Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem

I actually call forgiveness the "F" word for the evangelical community, because of how they use forgiveness.  

It's not that victims are against forgiveness. 

Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem.  

Because the problem will go on and on and on as long as every victim continues to give forgiveness.  The organization does not have to address the issues. 

All God’s Children Documentary

As you might have guessed I was watching All God’s Children on Youtube the other night, and the above quote I felt was very profound.  The Video segment above has this quote.

Children of missionaries were placed in boarding schools while their parents served as missionaries – in this case in Africa.  The children were abused badly by the caregivers, and as adult survivors they asked the missionary organization to start dealing with what happened.  The organization threw out the ‘forgiveness’ card, and stonewalled with prevention of this from happening to other children.  They wanted to blow it off as a ‘select few’ that I’m sure they wanted to treat as bad apples, but were overwhelmed with the numbers of survivors that came forward after the story went public.

What happened next was a show of fear towards the missionary alliance’s reputation, and self preservation.  They attempted to ‘deal with it’, but you get the sense they did it more from pressure than from genuine concern.  

Once the heat was removed (somewhat anyway) they were able to go on ‘doing God’s work’.   What they failed to realize or face was helping these victims, and preventing future victims IS God’s work as well.  They pretended their priories were not out of whack.

Sadly, what it shows is if other missionary children are abused?  They have no hope of true support within their community.  They will be set adrift.  I pray that the links I supplied below will be of help to you.

As the men and women within this video documentary spoke of the triggers they deal with to this day?  That doesn’t show a lack of forgiveness, but of struggle. 

They are still struggling to learn to cope with their past, and superhuman type of forgiveness others demand of them is NOT helping them by any stretch of the imagination.

Its true that the faith community does tend to use forgiveness so they don’t have to address the problem or issues.  Once the victim ‘forgives’ they move on as if nothing ever happened.  Victims are left to deal with this on their own, and sharing the burdens that comes from healing is the ‘unforgiveable’ to ask for.

Today forgiveness is a tool that is used, so the church doesn’t have to deal with things that seem to ugly.

Forgiveness is suppose to be for us, and yet it is used as a ‘on demand’ concept for others.  The forgiveness then turns into something for others, and not for the victim at all. 

You see this way to often when dealing with emotional abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and spiritual abuse.  Most of the time people that abuse others in this way?  The victims are asked to forgive their abuser, and then sadly those victims must then find ways of forgiving those that counseled them (on forgiveness) because they would rather wipe the slate clean afterwards – then help them mend other aspects that go along with healing afterwards.

You see those cycle of emotions afterwards are used as ‘points of unforgiveness or bitterness’, and that is the big lie when it comes to support of abuse victims.  Its laziness, unforgiveness towards victims, and fear of how this would impact THEIR circumstance and might bruise THEIR lifes or organization.    It has nothing to do with smearing God in some way, but has everything to do with their fear of facing sin.  Its self perseveration in the ugliest form.

Cycle of Healing – When do you face this?

They say its human to take the path of less resistance.  Victims are easy to steam roll because they are in weaken state anyway, and sadly all too often the faith community takes the ‘secular’ path that is far from biblical.

People that are abused, and are allowed healing tend to have cycles similar to the cycle of grief – loss of a loved one.  I remember when my father died they reminded me of these stages, and how they may not go in order – and you can deal with one cycle again and again at times.

• Denial: “This can’t be happening to me.”
  
• Anger: “Why is this happening? Who is to blame?”
  
• Bargaining: “Make this not happen, and in return I will ____.”
  
• Depression: “I’m too sad to do anything.”
  
• Acceptance: “I’m at peace with what happened.”
  

They tell you these cycles are normal and healthy.  In time you will reach the other side in which you learn to live with what has happened, and are able to go on with life.  That doesn’t mean you forget about the death, and you don’t mourn anymore.  It means that grief no longer overwhelms your life.  Most people have dealt with a death, and you see the genuine support people need as acceptable due to this.

Sadly, that is NOT true for abuse victims most of the time.  That seems especially true if those victims are within the church body – and the abuser is also.

It amazes me that people just ask this superhuman concept of others (instant forgiveness) when abuse happens, without having them process things that they have dealt with.  Then you notice those that counsel this ‘instant forgiveness’ are the ones railing against some pet sin they are against, and then place this aura of how its ‘everywhere around them’.  No, they aren’t ones that do the superhuman concept of instant forgiveness either.   Sadly, they are in so much denial they can’t see it.

Transformation is what is truly amazing!

They say if you beat a dog long enough he will learn to bite you in return after a while.  In softer terms if you torment a cat all the time you may get a good scratch or bite in defense as well.  Most people can ‘grasp’ and understand these concepts, and most are NOT going to blame the animals for their reaction.  If you take that animal and place it in better circumstances people are amazed at the transformation. 

