Hi Frank. I understand that you are baiting me with this comment. That’s true because you have misconstrued most of what I have said in previous comments. But I will still try to answer your questions.
First, and foremost, it is never ok to pinch any woman on the rear end, unless perhaps your own wife as gesture of love or compassion, like a kiss on the back of the neck. Of course, kissing other women on the neck would fall into the same category as giving her a pinch on the hiney, and is off limits.
As to pastors doing this, certainly it seems to be in order to give training in seminary to both male and female students. In this new age of #Me too, it might be in good order to teach future pastors to never touch a women or a man, whether on the arm or shoulder or anywhere. It can too easily be misconstrued as sexual misconduct. As to this pastor, in this story, I have no idea what his motive was, other than I doubt that he was sexually assaulting her (in her husband’s presence). His motive, whether in jest or as sexual assault, does not justify his action. So pastors, “No pinching.” Don’t be stupid. And you can tell your sons the same.
As to what do you tell your two beautiful daughters. I have one, too, and she is beautiful. Should boys pinch her on the hiney, I would have suggested that she should face the boy or man and confront him immediately. “What do you think you are doing?” Demand an explanation, as well as an apology if the pinch was unwanted. If the pinch was from her boyfriend, that might be another story. I imagine that would be the end of the incident.
I hear the stories of other men in leadership misusing their authority. We’ve all heard them. I hear stories in the news of men drugging women and while semiconscious raping them. Or men holding a woman’s future career over her head unless she has sex with him. I hear of pastors pressuring their staff members to perform oral sex on them. But I’ve never heard of someone being brought up on sexual assault charges, whether in society or the church, for a pinch on the hiney. And in this case, I can certainly understand the decision of the elders.
Thanks Frank, for your further comment. I appreciate your concern for situations like this. This incident took place in 1995, some 23 years ago. That’s a long time ago. This story is the retelling of an incident as she saw and remembers it from the past. This is her account of what happened, but we have no accounting of events from this pastor, from his perspective. In fact he is dead and cannot even tell his story. But I do believe these elders from two churches heard his perspective, and finally sided with him in judging this was not sexual assault and dismissed any charges. I am not at liberty, nor should you be, to hear a one-sided account and make a judgement. If I had heard only his accounting and not hers or others, then I would be just as at guilty in making a biased judgement. It’s too bad that these S.O.S accounts are given from only one perspective, therefore not impartial.
As I read this story and hear of the bitterness held still many years later, it would have been helpful to arrange for some counseling for this women to help her through her trauma. It may or may not have been offered. I don’t know seeing as this is a story as seen through one person’s lens.
Thanks, M Jill H, for sharing your own story and how you perceived the abuse that you experienced. I have little comment for what happened to you, except that I’m sorry. I hope that time and the love of those who surround you will contribute to your healing and comfort.
Life is full of valleys and mountain tops. The mountain tops can come from a hundred different directions, as can the valleys. Some people are struck with physical, mental, monetary, or psychological ups and downs that can be an extreme benefit or deficit upon one’s life. In this roller coaster of life, it’s hard to predict the presence or beneficence of a loving God, especially when caught in a valley (as you have suggested). The Psalmist often felt abandoned by God. “The length of our days is seventy years—or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:10) The deist suggests, that God exists, he created this world as a watchmaker but is far removed from human activity. His activity might be best seen in and through the natural laws (including the laws of relationships) that we experience daily. So, to experience God’s healing and comfort in the valleys of life, it is important to avail ourselves of that which brings healing, such as counseling, understanding and loving friendships, and time. I only wish the best for you in your situation.
Throughout my posting of comments, I have focused, in my opinion, on one flaw in this story. The retribution sought by this women against this pastor far outweighed the crime. Yes, he was wrong to pinch this lady on the hiney. Even the church elders seemed to indicate this by their initial response. But to classify this as “sexual assault,” was going too far. And so the elders, of not one church, but two, dropped the charge. To remove his pastoral credentials, even for a short time, would probably bring the end (ruin) to his ministry, a ministry that he had spent years preparing for. I believe that these elders recognized this and refused to charge this minister with sexual assault, a charge that did not fit the crime of a pinch on the hiney, even with an unkind comment. That’s my opinion, and now after all these other comments, I am convinced is still valid. Thanks for stating your opinions, as well.
