Grant Layman, "No we didn't call the police!"

A Christian leader, charged with any credible, serious, and direct wrongdoing, would usually be well advised to step down from public ministry. No such accusation of direct wrongdoing was ever made against C. J. Mahaney. Instead, he was charged with founding a ministry and for teaching doctrines and principles that are held to be true by vast millions of American evangelicals.

 

The above quote is included in the support letter of CJ Mahaney after parts of a lawsuit were dropped against Mahaney and his church due to the Statue of Limitations.  Translation?  According to the law they waited to long to file. 

 

Many states are changing these laws, because adult survivors should have their day in court against the person that harmed them.  Some states have already changed the timeline.  I think the movement to change it is growing in other states to thankfully. 

 

Sadly, what should have been a moment of transparency turned into a spiritual version of ‘Not Guilty’ for CJ Mahaney by his many Celebrity Pastor Friends.  What I never did understand is they KNEW that parts of the lawsuit was going forward, and if they couldn’t see the bias in the above statement?  Their discernments skills are WAY off.

 

To me it showed the habitual snarky attitude they tend to use when people question their belief systems, personal values, etc.  They preach about humility, benevolent leadership and authority.  I do question how people can’t see the hypocrisy at times.

 

You don’t use a political spin when transparency is clearly needed.  This is why many question their sense of ‘biblical authority’, and all that jazz.  They are supposed to be ‘mature believers’, and in their rush to say SOMETHING?  They basically put their foot in their mouths instead.

 

James 1:22  But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.

 

Sovereign Grace Ministries Scandal and Conviction

 

This week:  Nathaniel Morales, 56, who most recently served as a pastor in Las Vegas, was convicted of three counts of sexual abuse of a minor and two counts of sexual offense by a jury in Montgomery County, Md. He will be sentenced Aug. 14 and faces up to 85 years in prison.

 

Nate Morales is going to trial soon stemming from additional accusations from others as well.

 

Just to fill in a little history…..

 

Sovereign Grace Ministries has been described as a family of churches, and Covenant Life was the Flagship Church until 2012.  In layman’s terms?  The Corporate Headquarters.  Shortly after the lawsuit surfaced -  if I remember correctly - Covenant Life voted to remove themselves from Sovereign Grace Ministries family of churches.  They were not the only church either.

 

Nathaniel Morales used to be part of this Covenant Life church before he moved to Las Vegas, and was part of the lawsuit that the Brotherhood of Celebrity Pastors SPOKE against.

 

This week Covenant Life’s longtime executive pastor Grant Layman testified that he should have reported alleged abuse to police but did not.  Grant just happens to be CJ Mahaney’s brother in law, and worked with CJ Mahaney in leadership at this church during the time the abuse happened.  Grant recently left his position at the church, and now works in some sort of paint business.

 

Nate Morales was part of CJ Mahaney’s church (Covenant Life), and he and his church were accused of knowing about the attacks towards children there.  They basically dealt with it internally – as in did nothing about it.  You can read they felt it was their Constitutional right to do it that way as well in the document I have uploaded.

 

Keep in mind I uploaded the ‘revised’ statement.   They felt that the lawsuit harmed their ‘confidentially’ with their members.  I guess despite KNOWING its their lawful responsibility as a mandated reporter to also contact law enforcement.

 

The new statement on the ministry website said allowing the courts to second-guess a church’s pastoral guidance “would represent a blow to the First Amendment that would hinder, not help, families seeking spiritual direction among other resources in dealing with the trauma related to any sin including child sexual abuse.”

“Child sexual abuse is reprehensible in any circumstance, and a violation of fundamental human dignity,” the statement said. “We grieve deeply for any child who has been a victim of abuse. SGM encourages pastors from its associated churches to minister the love, grace and healing of God to any who have suffered this horrific act.”

 

Spiritual Slang for, “I shouldn’t have to report we are handling it just fine in house!’

 

Keep in mind it was noted in court that they claimed they would ‘take care of it’ (ie the predator), and yet the habitual sexual abuse by Nate Morales continued.  I suppose your not to question their ‘spiritual direction’ there huh?

 

You have to wonder now if Grant Layman – along with others will be charged with NOT reporting this to the police.  My prediction?  They will throw him under the bus as far as blame goes.  WELL until more evidence surfaces, and the story will change again.

 

If you remember back a couple of years we spoke about the Tina Anderson trial, and how her pastor Chuck Phelps did call the police…but then basically blew them off when they wanted to do an interview with him over his ‘mandatory’ report. 

 

So, he followed the law legally but his actions MORALLY?  Not so much.  Chuck Phelps actually blamed the police, because he claims he didn’t receive any follow up.  They showed in court that they did, but you know how that goes…..

 

The spirit of WHY this law was enacted is lost on them.  Makes you question their pastoral ‘wisdom’ doesn’t it?  This is what happens when they feel their biblical authority trumps what they don’t wish to face. 

 

Now, we have a church that had to admit IN COURT they didn’t even bother calling the police at all. 

 

Grant Layman was sworn in next.  Under oath he told the jury he did not report the crimes told him by Scott and Charlene Bates in 1992 that were committed by Morales against their son, Samuel Bates.  He also stated that within one year, he learned of the sexual abuse of Brian Wolohan and did not report it to the police either. 

Under cross examination by the Defense Attorney Drew (which was surprising), he was asked “Did you have a responsibility to report to police” the crimes committed against Samuel Bates and Brian Wolohan.  To this Layman said, “I believe so.”  Drew responded, “Did you report to police?”  Layman answered, “I didn’t do it.”

 

 

It should be interesting to watch HOW the group of celebrity pastor’s explain how their friend and head pastor of the church in question STILL had no clue about this.  How the lawsuit was over his teaching and doctrine.   Please.

 

1 John 3:18 Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.

 

No Comment From The Together for Mahaney Crowd?

 

I find it curious that Al Mohler, John Piper, and the rest of the celebrity Pastor group has not released one statement since the conviction this week.  They sure did RUSH to judgment when parts of the lawsuit were denied due to the Statue of Limitations.

 

In other news:  The Southern Baptist Task Force released their report about declining membership and baptism numbers this week.  Many are claiming this downward spiral is the fruit of ‘our spiritual lukewarmness’. 

 

What is sadder is what happened this week (conviction of Nate Morales), and the often the insensitivity and callousness of their responses.  Does that even enter their minds? 

 

Hmmm…

 

• This not the nasty way they deal with abuse within the church. 
• Its not the ugly names they call people that don’t believe as they do. 
• Its not the attacks on so called, ‘feminists’ who are more likely a group that disagrees with their role theory. 
• Its not the awful approach to homosexuality…

..NOPE its just lukewarmness.  I guess they feel their nastiness isn’t nasty enough.

 

Who would wish to enter their churches, be baptized by their pastors, and be encouraged to follow their band of celebrity pastors who allows one of their ‘friends’ to enable a child predator.

 

In reality is their coldness towards humanity.  Their indifference towards the reality of some families life’s.  Their stuffy attitude towards those they feel aren’t the ‘chosen’ ones.  Its their empty words and actions that I call spiritual pixie dust.

 

They wouldn’t know how to reach the world if their life’s depended on it.

 

Yep, and I did I mention they call that ‘love’.

 

Matthew 21:28-32

“What do you think? A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went. And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him.

 

Additional Resources:

BrentDetwiler.com

GRACE (Godly Response to Abuse in the Christian Environment)

Brief History of Sovereign Grace Ministries

Copy of Lawsuit in Question

Why Sovereign Grace Ministries Doesn’t Like Victims

An Example of the Anatomy and Physiology of Spiritual Abuse: Mahaney, T4G and the Gospel Coalition

Now you get 'juice bars and skinny jeans’ at church. Seriously? That’s all you heard?