My Siamese cat died in January – he was 17 years old.  He was rescue animal, and you could tell something had happened in the past due to his fear towards things that most cats would not be.  He never lashed out, or would bite.  He was just full of fear.  He was a young cat, and we used plenty of love, patience, and fun to help him come out of his shell.  In time he slowly came out, and he learned that not everyone/everything around him was worth fearing.  Those fears would pop up from time to time, but they lessoned as he enjoyed being spoiled with praise, kisses, rubs and plenty of kitty treats. 

He learned to trust us, and knew we had his best in mind.  When he was older we brought home a puppy, and at that point our cat was strong enough to show him (the puppy) WHOM the top dog was in the house.  Our cat also was secure enough in his position within the family to learn to love the puppy, and in return the puppy had a healthy respect for that ‘old man’.  My Siamese didn’t fear him as he would in the past, and after the patriarchy was established (if you will) he truly cared for his new pup. 

Towards the end of his life I think he sensed my fear of losing him, and he just lovingly endured things as we tried to save him with genuine affection in his eyes.  The day I put him down he was not afraid either, and he almost gave me one last smile as he fell asleep for the last time.    The transformation in that cat was amazing.

I think it is the same with people that are hurt and abused.  They need love, patience, grace and loads of support.  Fear hurts, and is NOT a comfortable state of living. 

Asking victims to forgive is all well and good, but telling them NOT to process their grief, fear, and the other host of emotions?  Its not healthy nor is it normal way of dealing with things.   People are big on saying love is not an emotion, but an action.  Sadly, the actions are not there with most abuse victims.  Using forgiveness as a tool to wipe the slate clean instead of helping them process what happened to them?  That’s not love its fear.

Avoidance is fear – not love!

On the one hand I can understand and empathize with this fear, but on the other hand I can see the terrible effects not facing those fears have on life.  The instant forgiveness crowd may not realize they cement belief systems in victims when they can not do as God would have them do. 

You learn to NOT trust an abuser, and you learn NOT to trust counsel as well when they also aren’t safe to help them process things.  That isn’t being a perpetual ‘victim’, but common sense towards the human nature.   Its like learning to speak ‘cat’, and telling my old pal he didn’t need our love to move past his fear. It’s unrealistic, and spiritual pixie dust to expect it.

When you read Psalms you hear similar cries of pain and anguish, and yet Psalms is NOT used to show you how NOT to deal with injustice, abuse and neglect.  It doesn’t tell others to have this superhuman forgiveness, so others can wipe the slate clean because they are afraid of dealing with reality of circumstances.  Instead it shows the pain and reality of life at times, and does NOT encourage people to stuff things down because those around them are to afraid to help. 

Its sad that people can show MORE compassion towards the death of pet than they do the destruction of a person.

The church sadly is no different than the world when it comes to injustice within the church.  They just have their unique way of NOT dealing with it.   The abuser tells you that its all your fault, and the quote ‘healthy’ ones within the church tend to send the same message once the abuse surfaces.  Telling them to forgive where the church can forget!  Yes, it’s the same as telling victims its their fault all over again.

It’s a sick mindset.  The denial is also very strong, and you could see this within the IFB community when the Tina Anderson story was exposed.  They just were plain unable to to understand WHY people were against Chuck Phelps being a board member afterwards.  They didn’t conceive the reasons that others didn’t accept their ‘authority’ to hound, manipulate and bully those that cried foul.  The organization called, Do Right BJU was started and BJU felt they were right – and they showed the world how sadly they do not have good grasp on reality nor scripture.

We had a person on a faith board that used to be in existence that loved to use manipulative statements of forgiveness towards other hurting people.  He or She would say something along the lines of, “I’m glad MY God forgives me better than you can forgive others!”  Why people think that type of statement is anywhere near helpful towards anyone just boggles the mind.  Yet this statement reassembles the attitude towards victims of abuse completely.

When it seems forgiveness is more for them than for you?  Its okay to cry foul, and please continue to reach out and find those that do understand what God asks from them towards your pain.

Victims are against forgiveness as the solution to the problem.

Forgiveness isn’t the solution to the problem of denial – its just one step of many towards healing.  It’s the scapegoat of the church uses to NOT do what God asks of them.  You can’t share in each other burdens when you pretend those burdens no longer exist.

The church sadly in most cases are more hurtful than secular society when dealing with sin within their own circle.   I’m so thankful for those individuals, organizations, churches and leaders that live out Christ like Love towards victims.  I just pray that some day they aren’t so few and far between.

Please accept the following links if you also need support:

All God’s Children – Documentary website

Missionary Kids Safety Net

Missionary Kids Advocates Forum

MK Planet online community for current MKs and Adult MKs (MK=Missionary kids)

The Hope For Survivors Ministry providing support for victims of clergy sexual abuse

In the links section at the top of my blog is other types of support and missions to help you with your faith towards healing.

My prayers are with you, the faith community, and lastly the abusers themselves.

Do Right BJU! The Principals of Protest!