Thanks, Jane, for furthering the conversation. I’ve been trying to step away from this dialogue. My last comment to M Jill H was not meant to be sarcastic, as you seem to imply, but helpful if anything. Read it, again.
Perception is very important to our understanding for a variety of actions. I had suggested in an earlier comment (to Frank) that, [“In this new age of #Me too, it might be in good order to teach future pastors to never touch a woman or a man, whether on the arm or shoulder or anywhere. It can too easily be misconstrued as sexual misconduct.”] Perception can indicate to a person whether a touch is a “come on” or an expression of caring or concern. How a young person perceives the discipline of his/her parents can be entirely different from that of the parents, whether as an expression of parental abuse or as an expression of parental love. Perception is the difference. This is just plain common sense. I’ll not pursue this further.
Thanks for the suggested reading list of helpful books on the topic of abuse. No need to send a hard copy. I’m a Kindle reader and can order it from Amazon. I imagine that you and I probably agree on many things, just not in regard to this particular story. Blessings to you.
Thanks, Kelly, for the effort you have put into this last comment. There’s much to agree with and gives me reason to pause. But I think you, yourself, have hit upon the distinguishing factor. You said, [“Of course there are differing interpretations of incidents involving harassment and abuse. From a judiciary view, opinions don't count, only facts count. If the event brought forth by the courageous story teller is true, there is only one interpretation...”] But of course interpretations do matter. Our perception of an event may be entirely different from that of someone else. The lens through which we see an activity shades the truth of what actually happened. So you say, “if the event brought forth is true...” Is a pinch on the hiney considered sexual assault? What if it was a pinch on the arm? Would that make it different? What if it was a slap in the face? As I have suggested we have one accounting of an event. We don’t know what led up to it, if he was incited. We have one account. And obviously there is another accounting. The pastor’s.
A high school boy gets into a school yard fight and is hurt, a broken arm, leg or finger. He brings charges to the principal against the other boy. Does it matter who started the fight or if the other student was hurt? I would think the accounts of both boys would be equally important in finding fault. The lens through we see an event will make a difference.
Remember, also, this was a pastor’s wife. As a pastor’s wife, certainly her word carried some weight. And I would imagine that her husband (a pastor) supported her and his word as a pastor would contribute to her weight and influence in testifying. The charge was sexual assault, according to the article, a serious crime. Was the charge justified? Apparently not.
The jury (the elders of two different churches), after hearing the two sides of the story did not charge this pastor with sexual assault. You can talk about the abuse of power by 2% of pastors, that’s an average across all U.S. denominations. Some would be lower and some higher. What is the final tally for the CRC? Does that 2% percent average mean all councils, made up of men, abuse their power? Of course not. And the likelihood of these two groups of elders making a biased judgement seems very unlikely, based on a 2% average. By suggesting so, shows a bias on your part. Thanks, Kelly, for your contribution.
Thanks, Safe Church Ministry, for publishing this account of a woman who felt she was sexually harassed by a minister at a CRC ministerial retreat. I was personally offended by this account and felt an injustice was committed.
I believe the punishment sought by this women was not comparable to the wrong that was committed by this pastor. Let me explain. Petty theft and grand theft are both crimes of stealing. Petty theft might involve the stealing of a candy bar from a grocery store, whereas grand theft might involve robbing a bank of a million dollars. Grand theft might result in twenty years in prison, whereas petty theft might result in paying for the candy bar. But both involve the act of stealing. Pinching this woman on the bottom amounts to petty theft, whereas a man exposing himself to a woman, or rape, or proposing sex might be considered a more serious crime approaching grand theft. To seek the suspension of this pastor’s ministerial credentials is way beyond the seriousness of this wrong doing (pinching a women on the bottom and making an ill chosen comment).
