Example of Projection in Dr. Marc Montes Tweets

I recently heard about Dr. Marc Monte tweets, and I wanted to point out this example of projection.

 

His last statement was, “Seems unreasonable to make comments about me when we’ve never met.  You come across as an angry young man.”

 

Now, lets look at his comments on twitter that for some reason to him DON’T come across as ‘angry’.  OH!  Lets not forget the important side note – what spurred the ‘angry’ man (cough!) to respond to him at all!

 

Went to BJU from ‘85-‘89.  Never heard one word about abuse.  Only psychos feel ‘abused’.  The rest of us had fun in a protected place.

and

Too many ‘victims’ use the Internet as a platform for whining.  If laws were broken, involved the police – not the internet.

 

Here is one definition of projection: Projection is a defense mechanism that involves taking our own unacceptable qualities or feelings and ascribing them to other people. For example, if you have a strong dislike for someone, you might instead believe that he or she does not like you. Projection works by allowing the expression of the desire or impulse, but in a way that the ego cannot recognize, therefore reducing anxiety.

 

Dr. Marc Monte uses projection by telling someone they come across as ‘angry’, but doesn’t see how he is coming across as ‘angry’ by his own statements.

 

Also, he has never met anyone that has been abused – by his own statements – and yet feels perfectly calm and cool about calling them psychos and whiners. 

 

The truth of the matter is he didn’t like being called out on his unchristian like statements.  In return stated the person that mentions this as ‘angry’ instead.  No doubt this did reduce his anxiety about stating things the way he did.  He can now blow the man off, and not deal with his own sinful comments (coping mechanism).

 

Then Dr. Monte – I guess – somewhat attempted to change his tone and demeanor (I don’t think I’ve had the pleasure of meeting you), and states he is curious about the specifics the gentleman’s comment.

 

Now, you have to wonder if Dr. Marc Monte lives under a rock…and thus wonder why he made the comments he did.  BUT that would make him clearly look foolish, since his friend Chuck Phelps had just been through all this. 

 

Or

 

Its just deflection because he doesn’t like being called out on the cruel comments that he made.

 

Notice also how the responder states he doesn’t understand the blindly insensitive comments he made towards suffering victims.  Dr. Marc Monte decides at that point to completely ignore the conversation. 

 

What does that show?  Common sense would tell us that he isn’t all that interested in ‘specifics’ is he?

 

Then we see statements do show some serious arrogance.

 

Since he never saw – or heard of – any abuse that automatically means NO abuse happened.

 

BJU (Bob Jones University) brought in an organization ( Godly Response to Abuse in a Christian Environment – GRACE) to investigate these claims, and I would assume he also sees this as waste of time and energy.  No, Dr. Marc Monte didn’t feel the need to call them names, or assumptions about this action.

 

Could be because he realizes that all hell would break loose all over him if he did state that BJU succumbed to the pressures of the world, and brought GRACE in at all.   Yes, I threw in a bit of sarcasm in that last comment.  It’s something they would no doubt parrot about others if it were NOT happening to them.

 

Right after these cruel tweets that sadly Dr. Marc Monte can’t comprehend as insensitive at best he received another response: You never caught a whiff because it was common to get rid of those who shine light on what happened. That's psycho.

People that refuse to own their statements and opinions don’t tend to respond, and as you can see he pretty much mastered that skill.  BJU like the Catholic churches that are in the news again now have this in common.  The Catholics got rid of the priest, and IFB got rid of the victims.  They both got rid of the problem so they didn’t have to deal with it.  They just chose different ways to basically do the same thing.

 

The difference is that the Catholic CHURCH will acknowledge what happened, and are mourning the aftermath.  Worshiper’s of the Catholic church mourn for the victims, and they are upset at a system of cover up.  Yes they are angry, and justifiably so.  Empathy for the victims is the Christian thing to do, because that is what Jesus would ask of us.  The Catholic church will be dealing with this for years, and still have a ways to go.  Dr. Marc Monte doesn’t seem to grasp this needs to be acknowledged and dealt with.

 

Now, BJU News asked him to look at a page that calls out Dr. Monte’s behavior, and ask him if he knew what BJU was even being investigated about.

 

Dr. Monte decided that playing dumb, and instead stated the article had no specifics about BJU in it.   In reality,  Dr. Marc Monte didn’t like the fact it was talking about HIM and his response to abuse victims.  That also is deflection.   The part about asking him if he knew the specifics of the investigation at BJU?  He pretended he didn’t even read that part at all.  The silence is deafening.