I’m sure some of you remember the backlash of the Tina Anderson story.  The Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches all felt they were being branded for actions taken by the few.  Yes, you tend to hear these type of responses anytime something ugly like this happens. Unfortunately, the victims tend to be lost in most of it.

 

Sadly, Bob Jones University is showing that Chuck Phelp’s response ISN’T all that uncommon.  Sounds like the ‘few’ are the ones that can see the failings in this case.

 

On a very optimistic note, there have been students from the Bob Jones University that have stepped up to call out issues that arose that made them feel uncomfortable and unsafe.  Chuck Phelps as you may remember feels that he is the true victim in what happened.  He has taken credit for the conviction of Ernie Willis, and yet still feels justified on leaving his website up calling Tina Anderson a liar.  How can you take credit for a conviction of the rapist, and then call the rape victim a liar?  Could be one of the principals that make the students uneasy. 

 

When the students found that Chuck Phelps was on the board of BJU a protest was started.  They had a petition online for signatures, and started a Facebook page called, ‘Do Right BJU’.  BJU is a very strict school, and the students were instructed to step down (stop creation of page) and remove the Facebook page.  They have not done so at this point, and frankly it would be wise if the university addressed their concerns.  Most knew when the students were asked to stop the chances of expulsion were highly likely.   BJU also issued a statement that has been removed, but people uploaded screenshots online.

 

Sadly, the university had taken the stand in agreement with Chuck Phelps that he was indeed the victim in the Tina Anderson Case.   They decided to stand behind their man, and if you read the statement itself?  Its drips with manipulation. 

Afraid of Conflict Resolution

I will admit at times I get apprehensive about being ‘real’ around certain people.  I used to be REALLY bad at that, because I was taught that you should always be the sugar sweet person at all times. 

 

That means instead of voicing your opinion about why something makes you upset?  You have to stop, think, and possibly go a different route to voice this – or you know not to voice it at all. 

 

Why?  People tend to point out your attitude as they see it, and wish to deal with that more than the substance of the point or hurt in question.

 

I’m not going to say that it’s a bad thing to watch your tone and approach.  I will say at times we tend to go a little to far in that realm.  If your approach isn’t ‘just so’ that is what is pointed out and concentrated on more than the true hurt that people need to deal with.

 

The Wartburg Watch recently had an article called the confessions of a SGM Pastor.  They speak of two awful stories about people within a fellowship that found out their children had been sexually abused by another party within the fellowship.  The principals that church followed were to help bring ‘peace’ among all parties.  The problem is in order to have this ‘peace’ they basically avoided dealing with the circumstances completely.  The families couldn’t speak of the hurt and betrayal they felt over the molestation, because to the church it showed their lack of forgiveness.

These were situations where the family of the victim and the family of the perpetrator were friends. There were pre-existing, close relationships. As they’re trying to sort these things through, when relational conflicts arose between the victim’s family and the perpetrator’s family, we unwisely used a Peacemaker model for conflict resolution. This resulted, put them on an equal plane – get the log out of your eye, get the log out of your eye, go for the speck, go for the speck – this resulted in the victim’s family being corrected when they should have been gently cared for as sufferers.

I read this and I thought of the many stories we have all heard not only that dealt with this issue, but also the theme of the blog – domestic violence in the church.  This is more doctrine that fact.

 

How often are men, women and children asked to look at their own sin before they speak about verbal abuse, emotional abuse, sexual abuse?  I think of Tina Anderson , and how she was asked to own 1% of the sin of her being raped.  How many stories have read over at Danni Moss’s Blog, Because It Matters in which she spoke of boy and girls being molested by people in the church, and adults feeling very justified in attacking the children to defend the adult.  How these children were running after the molester to be with them – thus they must have wanted it.    How the adult in the church was a 'Godly’ person, and just made a mistake.

 

How often do we hear hints of BE more submissive, watch your tone and approach, and make sure you are ‘encouraging’ to the person that is abusing you verbally, emotionally or physically? 

 

We don’t do well in gently caring for sufferers.  When a spouse or child are being abused we see more often than not how we need to realize a relationship is 50/50 in fault, and we never attempt to deal with the dangerous brokenness of character – or obvious sinfulness of that person.  We are asked to look for the GOOD qualities, and don’t be so nasty that all you see is the BAD ones! 

 

Yes.  There are always assumptions about your motivation, character, and how you dealt with things so far.

Chuck Phelps Enables Woody Allen type of relationship

 Chuck Phelps is now trying to explain the new ‘forgive and forget’ sexual abuse accusation that he blew off.

You remember the scandal that happened to Woody Allen?  He thought it was an awesome idea to shack up with his stepdaughter!

Well I guess we have another Chuck Phelps approved and not concerned about another 'Woody Allen’ saga.  Why do I say that?  Because Chuck Phelp’s story is a comedy of errors of sorts.  I mean Cheryl’s stepfather attempted to do the same thing as Woody Allen did. 