Put the shoe on the other foot, and consider that it was the woman who pinched the man on the bottom and said, nice hiney. More than likely the man would not be offended, but see it as light hearted humor. I doubt that very few men (including pastors) would consider this as sexual harassment. And I’m almost certain that many women feel the same sentiment. It, at least, demonstrates that most men think differently than women in regard to sex. I would imagine this pastor was acting in accord with his innate male personality and saw his actions as light hearted humor.
It is often said a speaker should know their audience before speaking. Although this pastor thought he knew his audience (this woman) for a variety of possible reasons, he had misjudged her. What he intended as light hearted humor was taken as sexual harassment by her. He knew he was in trouble the minute she made his action known to her breakfast group (which, by the away, amounts to gossip). I cannot imagine this pastor had any designs on this woman sexually, especially with her husband present. Again she was going for his throat for what he intended as humor.
The fact that he would not apologize reinforces his position. Although his outward actions accorded to her statement, he would not admit to sexual harassment (her accusation), but only to an intended humor. And, also, the fact that the elders did not likely consider this incident to involve serious sexual harassment, they were willing to review the proposed course of action and reduce the charges.
As I see it, this woman overstepped reasonable bounds in wanting to destroy this man.
Has the comment section been closed down for this article? I've noticed several new comments, both pro and con, on my internet alert, that have not made it onto the website. Is the opportunity for comments closed down for this article? I won't write further comments if it has. Thanks.
Thanks, Bonnie, for your concern about me. I don’t want you to get the wrong idea or impression of me. I am definitely against sexual harassment. I read the news accounts about men like Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Matt Lauer, Bill Hybels, and Catholic priests taking sexual advantage of children and think such people should be prosecuted severely. And such real predators in our denomination should be taken seriously, as well. But to prosecute a man severely (take his career from him) for a pinch on the but does not make sense. My guess is that this woman needs counseling as much as this pastor, or more so. And remember, we never got to hear the pastor’s side of this story. There’s a reason that he wouldn’t apologize for sexual harassment.
Kelly, you questioned my understanding of the nature of a power differential of those in leadership, what might be the boundaries and possible abuse of such leadership of those holding office. Certainly our form of church government and even civil government protects against such abuse. A jury of twelve, or a consistory of several elders protects against placing the power in the hands of a single person. Even the pastor holds no more power or authority than the other elders in our churches. Power, authority, decision making is placed in the hands of many, not just one. An example or two might help.
In the city I live in, we are witnessing a widely publicized trial of a police officer who is being tried for first degree murder of a young man on the streets of our city. There is no doubt that this police officer shot and killed the young man. It was caught on the police dash cam and has been shown to the public many, many times. The charge against him is first degree murder. Although acknowledging that he shot and killed the young man, he pleads not guilty to the charge of first degree murder. He claims this was justifiable homicide. In this trial there have been and will be expert witnesses giving their testimony that shows, in their opinion, either innocence or guilt against this officer. Does the evidence against the defendant involve a possible abuse of power by an officer? Of course. Will he be found guilty of the charges against him? Maybe so or maybe not. It all depends whether the evidence weighs in favor or against the defendant beyond any reasonable doubt in the collective mind of the jurors. This is a trial that is taking place presently in our city. Those involved have an understanding of the possible ‘abuse of power of those in authority’ issues that are important today. If he is found innocent of the charge of first degree murder, he will be set free. He may still be guilty of murder in the mind of the plaintiff, but that is just his/her opinion and is not legally binding. Expressing his/her opinion does not determine guilt. That would have already been legally determined. So again, charges sought, or the plaintiff’s opinion (or story) does not determine guilt. The verdict will come from twelve people who equally have the power of decision. This protects against either the accuser (plaintiff) or the accused (defendant) of abusing what power they might have, and protects from either deciding the verdict.
