The Church Hurt ME! Should we say that?

Should we be saying, “The Church Hurt Me”?  This was a title of a rebuke article over at the Gospel Coalition this last week. 

 

I thought to myself – WOW talk about bad taste to bring up such a thing after some pretty ugly opinions in the light of the ‘alleged’ victims of C.J. Mahaney’s network of churches.  Remember this was just a week PRIOR!

 

Are they seriously that out of touch?

 

Remember this tends to be a figure of speech.  Most of the time people are referring to a principal of hurt they experienced at a church.  The author went the literal route.  As in every Christian on earth, and every Christian Organization HURT me. 

 

I guess if it wasn’t published so quickly after the SGM Scandal I might not have such a bad taste in my mouth.  I would still think it was a bad approach being so literal, but it wouldn’t seem so ugly if the circumstances were NOT as they are!

 

Timing is key at times, and under the circumstances the author seems to be speaking of some petty things in comparison to the ‘alleged’ lawbreakers at Sovereign Grace Ministries they supported just a week prior.  When you think the of heat they took after their statements?  It looks really bad.

 

Here are some items the article brought up for discussion.

• Failure to hear the person's feedback on controversial issue.
  Refusal of certain type of service.
  Church member offending you in some way

Now, under normal circumstances I can see addressing these items.  Yes, some people do get very hurt or dismayed at church.  Heck I suppose even as ‘literally’ as the author wrote to be as well. 

Although since we aren’t under normal circumstances?  Taking a phrase that people use – when you are under criticism of enabling ‘alleged’ lawbreakers? 

Timing of this type of rebuke is just distasteful.

 

The Universal Church

The person could mean the big-C Church has hurt them–all Christians everywhere. That sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it? But think about it. When a person says “The church has hurt me” and they’re refusing to visit or join any local congregation of believers they have practically projected their hurt onto the entire universal body of Christ! They have assigned their offense to every possible Christian and Christian congregation imaginable. Practically, their distrust has reached universal proportions. In every case this is false. We might provide some of our best care by helping our friends recognize the practical universalism in some of their reactions. Hopefully we can get them to dial it down to the next possible  level.

 

The person could also mean Sovereign Grace Ministries under C.J Mahaney’s authority, and the brotherhood of pastors that stood by him due to friendship.  OH YES, as they also threw the victims under the bus! 

 

Again most of the time people are talking about a ‘circumstance’, and to try to make your point by being ‘literal’?  Universalism maybe?

 

Some have every reason for the mistrust, and not everyone that gets ‘hurt by the church’ means EVERY universal aspect of Christianity.  Your application is ridiculous!

 

Maybe we need to, “Check to see if someone is referring to a principal of a circumstance – and not literal’. 

 

Sounds a little silly to ask people to ‘dial it down’, because honestly?  He used the same extremes he accuses others of. 

 

I realize the author most likely wasn’t addressing this group of individuals, but more along the types of circumstances he mentioned.  I get that.  Problem is when the wounds are fresh like they are?  You need to at least mention something to them.  You should understand that some of them have said the very same things, and for good reasons.

 

You don’t write an article to rebuke people over petty items compared to the here and now circumstances his own ministry is dealing with (Rebukes of their support).  Can we get real here for a moment?

 

Sadly, they are showing how completely insulated they are from the world their audience lives in.  Honestly?  All it would have taken is a short disclaimer.  I have no doubt he doesn’t even grasp how ugly this sounds.

 

Shall we look at his points?

 

1. Take your pain to the Lord who bore your pain and bore the sin of those who offended. In His arms are 10,000 charms.

2. Take your heart to the ones who actually offended you and seek reconciliation–and if necessary take godly, impartial help.

 

When I see this type of instruction it is rather patronizing to those that are mourning families involved with the Sovereign Grace Ministries scandal.  People that have ‘allegedly’ been harmed by forms of ‘spiritual abuse’, and manipulating scripture to fit an ideology.

 

If we glance at some of the family stories you will find a small child right out of ‘toddlerhood’ being asked to come to a meeting with their pedophile for ‘reconciliation’, and to show forgiveness.  The leadership of the church called this meeting – not the wounded family. When the leadership was called out on this type of thing?  They ignored the rebuke, and a lawsuit followed.  I hope you asked them to dial down their ‘universalism.

 

This family was ‘hurt by the church’.  Figure of speech – not literal!

 

What seems to be a pattern with some churches to never use ‘traumatic’ events like this, and it is what most think of when others speak of being hurt by the church.  After what happened recently?  Why wouldn’t they?