The church claims they hear the Millennial generation, but are they listening?  They haven’t been listening for generations now!  Sadly, they just think they are.

I’m NOT a millennial, but I would be guilty of the generation that gave birth to them.  Yet, I can understand their complaints.  Our generation raised complaints, and we were ignored and spoken down to as well. 

I realize some of the older generation – like mine – will throw out the stereotype about the generations ‘issues’.  WELL all generations had them, and some young people walk away from church….and come back when children are born. 

Once they leave again after that?  Chances are pretty good its not over all the labels or issues that the present generation is handed.  Its normally MUCH larger than that.  To me?  That’s where they miss the boat…

Things have been going downhill since the 1980’s – if not sooner.  I guess its our children’s chance to have a running start, and bang into that brick wall now. 

Acknowledge and Deal with the Changes in Culture

When you don’t listen to the millennial generation’s parents?  You can be pretty much secure in knowing their children will figure it out as well.  Problems don’t go away when you ignore them, but tend to get worse.

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.

In the present culture you have the internet, and in my generation you had the start of cable tv (when I was teen I believe).  Our worlds were starting to open up, and come to find all the messages you told us about being the ONLY one that felt that way?  Hmm.  I guess NOT so much!  That’s why we are questioning you….

Your words had power when we were isolated, but now that the world as opened up?  We find others that realize some of the things you say don’t make sense either. 

For me personally at times the church’s viewpoint was almost superstitious. You need to keep sheltered, because otherwise you will be contaminated.  That doesn’t say much for our strength in faith.

You have to act a certain way, dress a certain, worship a certain way…so as we see it the church created an environment at times that made people compelled to hide sin.  You can’t show that ‘contaminated’ side.   If you point that out?  We were told this church attitude isn’t there, and we are seeing things or making things up so we can sin.  It’s a smoke screen!

John Piper: Women teaching Men

I think John Piper has now ‘confused’ the biblical manhood crowd.  I’m serious.

 

No doubt we have all heard the speeches about Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood.  The lists of do’s and don’ts are constantly being added.  Some of them are indeed quite odd.  This one can be added to the oddities list.

 

Before I start I have to wonder if John Piper actually plans what he wants to say, or the message he wants to get across to people.  I honestly don’t think he does on this type of platform.    I think of all the strange things that have come out of his mouth, and I KNOW he can’t actually STUDY before he says this stuff.  To me it would be WORSE if he did!

 

The question that was presented to him, “Would a pastor who uses a biblical commentary written by a woman be placing himself under the biblical instruction of a woman.  If so, would this not go against Paul’s instruction in I Timothy 2:12?”  (I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.)

It might be.  Uh.  He may feel it that way.  And if he does, he probably’s not gonna read it.  He shouldn’t read it.  It doesn’t have.  It doesn’t have to be experienced that way I don’t think.

In other words, he doesn’t know.…I think.

Don’t worry, it gets better.  Or should I say – MORE confusing!

So, I think the point of that text is not to say that you can never learn anything from a woman.  That’s just not true.  It’s not true biblically, and it’s not true experientially, because the reason for saying that I don’t permit a woman to teach or have authority over men here is not because she’s incompetent.  It’s not because she can’t have thoughts.  In fact, the women in your church, and the woman in, the woman you are married to, have many thoughts that you would do well to know. [laughs] And to know, and learn, and to learn from.  And so the issue there is not that she doesn’t have thoughts that you wouldn’t benefit from.  Or that she can’t, uh, teach you anything.

The, the issue is one of how does manhood and womanhood work.  What is the dynamic between how men flourish and women flourish as God designed them to flourish when an act of authority is being exerted on a man from a woman.

And so I distinguish between personal, direct exercises of authority that involve manhood and womanhood.

Okay then.   This says pretty much a whole lot of nothing right?  You can tell he has heard or read some comments from women towards his past teachings of this verse.  He wants to be sure you realize he doesn’t think women are dumb.  Why THANK YOU….I think.

Now we will glance at ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ examples of women in ‘authority’.  The point is more about the ‘teaching’, but of course as we know ‘authority’ to him is the UPMOST of importance.

Because it’s personal.  She’s right there.  She’s woman.  I’m man.  And I’m being directly, uh, pressed on by this woman in an authoritative way.  Should she be doing that?  Should I be experiencing that?  And my answer’s, No;  I think that’s contrary to the way God made us.

So those two words:  Personal and direct.

Here, here would be an example of what I mean.  A drill sergeant that gets in the face and says, Hut One, Hut Two, Keep Your Mouth Shut Private, Get Your Rifle Up Here, Turn Around Like I Said.  I don’t think a woman ought to be doin’ that to a man – because it’s direct, it’s forceful, it’s authoritative, it’s compromising something about the way a man and a woman were designed by God to relate.

Now, lets put our common sense hat on for a moment!  Tell me what anyone learns from, ‘Hut One, Hut Two, Keep Your Mouth Shut Private, Get Your Rifle Up Here, Turn Around Like I Said.’  That’s not teaching – I guess we can say authoritative drills?

Yes, there is a purpose to drills within the Army.  I realize he wouldn’t be comfortable experiencing this and being pressed on like this FROM a WOMAN, and you have a way of avoiding that.  Don’t join the Army!  I mean she is ‘submitting’ to her authorities by doing her this.  She is following the chain of command.

I guess it never dawned on him that WOMEN don’t ‘flourish’ under those circumstances either – by design!  I’m not sure what he is trying to say here.  It’s rather confusing.  I’m not sure I know anyone that likes to be bossed around like that.  To be honest?  This is an example of ‘authority over’ if you get right down to it.  In the biblical or personal context  – that’s SIN!  (Yes, I took the military context out of it)

Uh. The opposite would be where she is a city planner.  She’s sitting in an office at a desk drawing which street should be one way and which street should be two way.  And thus she’s gonna control which way men drive all day long.  That’s a lot of authority, and it’s totally impersonal, and indirect, and therefore has no dimension of maleness or femaleness about it, and therefore I don’t think contradicts anything that Paul is concerned about here.

So I would put a woman writing a book way more in that category of city planner than of a drill sergeant.   So that the, the personal directness of it is removed.  And the man doesn’t feel himself, and she wouldn’t feel herself, in any way compromised by his reading that book and learning from that book.

(LAUGHS!) Yes, she can’t directly give you cooties I guess!  Sorry I couldn’t help myself. 

I think I understand WHAT he is attempting to say.  One example of a woman – of course in the extreme – that gets in the man’s face and bosses him around.  Again this would be an example of authority ‘over’ him.  How does ‘bossing someone around’ have any dimension of maleness or femaleness?  It doesn’t.

Then you have the woman as the city planner.  In reality she is following a traffic pattern, and laying out how it works with local traffic laws.  To me that isn’t authority at all.  It also isn’t ‘teaching’.  We now have two bad examples of the point he is trying to make.

Using these two examples – that I suppose your could use for his purposes – women are to be impersonal and indirect so they have no dimension on maleness and femaleness when ‘teaching’ to men.

Quite honestly that doesn’t remove the ‘authority’ he speaks of.  I mean I assume if she taught something he hadn’t gleamed prior – it was authoritative.  To Piper the ‘authority’ portion is the important part.  That is the ‘maleness’ part that women shouldn’t have.  Confused yet?

So that, that’s the way I’ve tried to think it through, so that, in society, and in in academic efforts, and in the church.