Also, presently going on, is the sentencing of Bill Cosby, being found guilty of “sexual assault,” the same charge brought by the woman in our published story. There were many witnesses who testified against Cosby, testifying to being drugged and sexually assaulted while under the influence of drugs. The evidence was conclusive and the jury brought forth a guilty verdict of sexual assault. Although the charges are the same, does Cosby’s crime even remotely compare to the charge in our story? I can’t help but wondering if the same charge of “sexual assault” was brought against Cosby for pinching a lady on the bottom, if the case would even make it to court. My contention all along has been that what this pastor did (in 1995 or today) did not constitute sexual assault and the sought after retribution did not fit the act. The jury (elders) made their final decision in good faith and their decision would stand, whether in 1995 or today (whether considering the possible abuse of power by those in authority or not). Have a great week.
Thanks Anthony for this article on whether putting culture or putting Christianity should come first in one’s life. Quite frankly, I think you are rather naive in thinking that Christianity should win the battle for dominance over culture. On what grounds do you think your students should abandon their cultural values for those of Christianity? What makes Christianity any more valid than the Islamic religion or the traditional religions of Kenya? Are the core teachings of Christianity any more valid or verifiable than those of other religions? Don’t the teachings of the Bible, especially the New Testament, have to be accepted by faith, apart from any verifiable evidence? Is there any evidence to verify that God is a three person being or that Jesus is one of those three persons who has come down from heaven to be crucified and then rise in some kind of victory over the world which we can’t see or verify? So why would or should your students so completely abandon their traditional beliefs for those of Christianity? It can't be that our beliefs are more rational or verifiable.
You may suggest that the teachings of Christianity are true, maybe even verifiable, because the Bible, God’s inspired word, teaches those truths. But the Koran, and I’m quite certain that Kenyan traditional religions, will affirm that their teachings are also completely reliable because they are also inspired of God and therefore completely true. As to truthfulness, other religions make the same claim as Christianity. So, again, why should your students jump on your wagon and abandon what they have been taught all their lives? Certainly, the fact that you believe, shouldn’t convince them anymore than what they believe would convince you to change what you believe. Again, it seems naive on your part to think that your perspective is any better than theirs. What is your rationale for saying that my religion is better and therefore it makes sense to jump all ships but mine?
Thanks Anthony for your response to Bill Wald. It seems as though you put a lot of stock in Reformed theology to explain the effectiveness of the gospel and to further explain the effectiveness of your teaching, as to whether your students grasp and take hold of it. You explain that your teaching is simply the human means that God uses to effectually call students to commitment to Christ above culture. The bottom line, it’s not your fault if they don’t fall, hook, line, and sinker, for the message you’re trying to convey. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit who does the convincing. You can rest at peace and in comfort, that you’ve done your work. I’ll assume that you do an excellent job in your teaching, although some might theoretically question whether your teaching was truly effective. The deeper problem I see, is whether the message you are conveying is really reasonable and therefore palatable. If the message doesn’t meet a rational standard why accept it as true? Why shouldn’t your students also see value in their own religious traditions?
As I see it, Reformed theology (the five points of Calvinism) is just a clever way of explaining why most people aren’t interested in the Christian message. The truth may be that the gospel is unreasonable and therefore unbelievable. But Reformed Christians (and the apostle Paul) would try to claim that such refusal is only because these refusers have not been chosen or elected unto salvation. The rational explanation is that the claim of the Christian gospel is unreasonable and unbelievable.
I’m quite sure you think that your students (who are holding on to parts of their old religion) are being unreasonable in trying to accommodate both religions or to holding on to any part of their old religion. Christianity makes so much more sense. But it makes sense because you are looking at Christianity from within the box of Christianity. You are not looking at Christianity objectively from outside the box. An objective look at Christianity from outside the box will show that Christianity is no more reasonable than other religions. You seem to be asking your students to evaluate Christianity from within your particular box (a Reformed Christian perspective) rather than stepping back and evaluating your claims objectively from outside of the box. From outside the box, some people objectively see value in a variety of religions and might want to acknowledge and accept the good in each. But you seem to fault some of your students (and some Christians in the U.S.) for wanting to do this. Again, you seem naive in wanting your students to acknowledge the same narrow view that you hold of Christianity. If I were you (and I'm not), I would be glad that my students accept the core of Christianity, even if they don't accept it in every detail as you understand it.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, Eric, for clearing that up. That was easy. And I apologize, Kelly, for my mistaken identity. The picture threw me off.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Hi Frank. I understand that you are baiting me with this comment. That’s true because you have misconstrued most of what I have said in previous comments. But I will still try to answer your questions.
