I have placed the show on youtube if some of you have missed it.
Unfortunately, the church pastor in question at this point is trying to cover his butt to me. I mean he can't even make up his mind if she was raped, or had an affair.
All over the blog world and beyond they are speaking about the 'church discipline' that Tina claims happened, and her Pastor claims didn't.
When we look at Ernie Willis they had him go in front of the church to admit he committed adultery.
According to Christine Leaf (Tina Anderson's mother) and Pastor Phelps Tina Anderson wasn’t disciplined. She was there to ask for support from the church, and announce her personal need. Pastor Phelps said due to 'pregnancies being a public matter' (per his letter to 20/20).
At a church meeting, the woman said, Willis confessed to being unfaithful to his wife and Phelps read her letter about her pregnancy as she stood before the congregation.
Phelps said the meeting was not any sort of punishment, but was intended to inform the congregation and create a safe environment for people to help the woman with her pregnancy.
"I expected Ernie Willis to be arrested," Phelps said. "So to prepare the church for his imminent arrest, I communicated with the church or had him communicate with the church that he had been unfaithful to his marital vows. And to the young lady, she was with child, she needed help. . . . There was no discipline. Discipline implies she was put out. She was not put out. She was embraced."
Placing a minor up there that has been raped to tell her church that she is pregnant shows this Pastor has a serious lack of common sense, and it also shows he has no discernment skills AT ALL!
From what you have read about her mother's responses to everything? She is a doormat that followed what she was told to do.
Tina's personal need (remember she was a child at the time) would be dealing with the rape, but nothing is mentioned about how that personal need was fulfilled. Acknowledging it was RAPE would have been helpful as well. Pastor Chuck Phelps even admits she states she was attacked. The fact they didn’t believe her from her pastor’s own statements, but he believed it was consensual. I’m sure that wasn’t fulfilled.
If the man can't see that is FAR from helpful? Did the man check his brain at the door or what?
Notice they never make mention on how they 'helped' Ernie Willis.
Its telling that the Pastor states he believed that it is a ‘covert dating relationship that turned sexual in nature’ in his letter to 20/20, but when interviewed by his local newspaper he states:
Phelps said yesterday that he didn't tell the woman she was responsible for what happened but that she needed to be responsible by avoiding contact with Willis, whose children she baby-sat.
"She's not responsible for being raped. Of course not. She was an underage minor. That's why I called" the police, Phelps said.
Phelps said he told her to "be responsible, don't allow yourself to be around a person you know to be dangerous. She knew this person was dangerous after the first time, but she continued to be around him. . . . She needed to be responsible."
The second time she was raped he showed up at her house. She didn't go to him.
I have to wonder if he is talking about after she found out she was pregnant, and notified him she was pregnant - Willis.
Either way? His comments show lack of grace and no discernment AGAIN at all. We are speaking to a child that was was raped, and to even hint there is a partial responsibility on her part? That is the last thing someone that has been traumatized needs to hear.
Quite frankly, I wonder if he used these actions on her part to justify his beliefs on this being a relationship, and not an 'respected' adult that abused his authority.
The pastor says in one place he reported to authorities due to his legal obligations, but then states what happened to Tina Anderson as two different things.
I mean which is it?
- Rape that she is not responsible for
- Covert Dating relationship that turned sexual in nature
She is responsible - she isn't responsible. It was rape - it was a covert dating relationship that turned sexual in nature.
If the pastor can't keep his stories straight about this? It's fair to doubt his recollection on what Tina and others state was church discipline when he says it wasn't. I mean the man can't even grasp if it was rape or not!
The church states they followed their legal obligation, and in reality they basically covered their butts.
Tina Anderson mentioned on the 20/20 show that she felt it was possible that Ernie Willis told Pastor Phelps their relationship was ‘consensual in nature’. We can all see from Pastor Chuck Phelps statements in writing that he believes that as well.
We see no mention from either Pastor Phelps or Tina that she felt it was an affair.
Did you notice that? She never changed her story.
Tina was never ostracized or disciplined by the church. Interestingly, as a young adult, Tina returned to Concord, live with her mother, and for many months attended service which Ernie Willis was also present. Upon return to Concord from Colorado, Tina never registered a complaint with the Concord Police Department or Trinity Baptist Church. She never appeared upset in her spirit toward Mr. Willis. - Pastor Chuck PhelpsDoes that belief that it was an ‘affair’ mean he should neglect the spirit of the law that ‘consent’ doesn’t make a hill of beans difference in the eyes of the law? Actions speak louder than words when this pastor neglected to follow up when his moral obligation was to do so.
His shift to try to get the attention off himself like he does? This poor child never had a chance.