 

The intelligent thing to do is be gracious, and admit his error.  Instead, because it wasn’t HIS experience it didn’t happen at all.  Then he felt he must go a step further, and state that people that are abused are ‘psychos’.

 

Dr. Marc Monte that received a honorary Doctorate, ”in 2005 for work related to exposing the dangers of radical Islam in America.”   Yet the poor man can’t even grasp WHY people refer to comments like his as The Baptist Taliban.  Could it be he learned how to ignore these issues by watching them (radical Islam) do the same thing?

 

NOW that is something to truly ponder isn’t it?

Jack Schapp Exposed and then Fired!

Anyone remember this man?

This is Jack Schaap, and some may remember him from the 20/20 special that aired regarding Tina Anderson.  Jack Schaap’s attitude was exposed then as far as I’m concerned.

 

For some strange reason – I’m sure narcissism – he decided to do a follow up sermon after that story on 20/20 with additional rants about how he was glad he was a man.

 

When people got upset over it – which he claims WHO CARES – they went around and attempted to scrub this ugly portion of the sermon DOWN off the internet. 

 

Jack Schaap’s transcript is something I wrote out since he was taking down his words of arrogance.  His audience seemed to like it as they hooted and hollered their support from the pews.   The upload of this is on Internet Archive.  This did not get removed.

 

They seem to forget once it is on the internet?  Its almost impossible to scrub it clean completely.

I wouldn't get theology from a woman. I don't mind if mamma teaches the kids, I don't mind a strong lady, and a wise woman, and a gracious godly woman, that follows the lesson and teaching of the pastor.

Hey all you listening to me right now, I still believe it would be a cold day in Hell before i get my theology from a woman. I'm a preacher. Wasn't called papa sin(?).

No woman ever got me involved in ministry. I didn't follow a woman into ministry. A woman didn't write this book. No woman wrote the scriptures right here. A man wrote the Bible -- got it from God. A man hung on the cross. His name is Jesus Christ and God called a man to lead the church here. Hey! I'm glad I'm a man!

So many of you got nervous. Saw the preacher on the news. Praise the Lord the word of God is being quoted. More than some of you're doing about getting the word of god out.

I don't care about being politically correct. I don't care who it hair lips. I don't care if it bothers everybody from the White House, or the old man sitting in the out house. I wanna know what's going on in the church house, and I'm the messenger of the church.

This man of God (cough) has been fired this week due to his own ‘sexual sin’.  The hints of a story started on Facebook this morning, and honestly I wasn’t sure if it was true or not.  By this afternoon it was in the newspapers.

 

 

Jack Schaap has been dismissed from his church.

 

The note on facebook seems to be true, although I’m sure more details will surface in time. 

 

Here is what the facebook note stated:

 

I need to get the word out there...Jack Schaap, Pastor of First Baptist Church in Hammond was fired from his pastorate for beign a pedophile and raping a teen girl. She is under the legal age. She is a bus kid. She began counseling for sexual abuse. She took advantage of her. He preyed on her. He raped her. He's a filthy pervert. He is a corrupt, evil pedophile. He was caught while the youth conference because he left his cell phone on the pulpit. A deacon picked up the phone and saw a photo which she had just texted him of them in a sexual encounter. This is not hear-say. This information is from the police. He will be prosecuted. And if anyone is withholding information, they will be prosecuted as well. He's a RAPIST. He is a CHILD MOLESTER. He is a PEDOPHILE. We must take a stand!!! Silence breeds this behavior. Let's use our voice and support those who know what happened ... they need to tell everything to the police. Lets stand by the bus kid he abused. Let's not tolerate people in authority to rape children. We are suppose to be christians and we need to have righteous indignation!!! Jack Schaap is a pervert, he raped a teen, he's a pedophile, committed adultery, liar, deceiver, sex offender, predator, corrupt, power hungry, and should be in prison. And if we do what's right, he will be in prison and will not be able to prey on any more young girls. Please get the word out there. We need to stand together as one. Stand up for this girl. Stand up for those who know all the details and the police are questioning. They need to tell the truth and we will rally behind them.

It seems this church has learned something from the whole Chuck Phelps and Tina Anderson mess.  So far they don’t seem to be ‘hiding’ anything, and have involved the police.  What other’s have said?  Jack Schaap and his family have indeed left town, and he was due to preach this evening.

