it was only twice. He lied. He has no credibility. You cannot reverse the damage done. My advice, lay low, stay out of the limelight, and worship GOD. You blew your only chance. A public man of GOD, has to ALWAYS walk the line. This saddens me greatly. I realize we are human and sinners, but this IS the Graham family. As Christians we are held to a higher standard. The world is watching us closely. Waiting for us to slip. Tull ian slipped REALLY bad. If we cause one person to stumble……

    Like

  71. Catherine, there have been 3 women who have now come forward, not 2! Unbelievable, right? Brad and I have done more posts which will catch you up. You can find them by searching for Tullian in the search field.

    Like

  72. After having read the story by Rachel, I want to clarify something I posted earlier before being fully aware of Rachel’s story.
    I believe Tullian is a wicked man. One can only hope he will never be in any kind of ministry. I pray his family will or has already attempted to get him help. It appears he is a predatory monster praying on woman’s weaknesses. This type of behaviour is difficult to treat. I hope his current wife knows GOD’s word well enough to discern from his apparently false teachings and well polished deceitful, charming charasmatic behaviour. Wow, talk about end times prophecy and antichrists…..

    Liked by 1 person

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s