In the 20/20 video some people stated that Ernie Willis and Tina Anderson were treated as two different sets of circumstances for church discipline that night. Some within the church placed the puzzle pieces together that Ernie was the father of Tina’s baby. When asked why he was not arrested? They were told it was due to the protection of Ernie’s family.
I mean it would be easier to keep this marriage together at all costs if he wasn't arrested wouldn't it be? They wouldn't have to deal with this scandal if no one followed up - I mean THEY did THEIR job!
I’m sure that was the reason they didn’t follow up as well. I mean if they truly believed that Tina was lying about this whole thing? They still decided they were above the law when they did not following up with the spirit of the law.
Scripture states that justice must be done, and not following up to make sure it is? That's called neglect.
I’m sure Pastor Chuck Phelps can think of scripture pertaining to that.
Upon discovering in 1997 that Tina Dooley Anderson, a minor, had been involved in a covert dating relationship with a married man, Ernie Willis, and that this relationship had become sexual in nature, I immediately complied with statutes of the State of New Hampshire by reporting the situation to Officer Jim Cross of the Concord Police Department. I also reported to Erin Dickson of the new Hampshire Divivsion of Children, Youth and Families.
It was at my recommendation thirteen years ago, that Tina's mother, Mrs. Christine Leaf, also reported this relationship to law enforcement. Even though Tina Begged her mother not to report, Mrs. Leaf did report this sexual relationship with Mr. Willis to Lieutenant Gagnon of the Concord Police Department.
The Concord Police never contacted me futher about the reports or about the welfare of the whereabouts of Tina Dooley Anderson. They also never contacted Mrs. Leaf for any investigation or additional information. there was certainly no intent to cover up the allegations or hide this 16 year-old girl. I have always been committed to a policy of complaince and partnership with official investigations of any kind. - Pastor Chuck Phelps
Can you feel the man's kindness towards Tina even now?
Their ‘kindness’ doesn't come across as that to Tina even to this day. People that mature can look back at things, and reflect upon them. They mentioned that she grew up to be a responsible adult, and such a reflection should have been seen.
Could it be due to the fact they made her life a living hell, and just TOLD her it was kindness and for her own good?
This whole ordeal was handled awful no matter what side is telling the truth. Pastor Phelps only addressed the fact he shouldn’t have had her come up front to face the church. The fact he felt she was lying? I can understand why she didn’t feel the kindness he claims she was given.
It’s like placing poop on ice cream. Can you imagine your disgust at that? Can you imagine someone trying to tell you they were at least kind because you do in fact have ice cream?
Church Discipline means nothing if you allow an adult male that broke the law to continue to attend your church, and be around the child’s mother and the child herself.
Church Discipline means nothing if you prove your point by stating it was okay since Tina – a scared child – didn’t file a formal complaint with your church, or voice her lack of comfort because Ernie Willis was still at the church when she returned. I mean you didn't believe her anyway? Why would she feel you would take her seriously if she had?
Church discipline means nothing if you know law enforcement dropped the ball on a crime, and you don’t point this out at the time. The lack of follow up from the church, pastor, and mother? That sin falls on them. You still had a responsibility to Tina Anderson. The lack of concern for justice shows the volume of mercy you handed her.
Church discipline means nothing if you use that as an excuse to point fingers, and not own your own neglect.
Salt and Light
Matthew 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot.
14 “You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. 15 Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16 In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.
Sadly, Tina Anderson had no responsible adults in her life at the time. If they were responsible? Their good deeds would glorify the Father in Heaven.
Its funny how they want to blame the police, and yet they have so much they failed at themselves.
They are to busy telling everyone how kind they were. Yet they say stupid stuff like she never filed a complaint WITH THEIR CHURCH! She never showed a UGLY attitude to the man that raped her when she returned, with no regard for the fact that common sense should tell them SHE was uncomfortable with that at the very LEAST!
I refuse to link to Dr. Chuck Phelps site in which he posts his lame excuses, and justifications out there for the world to see how he is so GODLY!
Page One, Page Two, Page Three, and Page Four
If you wish to see it just google Dr Chuck Phelps, and you will see the pages I copied, and others.
There needs to be discipline on this Pastor's neglect. There is needs to be discipline on her doormat mother as well. I'm sure Pastor Phelps uses her age as '16' instead of '15' due to the state's law of consent! How much you want to bet?!
What is sad is they can't even see how God would be glorified if they dared to come clean NOW! They won't because they are cowards. Cowards that enabled harm to a child that God placed in their hands to care for.
How can Dr. Chuck Phelps seriously sleep at night!
If you enjoyed this post and wish to be informed whenever a new post is published, then make sure you subscribe to my regular Email Updates.