So that, that’s reading and benefitting from a woman’s exegesis in private.
Would you have any reservations about quoting from that commentary by a women in a public sermon?

I just think that’s an extension of the same principle.

You know there, here’s truth.  A woman saw it.  She shared it in a book.  And I now, I now quote it.

Uh.  Because I’m not having a direct, authoritative confrontation.  She’s not lookin’ at me, and, and confronting me, and authoritatively directing me, as woman.  There’s this, there’s this interposition* of this phenomenon called “book” and “writing” that puts her out of my sight, and, in a sense, takes away the dimension of her female personhood.

Whereas if she were standing right in front of me, and teaching me, as my shepherd, week in and week out, I couldn’t make that separation.  She’s woman. And I am man.  And she’s becoming to me my shepherd week in and week out, which is why I think the Bible says that women shouldn’t be that role in the church.

*Interposition - To place (oneself) between others or things

 

So he can learn from a women within the privacy of his own home while reading, but face to face is just too much for him….biblically.  You know the whole God’s design deal.  It reminds him of the woman drill sergeant I guess.  The book without her personal presence to teach allows him takes away her female ‘personhood’….in dimension (shakes head).  (Does he pretend she is MALE that way as well?  It won’t hurt him that way right?)

Man can have ‘indirect’ authoritative confrontation or directing, because she is only (ahem) preaching in a book.  It will allow his manhood to flourish and not be threatened by the mere fact he is reading a female author.  If she is in front of him?  WELL that might mean she could teach him again, and again and again.   That COULD make a shepherd.  Does this make anyone else dizzy?

I’m sorry but this man has some gall.  To THINK his manhood is protected by a book, because HE can take away that ‘dimension’ of being female away?  HE must separate those aspects, because otherwise its not GOD’S Design?  It’s insulting, and quite frankly I have to wonder if he hasn’t completely lost his cotton pickin MIND!  

How does that work when he is to speak at the True Women’s Conference?  Can you imagine…he is waiting for his time to get up on stage with his ears plugged saying ‘la la la la’ due to the fact a woman is on stage ‘teaching’….it’s a wonder he wasn’t diminished!

 

Okay – on a serious note:

He does realize that God’s word is NOT to be ‘indirect’ in this fashion right?  I’m pretty sure God’s word is to be ‘direct’.  Hmmm.  Maybe he can apply or not apply that interposition deal.  I guess he figures he is safe – remember that God has a ‘masculine feel’ afterall.  To me the more he talks about this biblical roles, or gender roles the more emasculated he sounds.    I never understand WHY he doesn’t realize how insecure and fearful he comes across.  Seriously.  He sounds like he is scared to death of woman.

 

What you think?  Confused yet?! Or just downright outraged?

 

MANHOOD, WOMANHOOD AND THE FREEDOM TO MINISTER
(1 Timothy 2:8-15)

John Piper’s thoughts back in 1989.

 

Additional articles on his podcast:

John Piper: “women’s books keep men safe from their direct, authoritative womanhood”

The Absurd Legalism of Gender Roles: Exhibit C – “As long as I can’t see her…”

CBMW, John Piper, Women Drill Sergeants, and Biblical Roles

Women Can Write Sermons; They Just Can’t Preach Them: Karl Barth vs John Piper

what John Piper sees when women teach

Drawing Source Used

Expel the wicked person from among you

1 Corinthians 5 ¹¹ But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister^[c] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

¹² What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? ¹³ God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.

This section was in response to a man within the fellowship that was sleeping with his father’s wife.  I do wonder at times why the woman is not mentioned, and have to wonder if it is due to him forcing himself upon her.  After all, the beginning of chapter they were being told to remove this man from fellowship.  No mention of her at all.

Today you can read all kinds of ugly stories of those within the church being brought to the law to pay for crimes they have committed against individuals within the fellowship. 

Although you notice they are NOT removed from the fellowship, and excuses are made instead (ie: pray for them, forgive them, and pretend their sin was minor like a baseball going through the church’s window).  What we seem to miss from the bible is not all sins were treated the same!  Organizations tends to ignore this portion of scripture within the Bible.  Now, they are paying the price for it.

I think most can understand serious crimes can really hurt the fellowship, and YES they should be allowed to mourn this loss.  They also need to be responsible about finding out how this happened, and figuring out how they can lesson this type of thing from happening again.  Since we are human I can’t sit here and write that I feel it can be completely removed from the fellowship, because I honestly think that is unrealistic.  Don’t I wish we could perform such miracles!

Problem it seems today is church organizations seem to wish to handle these types of sin ‘in house’, and sadly their public records of how badly they handle it!  They end up not helping anyone, and hurting more people than what they started with. 

For example, when you defend a man of GAWD, and blame the victim?  The criminal has no incentive to turn from their ways, because no one has the will or backbone to ‘expel’ him as scripture states.  Instead, they would rather them cry at the alter or follow steps the leadership has in mind to show repentance that satisfies them – not God.  Meanwhile, the victim and their family must be instructed on how they are to process things.  If they don’t?  They are the ones that are expelled.

Yes, we tend to do things BACKWARDS!

No doubt some wonder why God would have us do things the way he wrote in the bible.  I have to wonder at times if God doesn’t wish the criminals to face the music of their crime, and once they hit rock bottom have the choice to continue in their sin….or repent and truly turn from their ways. 

Criminals can turn their life around, and God knows this – more than it seems we do at times – but they ALSO have to choice NOT to.  If they stay within the fellowship because the church is too cowardly to follow God’s word?  We have old bread leavened with malice and wickedness.  All we have to do is check history to find this is true, and yet we we still choose to fix things ‘in house’.

⁸ Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

What would happen to the victims if we actually followed scripture?  We already spoke about the criminals above…..

Victims of these crimes are given the support they need to move forward, and I feel forgiveness can be more freely given.  Anger can be processed in a healthy manner as well – after all its righteous anger at first!   

When victims are thrown out of fellowship, and support is given to the criminal instead?  We see the church crumbling around our ears.  Why?  We didn’t follow the Word of God!

Sovereign Grace Ministries seems to be going down fast….

John Piper, and his 7 clarifying Justifications on Domestic Violence

Crying Out For Justice had noted on their blog that John Piper wrote an article (after how long?) to ‘clarify’ his position on Wife Abuse.  I had written a piece called, John Piper’s Ignorance is killing Children.  I had taken a video from John Piper when he spoke about wife abuse, and what submission to your husband looks like in such cases.  I uploaded his video to youtube, because his website stated you could ‘share’ their content.
I never in a million years would have expected them to take the video down off their site (Desiring God), and never say a word about WHY they removed it.  Most people that I have noticed feel they wanted to pretend it didn’t happen. 
I had no idea the firestorm that would start over this video, and when I check my youtube account?  It tells me it has been shared all over the place, and is quoted quite often.  To this day I still received comments on youtube under the video itself.
John Piper made some awful comments about domestic violence in the church in 2009.   This is 2012 – almost 2013.  It took John Piper almost 4 years to ‘clarify’ his position on domestic violence in the church.  Most people that feel they are misunderstood tend to correct the misunderstanding within weeks.  John Piper decided that years was appropriate in this case.   

We don’t need clarification – you need to repent!

Clarifying Words on Wife Abuse

by John Piper | December 19, 2012
Several years ago, I was asked in an online Q&A, “What should a wife’s submission to her husband look like if he’s an abuser?”
One of the criticisms of my answer has been that I did not mention the recourse that a wife has to law enforcement for protection. So let me clarify with seven biblical observations.