First, and foremost, it is never ok to pinch any woman on the rear end, unless perhaps your own wife as gesture of love or compassion, like a kiss on the back of the neck. Of course, kissing other women on the neck would fall into the same category as giving her a pinch on the hiney, and is off limits.
As to pastors doing this, certainly it seems to be in order to give training in seminary to both male and female students. In this new age of #Me too, it might be in good order to teach future pastors to never touch a women or a man, whether on the arm or shoulder or anywhere. It can too easily be misconstrued as sexual misconduct. As to this pastor, in this story, I have no idea what his motive was, other than I doubt that he was sexually assaulting her (in her husband’s presence). His motive, whether in jest or as sexual assault, does not justify his action. So pastors, “No pinching.” Don’t be stupid. And you can tell your sons the same.
As to what do you tell your two beautiful daughters. I have one, too, and she is beautiful. Should boys pinch her on the hiney, I would have suggested that she should face the boy or man and confront him immediately. “What do you think you are doing?” Demand an explanation, as well as an apology if the pinch was unwanted. If the pinch was from her boyfriend, that might be another story. I imagine that would be the end of the incident.
I hear the stories of other men in leadership misusing their authority. We’ve all heard them. I hear stories in the news of men drugging women and while semiconscious raping them. Or men holding a woman’s future career over her head unless she has sex with him. I hear of pastors pressuring their staff members to perform oral sex on them. But I’ve never heard of someone being brought up on sexual assault charges, whether in society or the church, for a pinch on the hiney. And in this case, I can certainly understand the decision of the elders.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks Frank, for your further comment. I appreciate your concern for situations like this. This incident took place in 1995, some 23 years ago. That’s a long time ago. This story is the retelling of an incident as she saw and remembers it from the past. This is her account of what happened, but we have no accounting of events from this pastor, from his perspective. In fact he is dead and cannot even tell his story. But I do believe these elders from two churches heard his perspective, and finally sided with him in judging this was not sexual assault and dismissed any charges. I am not at liberty, nor should you be, to hear a one-sided account and make a judgement. If I had heard only his accounting and not hers or others, then I would be just as at guilty in making a biased judgement. It’s too bad that these S.O.S accounts are given from only one perspective, therefore not impartial.
As I read this story and hear of the bitterness held still many years later, it would have been helpful to arrange for some counseling for this women to help her through her trauma. It may or may not have been offered. I don’t know seeing as this is a story as seen through one person’s lens.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, M Jill H, for sharing your own story and how you perceived the abuse that you experienced. I have little comment for what happened to you, except that I’m sorry. I hope that time and the love of those who surround you will contribute to your healing and comfort.
Life is full of valleys and mountain tops. The mountain tops can come from a hundred different directions, as can the valleys. Some people are struck with physical, mental, monetary, or psychological ups and downs that can be an extreme benefit or deficit upon one’s life. In this roller coaster of life, it’s hard to predict the presence or beneficence of a loving God, especially when caught in a valley (as you have suggested). The Psalmist often felt abandoned by God. “The length of our days is seventy years—or eighty, if we have the strength; yet their span is but trouble and sorrow, for they quickly pass, and we fly away” (Psalm 90:10) The deist suggests, that God exists, he created this world as a watchmaker but is far removed from human activity. His activity might be best seen in and through the natural laws (including the laws of relationships) that we experience daily. So, to experience God’s healing and comfort in the valleys of life, it is important to avail ourselves of that which brings healing, such as counseling, understanding and loving friendships, and time. I only wish the best for you in your situation.
