Bev Sterk

"Jesus’ way is the exact opposite of abuse." Amen, preach it sister... that line made me cry, because I've made a similar statment: we/the Church are doing exactly the opposite of what the Bible tells us when it comes to abuse and sexual immorality... I pray for the Church to step up and out, to walk in the potential God designed for her... being transparent and open, and humble, and honest, then, He will open the doors to bring healing through the Church...

I agree there is much potential, but we have to be willing to lose our lives (taking the risk to confess, repent, be honest and open, etc. ) first... and that's where it seems we get stuck... we don't understand and/or we refuse to acknowledge/recognize/admit it's the only way we can move forward... when in God's greater reality, it's the safest thing we can do, because it's God's way... He promises when we confess our sins TO ONE ANOTHER, that opens the door for healing (James 5)... and I have witnessed that and read testimonies that affirm that... it's a step of faith, and might feel like we are stepping off a cliff ( think of Indiana jones when he's going after the holy grail and he takes the step out into thin air, and there's an unseen rock bridge that blends in and so is invisible, but it's there!)

anyway... until there is significant, specific, transparent repentance (not some fairly safe, controlled, generic blanket statement acknowledging that we've messed up here and there, that just doesn't cut it or even come close)... I think the healing we experience in the Church will be limited... are we willing to lose our lives/reputation? are we willing to lay down our lives for those who have been hurt by/in the Church? somewhere I read, God's not worried about His reputation... the excuse of protecting reputation is a cop out by the leaders to justify cover up for each other... and it's the opposite of what Jesus did!

I know it's huge... and definitely not victimless...  just the tip of the porn iceberg is horrific... a friend recently shared Mark Driscoll's book "a call to resurgence" with me, and in it, he gives a list of some of the consequences which include the ones you mention, and again, this list is just the tip:

 

Objectification of women

lack of intimacy with spouse

no need to marry

couples who watch porn together and each fantasize about other people

promotes sex trafficking and abuse, especially of women and children (I would hope this would appall anyone enough to be so horrified that they would never want to view porn again, they are all horrible, but I would pray no one would want to be connected at all to this type of evil)

contributes to sexual sin in ALL forms

downplays severity of sexual sin

deteriorates ability to be faithful and content in marriage, which opens the door to lots more issues with children, relationships, etc.

corrupts relationship between parents and children

(paraphrased list from A call to Resurgence; mark Driscoll; 2013; Tyndale; p54-57

 

What do you mean by OK?

so does having a culture where it's OK for pastors to be honest about their struggle with porn, mean that we are saying they don't have to worry about losing their job, that we will be ok with leaving them in leadership? do we really think it's ok, for our spiritual leaders to stay in leadership if porn is an issue for them?  do we think they are still qualified to lead?  is that biblical?  Do we not view porn the same as adultery, even though that’s Jesus perspective in matthew 5?  Why or why not?  Why are the leaders so fearful?  are they fighting tooth and nail, like the Catholic church to keep it covered up, because it's so pervasive? is it possible we could have half (or more) of our leaders that should consider stepping down from leadership if the statistics are at all accurate? ... is this issue so HUGE, that’s why leaders are afraid to even begin to address it, because it would mean that maybe 50+% would lose their positions of leadership, including themselves?    are we downplaying how horrible porn is?    I'm asking, because I'm stunned at how poorly the church has so far addressed this and would like to understand what is going on that this HUGE issue keeps getting covered up by the Church leaders…  Do we think God is ok, with how the Church has responded so far?

 

...because at this point, doesn't it seem we are helping the enemy out because keeping it secret and hidden, in the dark – including through lies and deception, which is in agreement with the enemy's ways, (John 3 & 8) but God's way is bringing sin into the light, transparent truth (Eph 5), which doesn’t seem to be what we are doing?  Am I wrong?  I really struggle with understanding the fear, why are they so fearful?  that indicates a number of things, including lack of trusting God with His ways, and much worse...

 

Again, we all must be willing to lose our life/job/reputation for His sake, then we will find it... that's God's way...  hard? yes, but spiritually healthy per scripture!  One article says statistically, only 1% voluntarily share their struggle with porn, the rest get found out.   here's the link to a disturbing article on that...  I think i've posted this one before on another response... but it's worth a re-read...  http://blogs.christianpost.com/guest-views/sexual-sin-in-the-ministry-8613/

 

if it's child porn they are looking at, then they are definitely beyond any question not qualified, and I hope that would not even be a question...  even the secular world, thank God, recognizes that as very sick and very wrong...   so don't we see that when one is into porn, they are going to get more and more depraved and it tends to suck them into illegal child porn?  That will ruin your very life quickly, when it's found out...