He also said he had no legal obligation to call the police because she was an adult when he learned of the allegations.

The sad part is?  She had younger siblings in the home as well, and Phelps decided to take the family’s word that THEY reported Cheryl’s claims to the police.  Can you imagine? 

In the world of one of Woody Allen’s comedies that could happen.   The fact we don’t live in the land of comedy – where people don’t get hurt?  Chuck Phelps failed his moral obligation to protect those children in the house UNDER the age of 18.

He didn't just blow off Cheryl, but failed her siblings as well.

I have to wonder if we tell people that rob houses if they went to Chuck Phelps house, and they get caught?  Tell Pastor Phelps you called the police before they made the decision to rob him.  I mean if the man is gullible enough to think the family is going to going to report their own molester?  Why wouldn’t he fall for it!

Here is a girl that has gone to his church, and his school.  She tells him about unwanted touching from her stepdad Woody.  Then Pastor Phelps decided since Chuck Phelps himself told him to STOP that Woody the stepdad did!  This is a man that helped raise this young woman, and unlike Ernie Willis he wasn’t brought before the church for (ahem) a compassion plea.  I mean he was unfaithful as well no?

It wasn’t until Cheryl was on vacation with her family, and told her Aunt and Uncle about what was happening at home did ANYONE do anything.  They – thankfully – took her in their home since it seems her church, and AGAIN her own mother wouldn’t protect her.

In the portion of the letter posted on the website, Sheffield said Cheryl told him her stepfather had been touching her at night, starting when she turned 18 and continuing for a year. He said Cheryl's mother was told of the abuse in January 1996, shortly before Cheryl turned 19, and that her mother went to Phelps for help.
Phelps said the letter went on to say that an officer with the Warner police was investigating the case.

Sheffield said yesterday that he had read what Phelps posted on his website and said he remembered writing everything except the part about the police investigating the case.

"That's news to me today," Sheffield said. "That's completely foreign to me."
Sheffield said he wanted to call the police in 1996, but Cheryl was scared and refused to talk to an officer. Instead, Sheffield said, he called DCYF, since he was concerned about Cheryl's younger sister living in the Warner home.

Now, if we read the above?  Phelps is hinting at the fact that Sheffield (the uncle) was going to report what happened to Cheryl, because she had younger siblings in the home. 

You notice that Chuck Phelps himself – knowing about this even before Cheryl’s Uncle  - didn’t think to do that.  Once again Chuck Phelps is trying to say that it’s the police’s fault.  It’s not Chuck Phelps that should have called, because according to him he had no legal obligation to do so. 

The letter that Phelps posted on his website?  It wasn’t even sent to Chuck Phelps to begin with.  Another thing he attempts to take credit for receiving:

Sheffield also said he didn't send that letter to Phelps, but wrote it in response to letters he said Cheryl had been receiving from friends at Trinity Baptist. After Cheryl moved to California, letters began arriving at Sheffield's house, "questioning why she was leaving God, leaving the church," Sheffield said. "It was all being blamed on her by them."
He said the person to whom he sent the letter must have given it to Phelps.

This tends to line up with what Tina Anderson was saying from the beginning as well.  How they were the one and true church – how everyone else is not doing it right, etc.  Ahem.  I'm sure Chuck Phelps will also state that he had no idea about the letters - which would be a lie.

Sheffield said he also had a phone conversation with Phelps either shortly before or after he mailed the letter. He said he asked Phelps why he didn't report the allegations to the police, and "what I remember him saying is he did not have any obligation, any legal standing to report this," citing confidentiality rules protecting a pastor's conversations with church members, Sheffield said.

While Phelps said yesterday that he never instructed Cheryl to forgive and forget, "I'll never forget that," Sheffield said, recalling his conversation with the pastor. "He used the words 'forgive and forget.' That it did no good to destroy that family."

Tina was thrown under the bus for the sake of Ernie Willis’s family as well.  There was no reason his family needed to be destroyed, and so they sent Tina away to have her baby among strangers.

Now.  Seriously.  Can you imagine any pastor ‘condoning’ a Woody Allen type of relationship within their church?  I guess in Chuck Phelps eyes he didn’t.  I mean he told him to stop, and according to Chuck Phelps he did.  According to Cheryl?  Well, I guess that doesn’t matter.  We must not destroy that family.

We also don’t need to make sure that stepdad Woody doesn’t go on to ‘touch’ anyone else in that family – well besides his lovely enabling wife.

Church’s like the ones that Phelps ministers to?  They are ones that hold family above the people within it. 

They are ones that use rose colored glasses to see the ‘best’ only.  They refuse to deal with the dirty that happens in this world. 

They are part of the reason that people leave the church, give up on God, try to drown their pain with drugs and booze.  Why?  They need to deal with the dirty parts, and find a way of living with them in order to heal. 

Forgive and Forget?  Phelps says:

"That is language that is being suggested by a special-interest group that publicly criticizes independent Baptist churches to generate media attention," Phelps, now a pastor at a Baptist church in Indianapolis, said in a statement. "That allegation is a bald-faced lie."