Sadly, he didn’t clarify anything.  He basically gave another confusing message, and maybe its time he shuts up completely on this subject.  It’s clear the man has no clue what type of dynamics are involved within an abusive relationship, and all he seems to be doing is pandering to different sides of his following.
We will look at his seven biblical justifications (ahem – I mean observations), and compare them to what he said the first time.
He isn’t showing the humility he asks from others – per scripture. He doesn’t offer to repent of his errors, or even offer an apology for some misunderstanding. No. He wants to clarify.
He feels his ignorance towards this issue and its realities for many families was awesome, but misunderstood. People just didn’t understand him. In truth its not his communication skills that are lacking but comprehension of the issue he speaks of. 
He knows people feel this, and takes the coward’s way out. Repentance is what is needed – not clarification.

Its very saddening to me personally.  We can assume his viewpoint has not changed. That’s scary! The lack of police wasn’t the only error he made.  Notice also he placed this in writing, because last time he caught it over giggling at the question. Lets look at a portion of what was said last time:

A woman’s submission to her husband is rooted in the word of God, calling her to be—for the Lord’s sake, for the Lord’s sake—submissive to him. Which means she always has a higher allegiance, namely to Christ.
Therefore Christ’s word governs her life. And Christ has many words besides “Be submissive.” “Be submissive” is not an absolute, because her Lord has other things to tell her, so that if the husband tells her something that contradicts what the Lord tells her, then she’s got a crisis of, “To whom do I submit now?” And clearly she submits to Jesus above her husband. The reason she is submitting to her husband is because of her prior superior submission to the Lord.
So if this man, for example, is calling her to engage in abusive acts willingly (group sex or something really weird, bizarre, harmful, that clearly would be sin), then the way she submits—I really think this is possible, though it’s kind of paradoxical—is that she’s not going to go there. I’m saying, “No, she’s not going to do what Jesus would disapprove even though the husband is asking her to do it.” – From John Piper’s video 4 years ago

This time he decides he needs to remind her of all the people, offices, etc. that she is in submission to. Once again, he is asking her to call on her church with his comment, ‘is a call to humble, Bible-Saturated, spiritual wisdom’. Yes, he hints at the source all through his piece. This is just your first taste of it.

1. Every Christian is called to submit to various authorities and to each other: children to parents (Ephesians 6:1), citizens to government (Romans 13:1), wives to husbands (Ephesians 5:22), employees to employers (2 Thessalonians 3:10), church members to elders (Hebrews 13:17), all Christians to each other (Ephesians 5:21), all believers to Christ (Luke 6:46).
This puts the submission of wives and husbands into the wider context of submission to Jesus, to the civil authorities, to each other, and to the church. This means that the rightness or wrongness of any act of submission is discerned by taking into account all the relevant relationships. We are all responsible to Jesus first, and then, under him, to various other persons and offices. Discerning the path of love and obedience when two or more of these submissive relationships collide is a call to humble, Bible-saturated, spiritual wisdom.

His second statement on domestic violence is a bit more complicated than his first.  The first time we heard his speech on the wife’s submission to her husband ‘for the Lord’s sake’, and then he goes into some strange speech about ‘group sex’.  Now he reminds her (and others) of all the authorities people are to submit to, and how it takes discernment in order to juggle all of them.
Why he can’t just tell her that it is OKAY to call the civil authorities when she feels she is in danger?  He is over doing this WAY too much.  Honestly, he is confusing the issue more than it needs to be.  Its wise to call the authorities if you feel threatened in this way.  During this period you don’t have time to juggle of this stuff he rambles about.  That wasted time could cost lifes.

2. Husbands are commanded, “Love your wives, and do not be harsh with them” (Colossians 3:19). They are told to “love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it” (Ephesians 5:28–29). The focus of a husband’s Christlikeness in loving his wife is “love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her” (Ephesians 5:25).
Christian husbands are not Christ. They are finite, fallible, forgiven sinners. They do not stand in the place of Christ. Their wives relate directly to Christ (Hebrews 4:16; 11:6), not merely through their husbands. Husbands do not have the wisdom or the power or the rights of Christ. Their likeness to Christ in leading their wives is limited and focused by these words: He gave himself up for her . . . nourishing and cherishing . . . not harsh with them.
Therefore, an abusive husband is breaking God’s law. He is disobeying Christ. He is not to be indulged but disciplined by the church. The wife is not insubordinate to ask the church for help. A Christian woman should not feel that the only help available to her is the police. That would be a biblical failure of her church.

Sadly, an abusive man does not love his own body.  He can’t grasp the concept of nourishing and cherishing in the way that John Piper speaks of.  He is not capable of being what God commanded, and when you understand that part?  The rest of what John Piper states here doesn’t make any sense.
No one can relate to Christ ‘through’ an abusive person the way he means it.  Sadly, they are too broken.   They can’t ‘lead’ their wives in the way he speaks of either.  This assumption alone shows how disconnected he is from this circumstance.  The way he is presenting this?  The husband is a good, honorable Christian Husband – that failed miserably in some fashion.  It goes much further than that.
The biblical failure of the church is why these articles are needed to begin with.  The way submission is taught is confusing most of the time as well.  When you write books, and you tell women that if a man stops by your house to ask for directions – you need to do it in an submissive way in order to honor his gender is just a bit over the top.  This is why he has to tell woman its not ‘insubordinate’ to ask for help  in the first place.  That alone should tell you there is a failure within the church.
What's the Difference – By John Piper, Page 60

appropriate ways. there are ways for a woman to interact even with a male subordinate that signal to him and others her endorsement of his mature manhood in relationship to her as a woman. i do not have in mind anything like sexual sugges- tiveness or innuendo. rather, i have in mind culturally appro- priate expressions of respect for his kind of strength, and glad acceptance of his gentlemanly courtesies. her demeanor—the tone and style and disposition and discourse of her ranking position—can signal clearly her affirmation of the unique role that men should play in relationship to women owing to their sense of responsibility to protect and lead.
it is obvious at this point that we are on the brink of contradiction—suggesting that a woman may hold a position of leadership and fulfill it in a way that signals to men her endorsement of their sense of responsibility to lead. But the complexities of life require of us this risk. to illustrate: it is simply impossible that from time to time a woman not be put in a position of influencing or guiding men. for example, a housewife in her backyard may be asked by a man how to get to the freeway. at that point she is giving a kind of leadership. she has superior knowledge that the man needs and he sub- mits himself to her guidance. But we all know that there is a way for that housewife to direct the man that neither of them feels their mature femininity or masculinity compromised. it is not a contradiction to speak of certain kinds of influence

I have wonder if they don’t make these teachings confusing on purpose so that people have to constantly come back, and ask how to do something right.  They are made to be dependent on them for even the most simple tasks in life.  Why in heaven’s name do you seriously need to instruct a grown woman on how to give driving directions when asked?  It should be common sense – Be nice and offer them!
Sorry but when you get these types of confusing messages?  Yes, you are better off going to the police.  You don’t time to juggle the colliding submission levels, and all that jazz.  You end up being busy double thinking things to make sure you doing it as your pastor would wish, and the protection of the family comes second.  This should not be!

So the short answer, I think, is that the church is really crucial here to step in, be her strength, say to this man, “You can’t do this. You cannot do this! That’s not what we allow. That’s not what Christ calls you to be.”
I can’t go in to all the details, but I would say to the woman, “Come to a church that you feel safe in. Tell them the case. Let the leaders step in and help you navigate the difficulties. -John Piper’s Video on Abuse from 4 years ago.