 

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/dozens-charged-in-child-porn-case-in-nyc-area

again, I will add a warning, the reading the article could trigger responses connected with abuse... porn is evil, and especially horrific when kids are involved... and so the related articles are tough reads...

 

God help us, His Bride, to be holy as He is holy...

ok, I've hesitated to respond to this as I'm not an attorney, a pastor or a church polity expert and have minimal experience with this...  but have a significant interest for other reasons...

so I've read through the changes, and have a number of concerns...  I will address them one per post, as otherwise it might get lengthy, and I might not post them all at once, but over the next several weeks as I have time...

1) timeliness...

justice delayed is justice denied....

justice includes dealing with things in a timely manner. As I understand, when we make the judicial code the last resort in the church order (CO) process, considerable time has most likely elapsed at this point.  As evidence of that, it took one year for resolution in the recent classis Toronto decision (see post under Network safe church and recent banner article) and that wasn't even to the judicial code point yet (?), so it is quite likely that 1-4+ years have elapsed since the original incident by the time it gets to judicial code...  because of this length of time, the person bringing the charge/issue/concern runs into considerable pressure by others, including those in leadership and involved in the process, telling them to move on, let it go, and that they should drop the charges/issue since it’s been so long at that point.  Leadership involved needs to understand that the church order process can be the cause for it to take so long when it's the last resort, and the lack of timeliness of dealing with the situation is often not the fault of the person brining the charges, but is a result of the church order process.  The lack of timeliness of the process needs to be recognized and understood, not blamed on the person bringing the concern.

 

2) Words and phrases that need to have a very clear definition and understanding of the following terms or reconsider using these terms:

a. restorative justice

Restorative justice is a very broad term and needs clarity... Please include a clear, specific reference to a document, or include an appendix to what is meant by this term.  Looking back at Synod 2005, I could not find the definition in the acts of synod and needed to look in the 2005 agenda to find some idea of what we mean by this here, it was not a quick and easy search to find out what this means.  I read the 2005 overture related to this concept which states many of the same concerns I have about this concept.  Have those concerns been addressed anywhere?  If so, how, when and where?,  So, not seeing any definition in the proposed changes is concerning.

If the perpetrator is a master manipulator, the victim might be the one who ends up repenting and apologizing to the abuser.    Unbelievable?  Not unheard of, unfortunately.  I’m sure that’s not the intention, but I've heard about the victims where their spiritual leaders use their authority and tell them they are the ones in the wrong for a variety of reasons and that they are the ones that should be repenting and apologizing and asking for forgiveness.  (see above comment on timeliness and how some assume the person bringing the charge is at fault for making it drag on as one example).  I would like to see a clear, concise definition, understanding that can be quickly accessed either referenced or included here.

I agree that restorative justice is often not appropriate for charges regarding ungodly sexual conduct and any kind of abuse.  The Holy Spirit is the only One Who can ever restore the damage to the trust and innocence and other “intangibles” that have been damaged because of the situation.  I would love to see the prophetic and inner healing recognized as part of the process.  It seems that is recognized minimally in this process.

We want to make the assumption that whoever is leading will do so in a righteous, holy and godly manner.  I want to believe that too, and did for most of my life.  However, in the last several years, I have witnessed and researched multiple situations where that was not the case when it came to sexual immorality in leadership.  I have studied the Catholic Church and the sexual abuse of children that was going on for decades and how multiple levels including the Vatican were involved in covering it up, and protecting the reputation of the leader and the Church at the cost of the victim.  The code of secrecy that contributed to decades long cover up and keeping it hidden, again at the expense of those who were and continued to be victimized by leaving the priests in leadership positions, where they could continue to do their evil “deeds”.   I have researched the Sovereign Grace lawsuit, again, where sexual abuse against children by leaders was covered up for many, many years with leaders aware of it and left the perpetrators in positions of leadership, where they could continue to abuse.  I have researched Bill Gothard, a key ministry leader in the patriarchal movement, how he for years took advantage of teen girls who volunteered in his ministry, to date there have been over 30 that have come forward.  And most recently we have Doug Phillips, also a key Christian leader in the patriarchal and home school movement, in a lawsuit for sexual abuse, to mention just a few situations that have been publicized.   Along with that, in the last several years several women that have been in the crc, have shared with me their stories of abuse by leaders in the church, and that in all of their situations, the leaders were left in leadership.  Also, I have heard from others involved in a number of other abuse stories within the crc that had the same result: NO JUSTICE, and leaders protected.   Restorative justice would be wonderful, but in too many situations, we aren’t even seeing any JUSTICE at this point, unless it goes public, forcing leadership to deal with it in a more transparent way.