 

When you are writing an article like this on the coat tails of your followers being highly offended by using ‘friendship’ as a basis for ignoring this type of pain?  It would be common sense to view the article being presented in bad taste – and even offensive.  Did you acknowledge those comments under your article?

 

You see the brotherhood of pastors refused to acknowledge those they ‘offended’, and cut off the paths to reconciliation.  Remember the removing of their statement off Facebook when they didn’t like the comments?  Placing it on another website, and closing the comments completely?  Its sad that they don’t see how tacky that is – at the very least!

 

3. Stop saying, “The church hurt me.” It’s affecting your heart toward an entire congregation, many of whom are likely unaware and uninvolved in your hurt, and possibly affecting your heart toward all Christians everywhere. Don’t blame “the church.” Don’t spread your “hurt” over a wider area. If you do, it will dominate you. But if you target your pain and your reconciliation efforts–making it as small and specific as you can–you’ll experience greater control over and freedom from the hurt.

 

Stop taking a general term that most can realize the meaning of, and hinting that your definition only is appropriate one under the circumstances.

 

Most people can ‘discern’ what people are driving at by talking to them when they use this term.  In most circumstances a validation with a pure heart and intent could move mountains, and will crush the domination you see.

 

If you can’t reach people where they are?  Those very TRUE statements you do mention will be completely loss in the translation by most.  You should know that by now.  Please.  THINK!

 

4. Do realize that not every church hurt you and people are not “all the same.” Find a local church you can join. Start slow if you need to. But let the Lord’s manifold grace come to you in the fellowship of His people. That’s normally how He comforts us in our trouble and pain (2 cor. 1).

 

Do you realize when people say this term that their definition does not always align your all compassing one. You see most adults realize that people are not ‘all the same’, and if I were guessing figured that out in childhood.  Please tell us that wasn’t lost on you!

 

OH!  Can you clue the preacher boys in that people that don’t agree with their interruptions of scripture aren’t all evil feminists, or emasculated males?   You see they do give the strong impression that those that don’t agree are ‘all the same’ in that manner.  Matter of fact they make some very strong statements to that effect. 

 

5. Live in hope. Your Lord is also Lord of the Church. He cares for your brokenness but also the brokenness of the Church. And guess what? Your pain is the means He will use to teach the church to grow in love and their love will be the means of your healing. The church needs your hurt and you need the church’s love.

 

That would start if people would speak out against the authoritarian nature of some churches or Christian Organizations, and acknowledge humans tend to use their positions within the hierarchy to ignore the hurt.  Yes, its just that important!

 

The ‘church’ is good at giving you examples all the time on ways to show your love for them, but sadly are NOT very receptive to rebuke when their own ‘authority’ it gets out of hand.   Sadly, it’s a part of human nature that makes them extremely uncomfortable to admit.  Placing the words like:  Biblical or Godly in front of their statements, names, etc. doesn’t always make it so.  People are noticing!

 

Just so I’m clear – most realize that churches aren’t ‘all the same’ in that realm.  Too many are, and it would help if people like yourself dropped the spiritual spin on things and spoke out against them.  Just think of the healing that could take place, and the reconciliation that could start upon that acknowledgement!

 

Lead by Example!

 

Tell the preacher boys that claim the lawsuit, and charges against CJ Mahaney were NOT about ‘founding a ministry’.  How they are intelligent enough to know that, and instead of just deleting that sentence in their statement?  It would look a bit more transparent if they acknowledged the statement was foolish, defensive, and an outright untruth!

 

Remind them that YES friendship can be strong at times, and they can still be friends in private.  BUT when it comes to professionalism within a ministry under such terrible circumstances?  Its not a ‘biblical’ basis of innocence, and their opinions of his character don’t change that.

 

As hard as it is for them they MUST acknowledge that a statue of limitations doesn’t mean there is no grounds for suspicion or lack of guilt.  They wrote this statement from their own emotional state at this time, and their attempt at diversion out of loyalty was sin.

 

Your article asked:  ‘Should we be saying, The Church Hurt ME?’  Yes, unless you have an audience that tends to take things too literally. 

 

There are times to take the literal approach, but sadly in this circumstance?  No.  HECK even if your audience DID say it under the circumstances that you listed?  You tend to look as silly as they do.

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.

They MADE us DO IT!

John Patterson - Governor of Alabama (approx 20 minutes into program)

These people are going town-to-town getting off the bus, and seeking trouble through mixed groups.  Negro men and white women trying to force themselves into situations, which tend to inflame the local people, and in such a manner to incense them and to enrage them and provoke them into acts of violence.  That's what they have done.  