An abusive man needs to hear more than what is offered here, and an understanding of his mindset is essential.  It’s a pattern of behavior, and most of the time you find that the woman (or man) that is being abused doesn’t recognize it for what it is. 
Anyone can have a good day, and be nice.  Yes, even abusive personalities.  Too often we use that simplistic example to avoid looking at his core being.  That core doesn’t change with a session of church discipline – or even a number of them.  We also need to acknowledge that humans have a choice to see their sin, and turn from it – or refuse to.  That part is something John Piper ‘refuses’ to acknowledge or in fact deal with at all here.
If you can’t deal with that part? You need to stay silent. It’s a reality for so many people, and has been inside and outside the church.

3. But recourse to civil authorities may be the right thing for an abused wife to do. Threatening or intentionally inflicting bodily harm against a spouse (or other family members) is a misdemeanor in Minnesota, punishable by fines, short-term imprisonment, or both. Which means that a husband who threatens and intentionally injures his wife is not only breaking God’s moral law, but also the state’s civil law. In expecting his wife to quietly accept his threats and injuries, he is asking her to participate in his breaking of both God’s moral law and the state’s civil law.
God himself has put law enforcement officers in place for the protection of the innocent. “If you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer” (Romans 13:4). A wife’s submission to the authority of civil law, for Christ’s sake, may, therefore, overrule her submission to a husband’s demand that she endure his injuries. This legitimate recourse to civil protection may be done in a spirit that does not contradict the spirit of love and submission to her husband, for a wife may take this recourse with a heavy and humble heart that longs for her husband’s repentance and the restoration of his nurturing leadership.

Once again John Piper assumes he is capable of ‘nurturing leadership’.    Sadly, he is not.  He never addresses or goes NEAR this issue.  This is a problem, because if you can’t acknowledge it?  You can’t fix  it either.
Most that call the authorities do this out of fear for their safety.  The speech about where her heart maybe be at that point?  It shows how completely gone he is with the realities of these circumstances. 
Do people call the police when someone breaks into their homes out of a heavy and humble heart that wishes their repentance and restoration?  NO!  They call because they are scared, and maybe harmed..and want help and protection!  The rest?  Granted could come later.
The way he presents this will make the family feel badly about calling for help.  Their terror wasn’t enough, because they were not thinking of love and submission.  Seriously, what a dumb statement!  The picture I submitted here is showing how to do this the WRONG way.  Bleck!
John Piper needs to understand the systematic breakdown of her personhood over time by her abuser’s words.   They way he presents this places DOUBT in their MINDS!
John Piper’s added extras don’t help, but render things.  Romans 13:4 is all you need.

Here is a partial look at the relationship…
Some repeated comments include:  She will never make it without him, and the children will be homeless.  No one will want her, or believe her.  She is crazy, and everyone knows it. 
An Abuser once told his children, ‘Without me?  You will be living under a bush, and eating BUGS!” 
He builds a dependency on him, and any anxiety in his life no matter how small?  Its spilled over all this family, and you can bet he has them scared to death.
The family sadly already has an unhealthy sense of responsibility towards him, and his abusive behavior. 
When John Piper speaks of domestic violence in the church, and he uses phases like:  ‘maybe the right the thing to do’ or ‘may, therefore, overrule her submission to a husband’s demand’ leaves doubt in her mind.   That is the LAST thing she needs!
The abusive person has already brainwashed her into thinking she can’t make a plausible decision to SAVE her life, and the church is going to believe HIM.  Remember she is crazy, and everyone knows it. She already feels incapable of making decisions due to his treatment of her (ie: verbal and emotional abuse – or in Piper’s words verbal unkindness), and may not feel capable of the biblical gymnastics he was asking of her.  Remember this is a time of terror and trauma.  Not the TIME to think and feel all the junk Piper has in mind.  She needs to hear someone that can be blunt, and Piper isn’t doing that.
Calling the police is taking every OUNCE of energy, and bravery she has.  She doesn’t need some speech about where her heart should be – or maybe.  It just confuses things for her.  She needs to hear support. 
She knows the church will ask her to look her sin, and what they don’t understand is she may not be able to balance that in a rational way.  The family has already been trained to owe sins that are NOT their’s to own anyway.  Their approach needs to show appreciation to this concept.  John Piper does not do this. 
All the family will feel is shame – it’s a normal environment for them.  The abuser’s words of how awful they are, and how life is their fault?  It’s a normal mindset for them, and they feel they are already condemned.  She already FEELS like a piece of dirt on the bottom on his shoe.  The abusive person LIKES IT THAT WAY, and Piper doesn’t seem to grasp that either.  Its his form of control, and its  full of entitlement for HIM – not God.  He is too broken to grasp God’s moral law, because all he sees is how people wronged him.
Does this SOUND like a person that LOVES his body, and is capable of cherishing and nourishing others when he can’t do that for himself?
When you can’t get to point A – understanding the mindset of the abuser or family – you will not help the abusive person or the family get to be point B.  All the silly spiritual pixie dust you place in between doesn’t change that fact.

4. The church should not harbor an abusive man or woman whom the civil authorities would punish if they knew what the church knows. We are called to mercy. “Be merciful as your heavenly Father is merciful” (Luke 6:36). But there are times when mercy to one demands justice for another. This is often the case with criminal abuse. Moreover, there are many ways to show mercy toward a guilty person who must pay fines or go to jail. We are seldom in a position where the choice is simply mercy or no mercy.

I have to be honest that this partial comment about ‘would punish if they knew what the church knows’?  It makes me very uncomfortable, because YES the church does have a reputation of covering up. John Piper knows this.  They feel they can do a better job – in house.  It also tells you she has gone to them first, and they are wrestling with calling the authorities.
Unfortunately,  when you have people in a church that tend to feel they know better than anyone else?  People get hurt.  John Piper has not shown his discernment on this issue yet.  You need the law, and you also need people in faith behind you – full of support and encouragement.
Most of the time the church tends to look for the ‘accident’ instead of the ‘pattern of behavior’.  Churches HAVE used the excuse that being a card carrying Christian means abusers won’t manipulate the circumstance.  They won’t wail at the alter in repentance when their fingers are crossed behind their backs.  Abusive personalities didn’t get that way because of martial issues.  Its been a long journey for them, and they know how to play their cards. 
The church gives out to much benefit of the doubt – or feel they will see right through them.  It never dawns on them that is the other way around.  The abuser will play them as well.  Sadly, Piper are too focused on the Disneyland Happily ever after.   They never wish to look at the core issues, because it may not turn out ‘biblical’ enough for them.  That’s a problem!
In most cases – they couldn’t discern the proper type of justice or mercy in these cases if their life depended on it.  Instead of being FIRM, and letting the family know they WILL be their support system the way they need it?  They go down rabbit trails.  This needs to be a time of encouragement, and so far?  It hasn’t been.  I agree we are seldom in a position where choice is simply mercy or no mercy.  We also need to allow natural consequences to happen, and at times allow God to take the wheel.
Problem is you give the wrong type of mercy if you don’t have a good grasp on whom you are dealing with. 

5. For many women, the thought of a husband going to jail and losing his job and being publicly shamed is so undesirable that they often endure much sin before becoming desperate enough to turn to the authorities. What I want to stress is that long before they reach a point of desperation — or harm — the women of the church should know that there are spiritual men and women in the church that they can turn to for help. By way of caution and lament, I cannot promise that every church has such spiritual, gifted, and compassionate men and women available for help. But many do. The intervention of these mature brothers and sisters may bring the husband to repentance and reconciliation. Or they may determine that laws have been broken and the civil authorities should or must be notified. In either case, no Christian woman (or man) should have to face abuse alone.