Malachi 2:7 “For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of the LORD Almighty and people seek instruction from his mouth. 8 But you have turned from the way and by your teaching have caused many to stumble; you have violated the covenant with Levi,” says the LORD Almighty. 9 “So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law.”

Your play on words does NOT make your actions better.  I’m not part of a ‘special interest group’, and it doesn’t take brain surgeon to realize you once again have shown your proven track record of betrayal.

Breaking Covenant Through Injustice
Malachi2:17 You have wearied the LORD with your words.
“How have we wearied him?” you ask.
By saying, “All who do evil are good in the eyes of the LORD, and he is pleased with them”
or “Where is the God of justice?"

Partiality in matters of law God sees.  It was so plain others see it as well.  You don’t enable a Woody Allen type of stepfather to stay in the home with other children.  Their safety and wellbeing is more important than the marriage.  It was evil and even children can point it out to you.

Reference Article, “Pastor fires back in new abuse case”

9 “So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law.”

Chasm of Forgive and Forget!

Chuck Phelps at Tina Anderson's Trial attempting to get
sympathy for being thrown under the bus.

Sadly, it has been brought out that a second victim of Chuck Phelps, and his time at Trinity Baptist Church in Concord NH has been brought forward.

Once again Chuck Phelps is working with his lawyer to make sure his response to this second accusation is not seen as pure damage control.

Watch the chasm again of Forgive and Forget.

ChucklesTravels has the victim's uncle response.  The Concord Monitor wrote a story about, but they tend not to allow non subscribers read it.  I placed a copy in my documents section online if you would like to read it. 

Chuck Phelps of course has his response online once again.  You can click to enlarge.

Phelps Excuse for new victim page 1

Phelps Excuse for new victim page 2

I'm sure as with the Tina Anderson story more things will surface as time goes along.

The one thing that is similar between the two stories is that Dr. Chuck Phelps is more concerned about defending himself, and calls this a 'second sad story'.  He makes a point - once again - of the age of the victim.  He then claims the abuses stopped after he was informed of this.

This victim - unlike Tina - moved in with her Aunt and Uncle after informing them during a family vacation what had been happening at home.  The victim's mother told her brother (the uncle) that it had been dealt with - within the church.  The uncle contacted the police in the area, because she had two younger siblings still living them.  He also contacted Chuck Phelps who basically told him it was confidential, and the victim needed to forgive and forget.

Brian Fuller, current pastor of Trinity Baptist Church has removed the stepfather from worship, and other activities since learning about this second case.  Something of course that never entered the mind of Chuck Phelps during Tina's nor the new victim allegations at the time.  It seems that Chuck Phelps likes to forgive and forget.

Chuck Phelps also stated he contacted child services and the police once he was informed of the abuses, due to there being two other minors in the home.  The police claim no such record was filed.

Chuck Phelps now taking credit for conviction

Below is a letter that Chuck Phelps has on his website now.  He is basically attempting to take credit for the conviction that he fought very hard not to help happen in the first place.  The quoted portions are my notes.  His entitlement and diversions is amazing to me.  No humbleness is shown.  Its sad.

A Verdict Reached – Ernie Willis Guilty

The trail of Ernie Willis took place in Concord, NH, from May 23 to 28, 2011.  After a week of hearing witnesses, a jury found Ernie Willis Guilt on all counts placed before them.  There are those who may be curious about my reactions.

I am relieved.  Tina Anderson had a right to seek justice, and she is no doubt thankful that Ernie Willis has been convicted.  Ernie Willis broke the law.  No one has ever denied this.  When Tina made allegations concerning Ernie Willis in 1997, her mother and I reported the matter as a crime to the Concord police department (a fact now affirmed under oath by me, her mother, and the Concord police investigator assigned to the case).  Unfortunately, the Concord police were not diligent to follow-up on the reports given to them.  Further, it was affirmed under oath by me and a Concord police officer that I called the New Hampshire Division of Youth and Family Services and reported Tina’s situation as was required by the law.  Sadly, this report did not bring the immediate follow-up that is expected norm today.

If you note from the trial? 

Chuck Phelps and Christine Leaf both made it clear that Tina made no ‘allegations’ of rape to them – the purpose of the trial.  They both repeatedly reminded everyone she never said she was ‘raped’.  It was a ‘convert dating relationship’, and Phelps even noted on camera that he didn’t consider it rape.  By calling this a ‘covert dating relationship’ does infer that he felt it was ‘consensual’, and not a crime at least in his eyes. 

What Chuck Phelps is leaving out is they do not have record of him contacting the police, but do have a record of him contacting New Hampshire's child services.  The police officer he mentions above contacted him – after children’s services reported to the officer, and Phelps never returned the calls.  Chuck Phelps also needs to realize that he had a ethic and moral obligation – besides his duty lawfully – to follow up if he KNEW for sure Ernie Willis broke the law – as he claims no one denied.  He needs to apologize for his lack of ‘diligent follow-up’ as well, that should have been expected to be ‘norm’ now and at the time. 