Subscribe Now!Thanks For Making This Possible! Kindly Bookmark and Share it:
8 comments:
How awful for these young girls! I am so proud of Tina Anderson's husband. He stands up for Tina, and is clearly on her side. That is so rare among Christian men. They tend to shrug, and leave it up to their wives to fight these battles. But not Tina's husband. Go Tina's husband! God bless you!
My first impression of the story (which I had not heard before) was that the Pastor's statement about "complying with the law" was a red flag. He should have more than complied with the law. Even if a 15 year old tries to seduce an older man, it cannot be considered consentual, because she does not have the ability to know the long-term consequences she will face because of a sexual relationship when she is not mature enough to handle it. Furthermore, even if the man claims it was consentual, that is enough evidence for the pastor to know the man did commit sexual activity with a minor, which is both sin and against the law.
What was the pastor thinking? If the perpetrator had any children of his own, they, too were in danger of being molested. Keeping the man's family together would likely be harmful to the man's own family.
The testimony of the abused girls, & that of the ex church members did not reek of seeking publicity for themselves, but rather sounded strongly of a sense of guilt for their silence, and a sense of wanting to offer support to those who had been wronged, as well as an effort to stop the evil that has been hidden for years.
I personally know about folks who report to the police because the law requires them to do so. Their report includes comments like "this is just a big lie. Mr. Soandso would never do that; she is just mad at him right now. She actually has a great relationship with him. I have to tell you what she said because I am required to comply with the law, but I don't believe it for a minute." The result is that the authorities don't bother to look into it. If they do investigate, they do so with a bias that closes their eyes to the truth. And yes, it is part of the "good old boys club." The thinking goes like this: "If I don't wink at your sin, you will vilify my for mine. So I'll keep my mouth shut and keep us both out of trouble. Women! They're just lying because they're rebelling about us being in charge."
continued:
I think those women and men have taken the right action. When the church fails to keep their members accountable for their sin, and when the church (if you can call it that) puts the blame on the victims, when it is a pattern from that whole church denomination, and it is clear the whole denomination is so into similar behavior that it is unlikely to find a pastor from elsewhere to come in and hold the sinners accountable, the only recourse is to call in the larger society to hold churches accountable. Notice in you-tube clip #5 that is was not Tina who brought this to light 13 years later, but other folks from the church she had attended, folks who felt guilty for remaining silent.
I am the first to want to protect the reputation of Christians. But when their women and children are harmed and the churches make no effort to confront the sinners and hold them accountable, and instead hold the sinned-against accountable, that congregation does not deserve to have their reputation protected. It is only in holding them accountable that we even have a chance at regaining respect for Christians in general.
Notice that even the current pastor of her previous church does not alert his congregation that there is a child abuser among them. They must discover this info on their own. Good as the new pastor sounds, considering how Tina was vilified in that church, he is going out of his way to put children in that church in harms way. Can he guarentee that one of the perps will not find time alone with another child?? With a big group like that, it is easy for one of the adults to lure a child away from the group, to offer special attention, to prepare the child to agree to a sexual encounter. That new pastor is either ignorant or neglegent, or both.
your comments/retorts are like school in July....no class. You're just as bad as the biased, liberal, one-sided mainstream media and ought to be ashamed of yourselves.
- one with Christ
I'm not ashamed of what I wrote.
If you have problem with what I wrote - point out the issues.
Labeling people/blog/issues, etc doesn't accomplish much. Attempting an insult doesn't either.
One with Christ,
Stop attacking those who are exposing the deep darkness within the church. Instead, work for justice for those victimized by wolves in sheep's clothing.
Anyone claiming to be one with Christ should be familiar with His concern for justice. He ought to be concerned for the little ones being destroy by the stumbling blocks supposed 'men of God' are throwing down in front of His lambs.
Anyone calling themselves "one with Christ" should be more concerned with the crushed and broken souls in the story than with keeping up appearances. Stop worrying about saving face and cease from your decadent hero worship (idolatry) of these worthless men who prey on and oppress innocent children.
Amen, Mara!
As I read the crucifixion of Jesus, I see that it was the religious that really could not stand Him. So they betrayed Him, made up a salespitch to gain allies in the crowd, made false accusations and finally tortured Him. What does the bystander do? Lie and say he would wash his hands to try to preserve his image and appear neutral, when he could have stepped in. It was all about spin.
Is it any different today?
You can't attack darkness with darkness. Neither the post or the replies to the post were spoken in a manner which glorifies Christ.
James 3:9-10 ~"With [the tongue] we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way."
The "justice" we're so busy clamoring for is made useless by behavior our Lord would be ashamed of. Anything done without love is like a noisy gong. If we're going to call ourselves Christians, let's find out what Christ deems important and focus on those things.
How is pointing out injustice darkness? Does Jesus not do the same in the bible?
You comment makes no sense honestly. If you have points - point them out.
Post a Comment