No doubt women do think about jail, job, and being shamed publically.  The church needs to make her feel that the shame of the circumstance is not her’s to bear.  Shame should be felt by the one whom harmed others.  Why does that message NOT come out of the church’s clearly enough for all to see?  Will that red flag be enough to seek changes, or will we make excuses and simplistic comments about it?

Now that’s one kind of situation. Just a word on the other kind. If it’s not requiring her to sin but simply hurting her, then I think she endures verbal abuse for a season, and she endures perhaps being smacked one night, and then she seeks help from the church. – Piper’s comments from 4 years ago

He confuses people because prior he told the women to take things for a season, or wait until you are hit.   There was no clarification as to how this changed since his more recent statement (or Ahem – clarification). 
Are they going to asked if they waited a season, or asked WHY they waited until harm came?   
Could those past statements be part of the reason WHY families become ‘desperate enough to turn to the authorities’.
Yes, of course they can.  You see John Piper some of the statements and attitudes towards domestic violence within the church need to owned and repented of.  Your list of the 7 justifications doesn’t cut it.
People can be mature believers, and still not know HOW to handle this type of circumstances.  It’s not a putdown at all.  You need a special type of help with experience in these matters.  Once again, there is no clarification on this either.  He leaves this damning statement out there for people to wonder about.
Since he can’t make up his mind – due to NOT clarifying police action or not…how do they determine if they will contact civil authorities?  You see, he didn’t clarify anything here.  This was to be the WHOLE purpose of his new article.  There is no mention of separation during this ‘intervention’ either – just intervention of the abuser.  Would separation even be on their minds?  Still no comment.
The bible does speak of those that do not choose to repent, and turn from their sin.  The actions towards that person – if they happen to be a spouse – is ignored they feel ‘biblically’.  Quite honestly even if he did repent instantly (which we love to look at, and yet we are to see if they can live it also)?  Do they forget the family is still scared?  Will he be allowed to live and marinate with that reality he left his family in?  I’m sorry – forgive me shouldn’t be enough for anyone yet. 
Their only true focus it seems is reconciliation.  The reality of the marriage not working out the way they feel it must makes the church wiggle with anxiety.  Now we switch from the abusers' anxieties to the churches.  That doesn’t help the terrified family, and you have to wonder when their time comes….
The churches focus is on the future – with hopefully no divorce or remarriage. 
The family wants to feel safe, and is wondering what type of attack the abuser will attempt now that they are outed.  Where does their future lie?  How will they get by?  Where will they live?  Will they ever be safe?  Those questions are NOT due to thinking of divorce or remarriage – its out of personal safety and well being.  Something most are used to, and they have not had the luxury of.  They are scared to death! 
The church worries about reminding the family that they need to think of income from the husband.  How children can get screwed up if they don’t grow up in a two parent home.  The shattered family makes the church nervous, and although some maybe well intended PUSH the repentance and reconciliation way before its even a healthy time to embark on that journey.  
The family may feel at this point that their fear is frivolous to the church – due to their reaction.  The church will say it is NOT, but they won’t put their own anxieties to the side long enough to make that family feel safe.  They feel steamrolled without options this time, and if you listen to most family members?  They hear manipulative comments coming from these compassionate brothers and sisters.  “How will you live if your husband is in jail?”

6. When Jesus commands his disciples, “If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39), he is describing one way of love: the testimony that Jesus is so sufficient to me that I do not need revenge. This was the way Christ loved us at the end: “When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly” (1 Peter 2:22–23).
But this is not the only path of love open to those who are persecuted. The Bible warrants fleeing. John Bunyan wrestled with these two strands in the Bible of how to deal with persecution:
He that flies, has warrant to do so; he that stands, has warrant to do so. Yea, the same man may both fly and stand, as the call and working of God with his heart may be. Moses fled, Ex. 2:15; Moses stood, Heb. 11:27. David fled, 1 Sam. 19:12; David stood, 24:8. Jeremiah fled, Jer. 37:11–12; Jeremiah stood, 38:17. Christ withdrew himself, Luke 19:10; Christ stood, John 18:1–8. Paul fled, 2 Cor. 11:33; Paul stood, Acts 20:22–23. . . .
Do not fly out of a slavish fear, but rather because flying is an ordinance of God, opening a door for the escape of some, which door is opened by God’s providence, and the escape countenanced by God’s Word, Matt. 10:23. (Seasonable Counsels, or Advice to Sufferers, in The Works of John Bunyan, volume 2, page 726)

‘I do not need revenge’,  is again NOT on the list of priorities for the family during this period of time.  John Piper doesn’t understand this, and I guess has ignored proven concepts like it’s the most dangerous time for them is when they escape.  They will be reviled and threatened – NOT the abuser!  They want to hide – not get back at him.   Anger may come WAY later, but its more over the treatment they had to endure  and are finally able to allow it to safety surface.   That is called righteous anger, and not the sinful type he is hinting towards here.
When you can’t wrap you head around this additional concept, it also shows how completely disconnected he is to their reality. 
He seems to be looking at the family within a different environment.  One in which someone attacks the family, and the family – as a unit – wants to lash back at them.  We aren’t speaking of an outsider coming to harm the family.  We are speaking of an insider that they live with that has been harming them, and is going to be royally ticked off that he has been exposed. 
If they separate from him?  He is going to go nuts over that aspect alone.  Granted the church maybe able to calm him down at the moment, but its not something that will stick completely within him.  His resentment and contempt for them is still firmly seeded.  John Piper can’t seem to even conceive of this at all.  He is barking up the wrong tree here! 
The only ‘stood’ parts you see hinted at here is the reconciliation of the family.  Its not time to deal with this yet!  STOP rushing!  I realize its unreasonable to ask for him to look at the fact that the abuser may not wish to change due to choice.  So life without him is not something he will ever speak about.

My closing plea is to all Christian men, and in particular to the leaders of churches: Herald a beautiful vision of complementarian marriage that calls men to bear the responsibility not only for their own courage and gentleness but also for the gentleness of the other men as well. Make it part of the culture of manhood in the church that the men will not tolerate the abuse of any of its women.

So, in other words:  being complementarian, and living HIS version of it is the answer.  We have seen plenty of churches that can speak a good game, but you find they also ‘tolerate’ quite a bit.  Saying you won’t tolerate something is just words.  Showing compassion, and following up with the right type of action is what is needed.  

You need to be responsible with speaking about abuse.  You haven’t been, and this little piece still shows the ignorance that you held on to all this time.  John Piper you didn’t clarify anything.  You just cemented in what you said the first time.  Your courage was lacking in correcting your errors, and there was no gentle humbleness.  Lead by example!  Its time to repent – NOT CLARIFY!

We don’t need your 7 biblical justifications.  That’s all you did here.  You justified what you said last time, and it shows who your ignorance is killing children, and their families.

Open Letter to John Piper about Divorce – Written by a man
Domestic Violence, Christmas, John Piper, SGM and TGC
Double Standards in the true Confusion – Video shows how John Piper approaches those that suffered abuse – other than spouses.  HUGE difference!
John Piper, and Domestic Violence in the Church

Christianity and domestic violence

In Recognition of Domestic Violence Awareness Month:  Articles of Domestic Violence in the Church and the World

 

As we all know abuse is not a gender issue, but a human one.

 

Family + False Religion = Violence

The very agent that was designed to bring healing and comfort--the church--must then reexamine its teachings, traditions, and practices that support the baser passions and drives for greed of power and control. The church can be and should be the most reliable agent for healing and restoration. The church must be a loud voice against family violence. – Sounds of Encouragement

 

 

Domestic Violence Documentary

Sin By Silence

is a documentary of women in prison in California.   