At my recommendation Mrs. Leaf took Tina to see a licensed medical professional who examined her in private and never called the police (a fact also established by the medical professional’s testimony in court).

The facts posted on this website since the April 8th 20/20 program aired have now been stated under oath.  On Tuesday, May 24, 2011, the court determined that I could share what had previously been confidential information which I received from Mr. Willis many years ago.  The release of this information no doubt played a very important part in bringing these matters to justice.

Broad Brushing? Seriously?!

I'm not broad brushing, I'm NOT broad brushing....

  

This is a perfect example of the results of being inconsiderate and broad-brushing and passing judgment on an entire group of people because of the actions of a few.

I can see the objection to having all IFB churches painted with the same broad brush. What I find interesting, though, is that IFB churches are simultaneously claiming “We’re independent of each other; we have nothing to do with *them!*” and “Don’t malign all IFBs.” If we truly are independent of one another, then it shouldn’t be a “black eye” so to speak on all IFB churches when several are caught in this web of abuse and deceit. Those IFB churches who are truly God-fearing should be rejoicing that these things are being brought out into the open and justice is finally being served.

I guess I had a bit of an epiphany last night.  The term, ‘broad-brushing’ came coming to my mind.


I think we may have all seen the defensiveness, and outright anger some are showing over the broad brushing as they claim is happening because a news program pointed out some of the ‘independent’ churches can act cultish.

The two quotes I have shown above are both IFB members, and they have a completely different approaches and views of what is happening to their world’s once the Tina Anderson trial started.

How often have you seen me write about the ‘generalizations’ that are seen in the church?  The boxes that they want people to live in?  The biblical roles that should not be stepped out of?   SOMEONE has to be in charge! type of statements?

You will follow the party line they have in mind for women or you will be labeled that flying purple people eater – the dreaded feminist!

If you can’t grasp that there are firm roles for men and women?  If you believe in equality between the sexes – you buy into the genderless blobs of ‘sameness’.

They have been broad brushing for like what? FOREVER?!

They broad brush what men should be – otherwise they are ‘feminized’.

They broad brush what women should be like – otherwise they are worldly feminists!

If you can’t handle being a follower of complementarism, and rather be egalitarian?  WELL you buy into the men and women being the ‘same’ with no differences.

You can’t appreciate God’s purpose for us, and your emotional response shows how you brought into the worldly view of things……

WHAT no one has seen the ‘broad-brushing’?  (giggles) 

It’s strange how they feel attacked, and broad brushed when this 20/20 program started to speak about Chuck Phelps, Christine Leaf, and of course what happened to Tina Anderson.  How Chuck had a letter sent to 20/20 instead of being interviewed, and it was used – but he wasn’t allowed to give HIS side of things!  How we don’t like to be labeled as a ‘cult’, or ‘cultish’!  How those things don’t happen in MY church!

Its strange how people within certain faith circles make their claim to fame for broad brushing others all the time, and yet get defensive when it is turned around the other way! 

WELL as they see it turned around anyway.  I believe most people have enough common sense to realize not all churches are like the ones you see on the 20/20 program.  Heck it was even noted during the program, but I think their agitation level was to high to see it or hear it.



The churches shown on the 20/20 program broad brush all the time.  Organizations like CBMW broad brush all the time.  People that have very rigid ideas on how your faith life needs to be lived at times broad brush if you don’t live up to their expectations.  It honestly reminds me of dirty politics.

I wonder if they will see how they broad brush people all the time, and remember what that feels like in order to learn from that experience!

They are upset over the word, ‘cult’.  Hmm.  Do you ever think they will see the broad strokes they use towards others on a regular basis?  I sure hope so, but unfortunately I doubt I will see it in my lifetime.

Broad Brushing?  Seriously?!  I wonder if they have ever heard the term, 'projection bias'?

Playing with words, and their meanings…

Since the dust has begun to settle around the Tina Anderson Rape trial we have all been able to look at things more closely.

I had mentioned on my blog talk radio interview with Jocelyn Andersen, and Cindy Kunsman that I questioned what Chuck Phelps had actually told the police when he claimed he reported the rape.  In most cases in life presentation is key to getting your message across.



Let’s take a portion of his online website for his defense (Chuck Phelps):

I immediately complied with the 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 Division 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 further about the reports or about the welfare or 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 police of compliance and partnership with official investigations of any kind.

Unfortunately, what Pastor Chuck Phelps DOESN’T say was he was informed that he must make a report in writing at the time of his phone call.

He called the police and ‘reported’ the rape as a consensual sexual relationship.  Basically, he didn’t follow through on all compliance needs to file a report.   So his ‘numerous’ reports is not factual.  It was more like phone calls to say this happened, and didn’t follow through with the rest of the obligations he was told about.