When you watch the show Freedom Riders you will notice that the southerners make excuses for their behavior.

Black and white – men and women – were asking to be able to ride together on buses, and wanting to sit together in waiting areas.  The southerners were inflamed and enraged over the fact that these AGITATORS don’t take the Jim Crows laws seriously!

I can’t even imagine how completely scared the agitators were.  I know for myself my stomach would be doing flip-flops at the very least.

There were those that agreed with the principal they stood for, but honestly thought they were nuts to take it this far!  WHY would you purposely walk into a line of fire that you KNOW may get you killed!

People place themselves in harms way all the time for PRINCIPAL!  It was the correct, moral, and ethical, truly compassionate human principle they were standing on.

It takes guts to stand there, and take the abuse that was given in return.  THAT is what they truly did!  It was the choice of the southerners to react with violence.

The Repeating Theme of History

We know that now, but honestly?  The theme tends to repeat itself over and over in history.  It plays out in different ways, but this theme of ‘they made me do it’ is always present.

Jack Schaap Transcript - response to 20/20 broadcast

Jack Schaap arrogant response to the 20/20 program, and his enabling Elders snickering in the background

The picture of Jack Schaap preaching to his church after segments of him appeared on the 20/20 show about Tina Anderson and Independent Fundamental Baptist Church.  It seems his congregation was a bit alarmed that they used him as an example of what some circles teach.

Schaap states with pride that he was quoting the word of God, and yet if you listen to what he said during the program?  None of it came from the bible at all.

You see I'm don't take my theology from a woman ISN'T in the bible.  Telling women they better look like they did when they got married, and don't allow themselves to get fat?  Its not in the bible either.

His response to the 20/20 program is defensiveness, and something the program pointed out.  You don't question nor criticize your pastor.  He can't throw 20/20 out of the church, and so instead Schaap decided to proudly rage in church instead. 

He basically proved the point of the show, and I don't think he even realized it.  The attitude they spoke of is right there for the world to see.

He was so comfortable with what he say - he told video locations throughout the internet to pull down his response due to copyright infringements.  lol okay then!

You don't take down videos of you justifying yourself to your congregation if you sleep well at night with what you said.  You don't take down videos of yourself saying, "Hallelujah God's word is getting out!" of you really MEAN IT!

You notice the elders in the background with smiles and grins on their faces?  It shows to the world their acceptance of the venom he throws at others, and their pandering to his hatred.  He admits he is arrogant, and basically tells others if you don't like OH WELL!

I have recently seen the Jack Schaap video up again on the internet.  You can search for it, but I decided to post his transcript of the video response to 20/20.

Jack Schaap Transcript - response to 20/20 broadcast:

ABC news called me this week and said "We heard that you believe that men should be in charge of their wives"

I said, "No sir, I didn't say that. I said God said that. He said husbands are the head of the wife."

I said, "You got a problem with what I said when I'm quoting the Bible, then maybe you should take it up with God."

He said, "Do you think that's appropriate?"

I said, "Son, anything God says is appropriate. I think you better get that straight right now."

I never apologise for standing where God stands. I never worry standing where God stands. Somebody says, "You know what they are going to say about you?"

Pffft, who cares?

Stand in line, pick a number, slob!

Get you little squirt gun out and squirt away.

This is not a tidy world of tyrannical men and victimized women

Look we exposed a new oppressive layer!

I had been reading some reviews about a book called, 'Half the Sky:  Turning Oppression into Opportunity for Women'.

Christianity Today has a quote that I see as universal in some aspects, but when it comes to our culture it gets blown off.

While women do suffer at the hands of men, the authors point out that it is women who abort their female fetuses, who cut the genitals of their daughters, who favor their sons over their daughters for education and medical treatment, and who often abuse their daughters-in-law. "In short, women themselves absorb and transmit misogynistic values, just as men do. This is not a tidy world of tyrannical men and victimized women, but a messier realm of oppressive social customs adhered to by men and women alike."

All over the world we have social customs, and belief systems that can be oppressive.  It's never a tidy world, but often looks like the layers of an onion.

Once you deal with the top layer, and peel it away?  You normally have different issues to deal with underneath.

Domestic Violence Registry Proposed in Texas

The State of Texas is talking about putting together a domestic violence registry for those individuals that have been convicted of domestic violence 3 or more times.



If you can't see the video click here

Roy Rios from Lubbock’s Women's Protective Services supports House Bill 100. Under the legislation, it would take three convictions for a person to be entered into the registry.