(there will be more words that I would like to see defined or clarified in a subsequent comment)

 

significant clarification on:

b. "manifestly" and "obviously" used in Section 6.c regarding appeals

These are quite ambiguous terms and cause me to cringe more than I’m comfortable with.  What is obvious to one person, is not necessarily so for the next, that’s how come things get to the judicial code level.  The leaders of the proceedings are generally very smart, and if they think it’s necessary, they are smart enough to manipulate and cover things up for whatever reasons they feel it’s necessary, and so it will quite likely NOT be manifestly unfair or obvious that the evidence doesn’t support the conclusion, but it will be hidden, subtle, confusing and very, very difficult to prove, especially if it’s appealing something done in strict executive session.  Transparency does not seem to be a strong point in the CRC.

The charge of an unfair hearing will be met with much resistance from the leadership, and the leadership will spin everything they need to, to make them look good, and cover up.   Anyone who is good at manipulating will be able to make the hearing appear fair to the majority of people, but you have to dig to find how they are manipulating the process.  It will not be obvious or manifest, but will take peeling back layers of a tangled web, which most likely will include manipulation, deception, twisting, spinning, misunderstanding, etc..  That's one of the reasons the Catholic Church could cover things up for decades!!!  Things are not obvious and if they were, it would not have gotten to this point in the first place.  On top of that, often people are afraid to speak out, because they will be shunned, lose their friends/job, or worse…  and that is one of the tactics the enemy uses to keep evil from being exposed.

I see these terms as significant potential loopholes that can be used to manipulate the outcome, or give the perpetrator, or leadership, a way out.  Manipulators can twist the meaning of words to make it fit their situation, and use it to try to shut down a case based on some technicality.  As one example, per the church order article 84, “sexual misconduct” has a very narrow definition, basically “sexual abuse”.  However, sexual misconduct is generally understood with a much broader interpretation than how the CO defines it.  I would think that for most people, how the CO defines “ungodly conduct” is what most people consider “sexual misconduct” as well as “ungodly”.  It seems that sometimes something is decided on a technicality, instead of what is right and just.

I’m also very concerned about “manifestly” as that could shut the door on the prophetic.  When things are so hidden, secretive, covered up, God will use the prophetic to help expose it.  Often there will be manifest evidence as well, but it might not be obvious, and being a bit familiar with our traditional understanding of the prophetic, I have concerns that we might be shutting this door of the prophetic through using this type of word seems to me could technically exclude the prophetic.

Again, if something is at the point of judicial code/last resort, there are serious issues where someone isn’t taking responsibility, or being honest, or there is something fairly deep going on.  We cannot assume everyone is doing the righteous, Christ like response at this point, because then it would have been resolved long ago.

So would love to see these terms clarified or something as they are vague and seem to leave a large loophole for leaders to do whatever they want.

I found it interesting that the crc acknowledged our lack of justice through the following statement from Synod 2014:

BOQ: Synod 2010 issued a declaration confessing that the CRC has "not always justly and compassionately helped those who have been sexually abused" and has "not always justly or adequately disciplined church leaders who have been abusers" (Acts of Synod 2010, p. 867). EOQ

I'm thinking and finding that it's been more than an isolated incident here and there.

 

the Church has a responsibility to protect others from being abused by the same person, especially if it's a spiritual leader, no matter how repentant and forgiven the offender/leader is, and that will include being disqualified (as long as you are crc?) from certain levels of leadership which hold significant levels of authority and trust by people.    I am encouraged that classis Toronto made this decision and are sending a latter of regret for what this person had to go through (again).  It's a start/step, and has helped bring a significant issue into the light... so, as others have mentioned, what now, to prevent similar situations from happening...  including preventing the abuse happening in the first place!

Ezekiel 34 has been heavy on my heart for the last several years as more and more abuse by leadership situations come to my attention ... v 16 talks about those (fat and strong) who have sought their own welfare at the expense of others, and v 17 is about rams and goats (people of power/wealth) who oppress the sheep... v21 talks about the weak sheep (victims) being shoved and driven out by the fat sheep (those in power)... sounds like shunning to me... and lines up with Rachel's comment how someone said that she can never go to church again as she received hate from some for speaking out, and they made her feel like a horrible person...