I was trying to find a word that matches how he seems to be approaching things.  He will say things that would seem obvious to most regarding what he means, and yet what he means is something else completely.  The best term I could come up with was ‘double entendre’.  It ‘is a figure of speech in which a spoken phrase is devised to be understood in either of two ways. Often the first (more obvious) meaning is straightforward, while the second meaning is less so: often risqué or ironic.’

Phelps knew he had to do the ‘report’ in writing, but he never did.  That is the type of report he knew the police and investigators had in mind, but figured the layman would never figure that out.

I believe at trial he made the excuse that he never received the paperwork, and yet again we see he never followed up either.  Now tell me does that show, ‘committed to a policy of compliance and partnership with official investigations’?

They Turned Out Despite THEM!

I sitting here praying this morning for Tina Anderson, and all those that are watching and waiting for the jury to come back.  Will there be justice? 

I think some justice has happened even before this trial started.  Willis will go to jail no matter what the jury comes back with today. 

I pray for a different type of justice – that people will open their eyes and hearts to those families that don’t give their children a chance.

What I saw at this trial – among other things – is adults at the time trying to SHAMEFULLY take ‘credit’ for the awesome adults that Tina and Tom turned out to be.  It amazes me because their ‘safe adults’ in childhood were just as dangerous as their stepfather Daniel Leaf at the time.

These adults – Tina and Tom – turned out despite the outrageous conduct, behavior, and ghastly beliefs the adults in their life's made them endure.

The church’s ignorance is killing children, and if we are lucky enough to have some survive?  It wasn’t due to the adults in their life's – they survived despite them.  Can we get REAL for a moment!  Its shameful that people TRY to take credit where CREDIT isn’t due!

Tina and her brother Tom never had a chance.  It is their faith, and their push to have a life later on that should teach others.  Yet you have people like Christine Leaf – their mother – that use their mostly awful judgment as a parent to say it wasn't all that bad – look at how they turned out!

The truth is they turned out well despite their mother.

Prayers for Tina Anderson Today!

Prayers for Tina Anderson as they start the trial Monday Morning!

Emotional Abuse and Your Faith Interview

I was interviewed on Blog Talk Radio this afternoon, and it seemed to go very well.

Jocelyn Anderson and Cindy Kunsman discuss relevant issues within the church each week. I encourage you to check out the archives from their past shows.

What is NEAT is

• You can have an email sent to you with reminders for the shows, and what the shows will be about.
• If you get a signon name on the site you are able to participate in the chat that does on during the shows.
• There is also a phone number that you can call during the show to make you own points.
• Its neat to hear the personalities online I think!
• You can also listen after the show is done if it doesn't fit your schedule.

I have been listening to their show for a couple of months now, and they truly do have some great interviews and prospective.

Listen to internet radio with jocelyn andersen on Blog Talk Radio
If you can't see player click here.

Here is the player to listen to today's show, and I'm going to place their station on my side bar as well. You can access any of their past shows there.

Thank you so much Jocelyn and Cindy for this opportunity.

Spiritual Leadership Coverups Enabled? You Get What You Honor

One theme that is written about to many times, and is quickly echoed as ‘not in my church’ is the blame shifting.

In the case of Chuck Phelps people are quickly asked to blame the police.  Chuck called, and Chuck reported.  He had her mother do the same.  

Chuck’s defense of Ernie Willis NOT being arrested until 13 years later is blame shifting.  No one wants to admit it for some reason, because ‘technically’ he followed the law.  The police never followed up.

The fact that the law was indeed broken, and a child was harmed wasn’t a good enough ‘biblical’ reason to make sure the police DID follow up.  Did this man EVER encourage the mother to make sure SHE followed up?  I would assume not, because he never EVER mentioned that.  He knows that people are questioning him NOT following up with the police, and yet he stays silence.

Since most are well aware of the fact that there are churches that don’t like outside influences within the church?  Since most know that they would rather handle these things ‘in house’?

The lack of following up by her mother and her pastor, and their example of blame shifting and also the church taking heat due to his authority is a great example of:

You Get What You Honor

I think to most that have not experienced the influence of a neglectful church truly have a hard time wrapping their minds around what happened with Tina Anderson, and so many others.

I found an IFB handbook online, and just to be clear that doesn't mean every Independent Fundamental Baptist Church follows this handbook. 

If you read parts of it particularly regarding the Head Pastor, and how he is to be seen from the congregation?  If you have wolf in sheep's clothing your congregation is being primed for abuse.  Lets look at one section, but you can read the entire handbook as well.