"Having your information out there on this level is always intimidating, but I think as far as what this really stands for, making sure people are accountable when they are convicted of family violence, I think it has more pros then it does cons,” said Rios.

Rios believes that by making this information public, it will add to public safety and help deter people from getting into violent relationships. Defense attorney Rod Hobson believes otherwise.

"The idea is I guess you're not going to date the person if they've been convicted three times of something that's in a centralized database. Some people might not want to date somebody if they've been convicted once. Some people might not care. Why is the state of Texas getting involved in a situation to this extent," Hobson said.

Hobson said domestic violence convictions are already a matter of public record and asks who is going to pay for it.

There are concerns on both sides, which would include how this could stop offenders from gaining employment. Another reason they brought up was having their name posted online forever even after they had been rehabilitated.

I would have to wonder what they would consider 'rehabilitated' personally. Men and women that graduate from the domestic violence classes that are court ordered after three convictions?

Think the Best of Them!

My last post I wrote about an article I had found online that did a book review for 'No Place For Abuse".

I received a comment, and additional issues started to pop into my head.  How regular advice turns into actual enabling of the abusive relationship.  Here is the excellent comment in question.

Hannah, a supportive friend sent me that article before I left my abusive relationship. At that time, I was thrilled that a Christian article endorsed separation, because my advice was that I could not or should not separate.

But reading another article on the site (gotquestions.org) about divorce for abuse concerned me. Although there isn't anywhere to respond or comment, there are contact details so you can write to them. That's what I did, and my concerns were exactly what you referred to. It is incredible how people dismiss the experience of the abused victim and deny her the right to judge or observe the abusers' changes. Her safety is also discounted, with the recommendation to reconcile taking priority as soon as things look "safe". There is no acknowledgment of the abusive cycle, or the manipulative tactics involved.

But the great thing is that I saw the recommendation for that book and being new to all of this, I was hungry. One thing led to another, and I slowly gained more information and insight to abusive behavior, and eventually separated.

Thanks for your post - if only more people challenged the type of thinking propagated by that article.

Thank you Anonymous!

If there is one thing I see over and over again on advice to victims is to 'think the best' of their abuser.

Concentrate on the good things.

Look at the positives.  

I think you get my drift here.

Victim Mindset

The victim mindset is normally geared to 'think about the positive' aspects of their abuser.  At times they go to great lengths to place themselves in a negative light JUST so their abuser is thought about in a better one.

They are willing throw themselves 'under the bus' as the saying goes for the benefit of the abuser.

People that claim they understand the power and control aspect of domestic violence within the church?  They tend to take the assets and debits at face value. They don't see this as part of the cycle, and yet again they show how little they truly do know.

What people tend to do when victims point out NOT so nice things about their partner?  They apply stereotypes towards them.  They are being to negative, and can't think of nice things to say.  They need to take their 'black and white' view of things off for a moment, and stop viewing things as they are cutting the spouse down, being negative, etc.

If everyone has to be so 'nicey nice' all the time is it any wonder why people don't go to the church before things get really bad?

People get so caught up with this 'preconceived' ideas that if someone states one thing in frustration or anger they are half the issue.  They aren't thinking enough of the good traits of the spouse.  Victims like most people will either 'own' the fact they are awful person for even showing that 'disrespect', or will get defensive because most people only hear and deal with one nasty portion they mentioned and nothing else.

It may seem easy to most to 'stick' to negative thinking about your spouse, because we hear church ranting and raving about that all the time.  Victims at times will actually do this as well, but if you look beyond the surface stuff?  The coping mechanism most of the time is doing just the opposite - think the best and make excuses for them.  They may at times voice their frustration, but most of the time their 'self talk' goes in the opposite direction.

Victims throw out surface stuff to see what the reaction will be. It like sticking your toe into the water to see how COLD it is!

They are a good parent, but when they drink they get nasty.

They are good spouse, but tend to be very jealous if someone even looks at me - or I at them.   

The reactions I see a lot:

Are you both Christians?  Have you spoke to your pastor?  Are you counseling?  What is your definition of 'drink to much'?  Is their infidelity in your past, and is that why they are jealous? Are they stressed at work?  What are doing to serve your partner so they don't go there in their thoughts?  You need to make sure you don't concentrate to much on the bad stuff, and remember they are good parent and spouse!  If you spend to much time in the negative aspects you will be come hard hearted, and you will make them react worse!

Ever notice how advice tends to border line encouragement of codependency?