 

I hope they do NOT make excuses for this man.  Goodness knows we saw enough attempting to justify everything from Tina’s rape to Chuck Phelps handling of the case.  Those justifications make them look like fools, and so far it seems they seem to be doing the right thing.

 

What seems ironic is that Jack Schaap’s just did some strange sermon on, ‘What Mom and Dad Don’t Know Will Hurt Him’.  He was basically talking ugly about teenagers, and how he is the modern day Dr. Spock for the parents at this time.  Bleck!

”And I’ll look at the person and say, who ya sleeping with? Your kid’s problem(s) isn’t, the, did you see how short her skirt is, no, the problem is, she takes her skirt, and everything else off. Your kids are coming to me and telling me they have sexual experiences in the hundreds; hundreds; hundreds.”

As most of his sermons are currently being scrubbed from the internet as we speak?  You have to wonder if a bit of projection wasn’t going on there.

 

Presently David Gibbs, official lawyer for scandal ridden fundamentalist churches, is flying in for damage control.

 

Let’s hope they continue down the right path.  You just know this is going to be bad.  There will be plenty of people hurt.

 

My prayers are with them.

 

First Baptist Church of Hammond Pastor Jack Schaap fired amid investigation

 

Hammond Baptist dismisses pastor for 'sin'

 

We Love You, those that are Victim(s) of Jack Schaap

 

Jack Schaap of the Independent Fundamental Baptist Church Dismissed And Sheriff's Office Investigation Ensues

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.

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’?

I am an Agitator! Want to join me?

Like they were always on guard thinking that
we are going to do something to him
- while they were doing it to us.

I watched the Freedom Riders last night on PBS.  I have to say I was terribly moved.

I don't think the younger generation can truly understand how ugly those attitudes were back then.  Don't get me wrong in saying bigotry is a thing of the past - its not.

Have we forgotten today how much non violence had moved a nation not even a generation ago?  At times I wonder.

You watched blacks and whites - male and female - go directly into the line of fire.  You watched how mobs of people allowed their hate and fear turn to violence.

They had the control, and they will tell you that their Negros liked it that way.  Sound familiar?  The world wasn't going to tell them how they should treat those under them.  They were happy with the status quo, and they spoke for 'their' blacks as well telling the world they were content as well.

When you are raised with this belief, and it is encouraged and lived as much as possible?  It amazes me how much people will just accept it.  I have no doubt that even some 'Negros' as they were labeled believed in their inferior status, but that is NOT to say some or even MOST believed that lie.

If you were in the south you got killed for stepping out of line, or maimed at the very least.   I'm not saying the North were not bigots as well, because we all know they are all over even today.

Jocelyn Andersen has a book, 'Woman this is War' in which she looks at past history to challenge the gender roles.  If you see this documentary (Freedom Riders) you can clearly see Jocelyn's points in her book.  Its like history trying the same old tired excuses, but focuses in a different direction of gender now.

Instead of calling people feminists?  They were called, "Agitators".  Why were they called that?  They felt that people should be able to sit where they wished on the bus.  The 'Negros' were to sit in the back of the bus.  They were not allowed to use the same facilities, or water fountains.

They were to be 'separate but equal' as the saying went to keep the systems of segregation.  The law stated the separation would exist as long as you had equal facilities for each.  We all know that didn't happen.

You hear the whites claim that this system has been in place for hundreds of years, and its just the way the whites like it - and blacks like it as well.  After all, they claim 'the whites are the best friend a negro has!"  If you give him a chance (the white man) he will even show you, and tell you about his benevolence towards 'their' Negros. Makes you sick doesn't it?


Agitators

It's hard to wrap my mind around the fact I grew up in this period.  There was so much toxic hate.  My parents were part of the 'agitators' group, and they raised my brother and I to be agitators as well.  White agitators were the worse kind according to the 'normal red blooded' whites.  We were traitors and a disgrace to our race. 

Here is a quote that truly hit home for me from the movie.  There were many others, but it rang true for today in the world of 'equal in value, but differing roles'.

We dealt with violence everyday in the south.

They didn't treat us like we were human.

They treated us like we were vicious animals.

Like they were always on guard thinking that we are going to do something to them - while they were doing it to us.

The sentence I underlined?  That is called projection.  You project your sins to others.