Responsibilities of the church to the pastor.

a. The church is to pray for their pastor; for God to give him wisdom to lead the church, and to willingly follow his leadership (Heb. 13:7).
b. The church is to submit to his God-ordained authority over the church, so that he may have a joyful ministry in the church (Heb. 13:7).
c. The church, especially the men of the flock, are to help him and be supportive of his pastoral ministry (See Exodus 17:8-13 — two men who held up Moses’ hands in battle).
d. The church is responsible to provide his family needs as well as the expenses of running the operations of the office he holds (1 Cor. 9:7-14; 1 Tim. 5:17-18).
e. The church is to protect the pastor and his family from those who would go about sowing seeds of doubt and discord among the membership; casting a shadow upon his ministry and accusing him of misdeeds in the ministry. It is a dangerous thing to attack this sacred office; and equally as dangerous to allow others in the church to do so (1 Tim. 5:19-20; Prov. 6:16-19).
f. The church should exercise firm church discipline to those who refuse to live in harmony with the other members; who are bent on destroying the fellowship of the church (Mt. 18:15-19).
g. The church member should always consult the pastor first, on any problem or matter of concern, and not spread talk around until it gets built up all out of proportion (the devil will see to that). Most often, when you sit down with your pastor, with an open Bible and prayer, things will be clearly understood and resolved so that peace can continue and that misunderstanding doesn’t create confusion.
h. There can be only one leader in a church. The pastor is that man. A church cannot survive when it has a divided allegiance towards more than one leader.
i. When God is finished with the pastor in a church, He will lead him to another work. Unless he is found unfit for the ministry, or is guilty of open sin, he is to be respected for the office he holds by all the members.
j. If any member of the church, after serious counsel with the pastor, still cannot follow his leadership, that member should, in the spirit of Christian love, quietly seek another church and pastor where he or she can serve the Lord. If that same member persists in trying to destroy the integrity and ministry of the pastor, he or she should be dealt with in accordance with church discipline as found in Matthew 18:15-19.

I have formatted the text they way they did on page 9.

Charles L. Surrett's twist and turns of the Fallacies of Logic!

Sexual predators, like any other criminal, look for an environment in which they can safely perpetrate their crimes. In an atmosphere where authority figures are viewed as 'anointed' and 'called' by God, where they are looked at as counselors and are privy to secrets in their congregation, where trust does not necessarily have to earned but is granted by the office itself. Women and children are to be submissive, which is often interpreted as subservient. Folks who ask questions are sometimes labeled as gossips and rebels. Stir in the fact that accusations of abuse are usually based solely on the word of a woman or child against The Man of Gawd and well... - you might as well pour Miracle-Gro all over it.

I found this quote on a thread speaking about the Tina Anderson charge against the IFB church.  From what I gather these people are IFB as well.  If we remember from the beginning of the 20/20 show they speak about these views well.

I think we all know there are churches out there that are bit more radical than others.  If you have read around there is a variety of responses about this from IFB members.  To me, the intelligent thing to do is speak out against the parts that have been proven and mishandled.  Responsible organizations would take this example, and reexamine their procedures - then make sure everyone within their church is aware.

Its sad when certain well-known and respected IFB members can't admit they also see mistakes that were made, and instead take a defensive stand to throw others under the bus.

Dr. Chuck Phelps as I mentioned has a website up with difference letters, and explanations to basically cover his butt.  Unfortunately, the more he places up on his website the worse he looks.

Its quite odd that a man of  “God” thinks that it would be acceptable to the world to just ‘do his job’ and report a sexual assault, and then turn around and basically tell everyone he doesn’t believe a sexual assault happened.  Then inform anyone that will listen about how he was ‘kind’ in his response.

Within the 20/20 show they spoke about the ‘old boys network’, and Chuck Phelps has now proved the point.  Dr. Chuck Phelps has placed a letter on his site from one of the boys – Dr. Charles L. Surrett.  In Dr. Surrett’s letter he characterized the show as ‘special pleading’.

Dr. Surrett defined ‘special pleading’ as intentionally presenting favorable evidence to one’s case, while at the same time purposely omitting unfavorable evidence.  He states that this may be acceptable in courtrooms, because the whole truth should come out if both sides do their jobs properly.

I would assume Dr. Surrett’s letter is to show the other side.    The problem I see is I don’t think the man watched the show, nor did he read the other documents on Dr. Chuck Phelps’s site.  He tends to contradict documents on Phelps Site, and his own use of ‘special pleading’ is seen as continuing to twist what happened.

1. He states ABC showed two cases of young ladies who were ‘allegedly’ sexually attacked from members within the IFB churches.  The show actually showed at least three. 
   
   I guess he didn’t count the cases that had convictions.  That would mean the word ‘allegedly’ at this point would be mute in light of them.  He stayed away from that, and didn't acknowledge it at all.  I guess it is because it may make his statements look 'unfavorable'.
   
   I saw that as a play on words myself.  If you are going to make your point you need to 'acknowledge' the conviction of more than one man in that case of sexual molestation that was spoken about on the program.
   
   Don't accuse an organization of 'leaving facts out', and then turn around and do it yourself

Church Discipline for Dr. Chuck Phelps!

I'm sure some of you have heard about, or even saw the 20/20 special about Tina Anderson.

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.