Alot of the times victims have a hard time even getting to 'but' part of the sentence, and when they are brave enough to finally do that?  People around them already have this 'image' of the abusive person in their head, and they just can't fathom that the extreme negative aspects that victims tend to 'hint' at.

You said they were a good parent/spouse, so maybe you are taking this to far!

WAFFLING

Waffling is a term people use about victims going back and forth over being 'angry' at their circumstance, or feeling 'sorry' for the abuser.  We all need empathy, but victims tend to take it to far.  If they would just be 'nicer' or 'more understanding' the abuser won't abuse.

If I follow the recommendations of the police that filed a restraining order?  My partner will get more depressed.  They will get angry with me.  They may lose their job.  I just want someone to help me, and to help them!  If I would have just kept my mouth shut that night he/she wouldn't have been arrested, and I wouldn't be in this place.  I made things worse.  What happens with the children?  They are scared, but they love him/her also.  They may blame me.  Is it my fault?  Why does he/she do this?

What they miss is balance.  They are so confused that they are indecisive and can't make up their minds.

This may be a trait that some have had all their lifes in dealing with relationships, or the abuser fostered this to use to their advantage. Waffling is helpful the abuser, because it is a aspect they can use to get themselves off the hook regarding accountability.   Doubt is a aspect abusers use as a weapon, and have no problems turning it around to their advantage.

People may be incapable of decisions at the beginning, but with help and support that can turn around.

People that try to help support victims and their families tend to miss the 'waffling' aspect of this.

Its a lingering aspect that is part of the power and control cycle that people claim they understand, and this is one aspect where they show their ignorance by not connecting the dots.

The waffling is a by product of the abusive relationship, and a tool the abuser used to keep them in their 'place'.  Abusive people will use this to their advantage, because confusion can easily be used as a 'power over' aspect.

Think only the Best of Them!

This is another red hot area people completely dismiss within the abusive relationships.  "Thinking the Best of Them' has been used as a coping mechanism for the relationship itself.  Victims use this all the time just to be able to deal with their reality.  They forever are making up excuses for their abusers actions, and only focusing on the positive in order to live in denial with all they have within them.

Thinking the best of someone can be enabling instead of helpful to victims.  This advice is good when you are dealing with a healthy couple, but with an abusive one?  You are asking the victim to use a coping tool they have used for a long time, because mentioning anything BUT the good can be dangerous.

They may have brought up things in the past 'softly', and it was turned around on them.  Abusers show them - because they are incapable processing anything negative about themselves - that they brought things up wrong, its actually the victim issue not them, or if you don't like it get f*ck out!

Helping parties don't realize their 'Think the best of Them' is received the same way.  You have now placed them in the corner, and they are ready for the attack.

In it's true form, Enabling behavior means something positive. It's our natural instinct to reach out and help someone we love when they are down or having problems.

However, when we apply it to certain problems in living - domestic violence, financial trouble, codependency, certain forms of chronic depression -- enabling behaviors have the reverse effect of what is intended.

Victims tend to 'look for the good aspects' so they don't have to deal with the ones that are dangerous.

Victims don't need to 'think the best of them', because they could hand you volumes of information on that subject.

They need help with dealing with the not so nice parts.  

They can give you all kinds of excuses for the behavior as well, because it has been drilled into them.  The Abuser's bad childhood, their drug, drink, or p#rn habits.  They have an awful boss, and their family doesn't cooperate.  Abusers basically drill into victims they are the 'true victims'.  They can't help themselves.  The victims role is to make their world safe and comfortable - anything less?  They failed at their job once again.

To think the BEST of them is another advantage people hand over to the abuser with the power and control cycle.

The abusers will tell them they don't think enough of the GOOD stuff, and their behavior is the end product of that.  They basically hint that even others know victims are pushing their buttons, and why can't they grasp their abusive behavior is a reaction to such.

If you would THINK the best of me like everyone says?  You would forgive and forget!  Since you can never do that you are actually 'abusing' me!  Don't you ever think of anyone but yourself?  Everyone knows how selfish you are!

People assume because they can identify the difference EVERYONE can!  They don't apply the 'abusive dynamic mindset', and use normal healthy thinking instead.

When parties that wish to help they must place the normal family dynamics to the side.  There is always an ugly twist to those that abusers use to their advantage, and you will miss your opportunity if you can't separate the two.

Waffling and "Thinking the best of them" are tools of survival within the abusive relationship.  People not able to identify the unhealthy use of these aspects?  They will not help anyone, but will allow the abuser to have the upper hand once again.