Church, we are called to much higher standards of holiness... from a number of abusive situations that have been shared with me, the response from Church leadership has not been acceptable, and that includes the crc, so it is encouraging to see Classis Toronto step up with this righteous decision.  It's way past time...  this case took a year, there are others that have been going on considerably longer... or the person gave up, because it was so painful and traumatizing and continued to be abusive from the leadership's resistance to it being exposed.

 

Both are biblical, I do find it amusing/interesting that in our tradition of being averse to spiritual experiences to some debatable extent, someone FELT it necessary to change the phrase about how we feel...  curious how that came up...  that would be interesting to know...

This reminds me of a similar hymn that has also been altered in the 1987 crc psalter... Spirit of God Descend UPON My Heart to Spirit of God Dwell Thou WITHIN My Heart...  both versions are biblically correct but speak to 2 different ways the Holy Spirit works...  He dwells WITHIN us as believers and also comes UPON people

for times of special anointing for specific seasons, times of ministry, ie revival.

Another phrase in that song was also changed, from the "baptism of the Heaven descended Dove" to the "fullness of the Heaven descended Dove".  This would be an interesting discussion as well, as it seems there are several understandings of "the baptism of the Spirit" and that is a concept Jesus mentions in Acts 1:5...  for some reason this phrase was changed...  again both are biblical, but I find it interesting as our theology of the Holy Spirit has been somewhat limited historically due to our traditional belief of cessationism.

and verse 2 of the Spirit of God song... i have rewritten that verse to a positive based on Paul's charge to us in I Cor 14:1...  I ask FOR dreams and prophet ecstasies... etc....  AND take the dimness of my soul away.  So if we sing v2 in church or anywhere I sing the positive version.

Thx. Bonnie, always appreciate your insights...

sins become a much bigger problem when there is cover up/secrecy that goes with it... then that web of lies, deceit, etc. just gets more and more of a mess... and it is false grace that allows and enables this...

honesty/confession is healing... without it we cannot move forward in a healthy way... so honesty, transparency (instead of secrecy), and accountability are all healthy... and would all line up the Word of God and His plan for His Church.

a humorous story is of a friend (bless her heart, she's ok with me sharing this) who was new to the CRC, didn't realize the "time of confession" was silent and so shared a sin she was struggling with, and then realized no one else was sharing... that was the last time she did that there...

maybe the 10-15 seconds of silent time might be something we want to re-think how that might look/sound? =) maybe something a bit more in line with James 5:16 as my friend expected...

so, is anyone interested in pursuing "deliverance" as a viable option?   has anyone ever tried this, whether or not it was succesful, or is dealing with these type of issues/sins primarily through "psychological" type intervention?

Is something holding us back on "deliverance'? 

If it seems I'm "singling" out spiritual leaders, it's because that is the point of this particular discussion... pastors with porn/lust/sexual immorality struggles... we're not discussing gossip/slander on this thread, we're not discussing lay people here, although these maybe should be discussed in some forum as well, but the point of this thread is pastors aka spiritual leaders and porn. 

Again, I go back to our walk with the Holy Spirit, or lack there of.   Does anyone agree, we might have missed something here?  or am i alone out in left field or beyond?  I believe this is part of the root issue why something like porn is such a significant problem.  But I'm open to being wrong...

I ask this respectfully, with the hope of having a sharpening discussion... iron sharpens iron, and we need to see if our sensitivity to the Holy Spirit and His gifts (and I have encountered resistance to them), might be part of the problem.  Because if it is, and we're not willing to recognize that possibility... we're as good as dead... we can have a man run institution using our intellect and natural ability that we call the crc, but the life and power of the Spirit will not be in it if we are not willing to repent of where we have quenched Him.. we can even make it appear "successful" and "healthy" to some degree, but as we know, our denom. and others like us are dying... and we are still trying to figure out why. 

I apologize, if this seems strong, but to me it's the "white" elephant that needs to be discussed in the denom.    There is so much potential, if we are willing to walk much more fully in the Spirit and His gifts.

 

 

As far as I know, every level of YWAM missionaries raise their own support... this is the case with a number of other ministries as well as Steve mentions...  I see it on a local level with young people raising support as they are called as intercessory missionaries and involved with the local prayer center where I'm on the board... now try raising support for that!!

one of the things this enables YWAM to do, is that they help hundreds of families with affordable adoptions, several social workers/attorneys raise their own support and then give their time to the adoption process... and affordable adoptions is a justice issue.