Sin by Silence is a domestic violence documentary film by Olivia Klaus that offers a unique gateway into the lives of women who are the tragedies living worst-case scenarios and survivors - women who have killed their abusive husbands. Based on the first inmate-initiated and led support group in the entire United States prison system, the film reveals the history and stories of the members of the group Convicted Women Against Abuse created by inmate Brenda Clubine in 1989. By following five women's abusive experiences that led to their incarceration, the film take viewers on their journeys from victim to survivors, reveals the history of the Battered Women Syndrome in the state of California, and shatters misconceptions. This documentary is a production of Quiet Little Place Productions.

In 2011, the film had its television premiere on Investigation Discovery to over 2.2 million viewers.

Within the last couple of months Governer Brown signed the “Sin By Silence’ bills into law.

Investigation Discovery Channel is now reairing this program on October 24, 2012.  You can check out their website to see clips, and check which channel and time it will be available in your area.

 

No Way Out But One 

In 1994 Holly Collins became an international fugitive when she grabbed her three children and went on the run. It all happened because a family court had ignored Holly’s charges, the children’s pleas, Holly’s broken nose, Zackary’s fractured skull, and other medical evidence of domestic violence. The family court in Minnesota gave full custody of Zackary and Jennifer to Holly’s ex-husband. It was at that point that Holly came to believe she and the children had No Way Out But One.

In September of 2011, Holly and her children returned to North America.  All Charges were dropped, except for the ‘contempt of court’.

Documentary Channel is airing this program on 10/29/12, and you can check to see if your TV provider is available on the site.

Here and Now have an interview with this family, and what they are doing presently.

 

Domestic Violence and the Church

Video I found that interviews a woman, and a reformed man. The husband in this case stated that the Christian counseling wasn’t what they needed, because they were more concentrated on authority of the husband. He speaks of how he wasn’t served well by the church counseling, although I’m sure it was well intended.

 

Domestic Violence Facebook Pages

 

Break The Silence Facebook Page presents stories of people that are effected by domestic violence.  It also has resources for victims and their families.

 

Church Survivors Facebook Page

 

New Book on Domestic Violence

Should I Stay or Should I Go? New Book by Lundy Bancroft.

Here are two sample chapters for Lundy’s new Book.

Resources for the man that is serious about his change

and Chapter Two as well. What’s it All About

 

Domestic Violence and the Church articles

A open letter to John Piper about his view on divorce is written from a man’s prospective regarding the domestic violence he lived with, and how John Piper’s teachings on abuse, marriage, and divorced effected his life.

 

Your teaching has dangerous consequences: people like me read your words and take what you say very seriously. When you leave no room in your church for abused and broken divorcees, that has real world effects. I am such a broken person, and I do not know where I’ll end up. I am fighting the guilt and shame of divorcing my wife and I have to remind myself every day that my guilt and shame are not real – that there is no condemnation because I am in Christ. What I feel is based on how men like you view me, not how God views me. I hope that I can find believers with whom I can some day open up and have a trusting  relationship again. Right now I am scared to talk to any believers at all, for judgement is just a few words away. I know for certain I will never end up in your church and I will cringe every time you are quoted. It is difficult to respect a man who would call me to endure torture in a situation he does not understand.

 

Abuse and God’s Mercy: Martin’s Story is written by another man – also a victim of domestic violence in the church.  He was divorced, and remarried to a wonderful wife.  He speaks of his journey that God has place him on, and the rejection of him in ministry due to his remarriage.  Its an inspiring story of how faith helped him overcome, and learn to do God’s will for his life.

 

To the best of my knowledge, no church exists that would ordain a pastor with my background.  I rejoice in my service at the Mission and will wait on the Lord for the next opportunity.  At least now there’s no quit left in me.  God has given me enough trial to know – there’s no option besides perseverance for me.

There is a God in heaven that is more powerful than the nastiest group of Deacons, Elders, or Pastors.  He will show each of us His path for us to go, and He loves each of us no more than the other, that is without limit.

Less important than a pair of socks

Biblical Personhood writes a short story of over the top submission, and leaves everyone in the dust besides the father.

I was a teenager at the time. I was crying as I told my mother of my problem.

Then he bursts in. He does not await his turn to speak. He bellows: “There should be eight pairs of socks in my drawer and there are only seven!” My very submissive mother leaves me in the middle of my sob story, to go and find my father’s 8^th pair of socks.

It is not like he needs those socks right now, mind you. He is not on his way somewhere and desperately need the black socks to match his clothes. He simply dislikes the thought that not all his things are in the right places.

Silence and violence in the church is an article by Theological Curves

For five years I asked the seminary where I was teaching if we could have a chapel service that addressed family violence and abuse. I was dreaming of a service that offered hope for survivors and solidarity from those who had been impacted by violence directly or indirectly. For five years I was told in a variety of ways that abuse was not our concern nor an appropriate issue within a seminary. Some years it was a direct verbal message, other years I would be politely listened to and then would never hear a follow up or was told after the fact that all chapel times were already scheduled.

All of this despite the fact that recently one of the graduates from this seminary was convicted of murdering his wife and that every semester I had students in my office discussing their own past and current abuse.

The Issue at the Heart of Domestic Violence By Danni Moss – a friend of mine that has passed away.  I’m blessed that her family decided to keep her blog up, and her ministry alive by her words even after she passed.  We still miss you Danni!

 

Domestic Violence and Fundamentalist Christianity

The religion they practiced tended to focus on the darker aspects of Christianity. They focused on the sufferings of Christ on the cross, His torments. They focused on the torments of hell for unrepentant sinners. They focused on how BAD people were, how we were all born in sin and would die in sin, did we not repent, and suffer the torments of hell in the lake of fire forever!

There was no carrot in front of the donkey's nose: it was the devil with a pitchfork prodding the donkey from behind, all the way.

They also blamed EVE, for letting sin into the world. We were all children of Eve. They also had a peculiar relish in eschewing the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Whore of Babylon, and the adulterous woman that Jesus saved from stoning. It was impressed on us as girl children that any immodesty on our part, the least bit of natural human curiosity about the opposite sex, was shamefully our fault and could lead to dire consequences here on earth in addition to damning us to hell forevermore. My mother was excessively modest, appearing to be frightened of and uncomfortable inside her own body. I think she wished not to have a body at all, and wished no one else did, either.

 

The Girl Effect, part 4  On this blog (Yeshua, Hineni!)there is a series of articles, and they are all worth reading!  I wanted to link to this one, and to point out the resources at the end.

I Want you to know, if you know someone, or if you are currently experiencing domestic violence - This is not what G-d calls you to. Find HOPE.  G-d wants you to have health and healing. He wants you to thrive. YOU ARE NOT CALLED TO BE "submissive" to abuse. This is not at all what G-d designed when the mandate after the Fall was given.  This is not what was given to us at Sinai. This is not the freedom that Y'shua brings, and that Paul heralds. It simply is not.

John MacArthur discounts the seriousness of abuse 

Barbara writes about YET another pastor that claims he ‘gets it’, but YET AGAIN clearly has no clue what he is talking about.

 

She starts her article off by quoting John MacArthur:

“If a violence-prone husband becomes agitated and abusive, the wife should remove herself from danger, by leaving the home if necessary. God has promised that He will not test us beyond our ability to endure, but will always make a way of escape (1 Corinthians 10:13). Sometimes escape is the only way. If you have children and they are in danger, take them someplace where you will be secure until you feel you may safely come back.
If you are not truly in any physical danger, but are merely a weary wife who is fed up with a cantankerous or disagreeable husband–even if he is an unbeliever who is hostile to the things of God–God’s desire is that you stay and pray and sanctify that husband by your presence as a beloved child of God (1 Corinthians 7:10-16). The Lord will protect you and teach you in the midst of the difficult time.

Just as John Piper, and many other pastors they never tell you to call the police.  They tell you to stay away until you feel it is safe to return.    The ‘deal with it’ attitude is what is killing the trust between Christ Followers, and the so called ‘leaders’ of the church.  Its irresponsible for pastor’s to speak of domestic violence in the church when it is clear they have NOT educated themselves on the issues, dangers, and damage.

 

Poems and Prose about domestic violence

 

The Last Straw lists poems about domestic violence. 

Poetry about children and domestic violence

 

What It Means To Be A Victim

A CHOSEN VESSEL

Will you love me to death?

SHATTERED PIECES

RECYCLED ROSE

Walls

You Can't

 

 

 

These are just some of the awesome sources that I have found within the last week, and I honestly can’t remember them all.  There has been so many good articles that cover this topic, and I know I’m missing SOME!

 

I also have many other resources on my Emotional Abuse and Your Faith resource links page that I try to add to regularly.

 

If you have any articles, facebook pages, videos, poems or prose about domestic violence and the church…or the world?  I would love for you  to share them here in the comment section!

Mutuality or Bait and Switch?

The problem has been compounded by the fact that some complementarians seem to shy away from using the term mutuality. Perhaps they would rather avoid the word than attempt to extricate it from egalitarian connotations. That’s too bad, because both the egalitarian effort to redefine the word, and the complementarian hesitation to wholly embrace it, obscure a profound biblical truth: Complementarity fosters mutuality at a far deeper level than sameness does.

– Mary Kassian

Mary Kassian started a series called, Complementarity & Mutuality.


The comments were particularly interesting reading.  She was called out on the terms that they tend to use regularly to define the differences between complementarian and egalitarian beliefs.  The strange part to me?  She tends to redefine ‘belief’ systems with her own terminology.

The points that were made is that you can’t find these terms like ‘sameness’ or ‘role-interchangeability’ outside the complementarian realm.  These terms are not used within the Egalitarian circles, and makes it is confusing as to why they need to use them at all.

Mary Kassian basically said she couldn’t come up with better terminology, and how semantics are confusing.  (shrugs) I guess that means they made up something, because they can’t figure out how better to describe it.  It certainly takes much away from what some think she is trying to say.

I think most would find that explanation rather disingenuous.  

I mean all you have to truly do is google the term Christian Egalitarian, and come up with a better definition that uses plain English without extras. 

Let try that:

Christian egalitarianism holds that all people are equal before God and in Christ; have equal responsibility to use their gifts and obey their calling to the glory of God; and are called to roles and ministries without regard to class, gender, or race.

Makes a bit more sense than ‘sameness’ or ‘role-interchangeability’ doesn’t it?  Most would be able to understand the term ‘mutuality’ within the above definition as well – without her make up words.

Readers seem confused between complementarian versus hierarchy

If you look a bit closer?  Most of the questions to her were about hierarchy, and how that plays into life.  Mary Kassian is forever stating that complementarian belief systems is not the same as hierarchy as some are describing it.

So why are they are always making these debates about complementarian compared to egalitarian?   That doesn’t seem to be the debate at all.   At least to her readers that have questions!

People are confused about what complementarian stand truly IS!  How it is different from ‘traditionalism’ or ‘hierarchicalism’ as she quoted it.

If you notice the comments, questions, and explanations given most of the time on their information has more to do with what Mary Kassian terms as: ‘hierarchicalism wrapped in legalism’.  Last time I checked?  That has nothing to do with egalitarian beliefs.

Instead of getting defensive … stand up against these teachings that harm so many, and do so with more than a sentence or two stating that isn’t what you MEAN or how your beliefs work!

What it shows is that they have a HUGE hindrance in regards to their definition of what they believe.  Her articles on strawman’s or complementarian’s for dummies don’t seem to be doing her position any justice.  It seems she is to vague as to what it is – as opposed to what it isn’t.

Why do they keep presenting things as ‘complementarian versus egalitarian’ then?  I would guess that is something she would rather discuss, but it should tell them something when they can’t get past the ‘hierarchical’ portion of the discussion.   There seems to be a lot of confusion as to what the difference is.

Maybe they can could make up some more words to make it more clear?!    I wouldn’t recommend it, because their made up terminology thus far isn’t doing them any favors.

Shock Jock Doug Wilson Penetrates Gospel Coalition

“The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife. Do not deprive each other except perhaps by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.”-1st Corinthians 7:4-5

The blog world seems on fire over a recent article by the Gospel Coalition.   The article was called, ‘The Polluted Waters of 50 Shades of Grey, Etc.’, and to be fair a follow up piece called, ‘Shades of Outrage”.

(Note:  I edited the above links due to them removing from website.  I have placed a cached image of the articles in question in my google docs so you may still view them.  Jared Wilson also offered up an apology.)

I’m sure you might have guessed that the author Jared Wilson was talking about a secular book that seems popular today.  To be fair?  I haven’t read it, and honestly don’t know much about it except for what is talked about briefly in the news.

To me, there seems to be enough on our plates as Christians.  I don’t understand why we seem to have to remind the body of Christ of ‘what the world thinks’ of things.  It’s the world right?  We aren’t told to conquer or scold the world, and I have to wonder if some do forget what the mission as Christians is.

Today in different circles of faith I realize that some like to use these types of items as tools.    Its tools to use against the other circles of faith that seem to have doctrinal – along with other differences from themselves.  I find it kind of childish at times, and I honestly don’t know why people ‘buy into it’ to the extreme that they do.  (In this circumstance – they use the marriage bed like this, and we view it like that type of thing)

Name calling, and swapping personal jabs tends to repel people from coming to the faith more than anything.  Why wouldn’t it?  You see in on the news, in the work place, and in the current politic environment all the time.   When people act like this?  They can claim all the wish they are different from the ‘world’, but their speech and actions certainly don’t back them up with anything substantial.

What the uproar seems to be about is a quote from Christian ‘shock jock’ Douglas Wilson.  From I can gather?  He is the fringe of the fringe of what most would say is the patriarchy or complementarian circles.   So why do pastor’s like John Piper, or organizations like The Gospel Coalition quote him?  That does make you wonder doesn’t  it?!

As you might have guessed the original article was about how the ‘general public’ is going nuts over this new book, and how they just don’t grasp what God’s intent is for the marriage bed.

Here is the quote most are talking about:

When we quarrel with the way the world is, we find that the world has ways of getting back at us. In other words, however we try, the sexual act cannot be made into an egalitarian pleasuring party. A man penetrates, conquers, colonizes, plants. A woman receives, surrenders, accepts. This is of course offensive to all egalitarians, and so our culture has rebelled against the concept of authority and submission in marriage. This means that we have sought to suppress the concepts of authority and submission as they relate to the marriage bed. – Shock Jock Doug Wilson

My first thought?  Here is a gentleman (Jared Wilson) that is calling out a book that he states is like acceptable po#n of the day.  How the world thinks it is acceptable to live out rape fantasies and such.  So what does he do?  

He quotes the Christian Shock Jock Doug  Wilson from his book, ‘Fidelity: What It Means to be a One-Woman Man’.  (If you are interested it’s the chapter on rape on the link)  If you notice the above bolded part Doug Wilson uses what most recognize as ‘rape language’ to show how he feels is the proper context for the marriage bed.