Throughout my posting of comments, I have focused, in my opinion, on one flaw in this story. The retribution sought by this women against this pastor far outweighed the crime. Yes, he was wrong to pinch this lady on the hiney. Even the church elders seemed to indicate this by their initial response. But to classify this as “sexual assault,” was going too far. And so the elders, of not one church, but two, dropped the charge. To remove his pastoral credentials, even for a short time, would probably bring the end (ruin) to his ministry, a ministry that he had spent years preparing for. I believe that these elders recognized this and refused to charge this minister with sexual assault, a charge that did not fit the crime of a pinch on the hiney, even with an unkind comment. That’s my opinion, and now after all these other comments, I am convinced is still valid. Thanks for stating your opinions, as well.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, Jane, for furthering the conversation. I’ve been trying to step away from this dialogue. My last comment to M Jill H was not meant to be sarcastic, as you seem to imply, but helpful if anything. Read it, again.
Perception is very important to our understanding for a variety of actions. I had suggested in an earlier comment (to Frank) that, [“In this new age of #Me too, it might be in good order to teach future pastors to never touch a woman or a man, whether on the arm or shoulder or anywhere. It can too easily be misconstrued as sexual misconduct.”] Perception can indicate to a person whether a touch is a “come on” or an expression of caring or concern. How a young person perceives the discipline of his/her parents can be entirely different from that of the parents, whether as an expression of parental abuse or as an expression of parental love. Perception is the difference. This is just plain common sense. I’ll not pursue this further.
Thanks for the suggested reading list of helpful books on the topic of abuse. No need to send a hard copy. I’m a Kindle reader and can order it from Amazon. I imagine that you and I probably agree on many things, just not in regard to this particular story. Blessings to you.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, Kelly, for the effort you have put into this last comment. There’s much to agree with and gives me reason to pause. But I think you, yourself, have hit upon the distinguishing factor. You said, [“Of course there are differing interpretations of incidents involving harassment and abuse. From a judiciary view, opinions don't count, only facts count. If the event brought forth by the courageous story teller is true, there is only one interpretation...”] But of course interpretations do matter. Our perception of an event may be entirely different from that of someone else. The lens through which we see an activity shades the truth of what actually happened. So you say, “if the event brought forth is true...” Is a pinch on the hiney considered sexual assault? What if it was a pinch on the arm? Would that make it different? What if it was a slap in the face? As I have suggested we have one accounting of an event. We don’t know what led up to it, if he was incited. We have one account. And obviously there is another accounting. The pastor’s.
A high school boy gets into a school yard fight and is hurt, a broken arm, leg or finger. He brings charges to the principal against the other boy. Does it matter who started the fight or if the other student was hurt? I would think the accounts of both boys would be equally important in finding fault. The lens through we see an event will make a difference.
Remember, also, this was a pastor’s wife. As a pastor’s wife, certainly her word carried some weight. And I would imagine that her husband (a pastor) supported her and his word as a pastor would contribute to her weight and influence in testifying. The charge was sexual assault, according to the article, a serious crime. Was the charge justified? Apparently not.
The jury (the elders of two different churches), after hearing the two sides of the story did not charge this pastor with sexual assault. You can talk about the abuse of power by 2% of pastors, that’s an average across all U.S. denominations. Some would be lower and some higher. What is the final tally for the CRC? Does that 2% percent average mean all councils, made up of men, abuse their power? Of course not. And the likelihood of these two groups of elders making a biased judgement seems very unlikely, based on a 2% average. By suggesting so, shows a bias on your part. Thanks, Kelly, for your contribution.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, Safe Church Ministry, for publishing this account of a woman who felt she was sexually harassed by a minister at a CRC ministerial retreat. I was personally offended by this account and felt an injustice was committed.
I believe the punishment sought by this women was not comparable to the wrong that was committed by this pastor. Let me explain. Petty theft and grand theft are both crimes of stealing. Petty theft might involve the stealing of a candy bar from a grocery store, whereas grand theft might involve robbing a bank of a million dollars. Grand theft might result in twenty years in prison, whereas petty theft might result in paying for the candy bar. But both involve the act of stealing. Pinching this woman on the bottom amounts to petty theft, whereas a man exposing himself to a woman, or rape, or proposing sex might be considered a more serious crime approaching grand theft. To seek the suspension of this pastor’s ministerial credentials is way beyond the seriousness of this wrong doing (pinching a women on the bottom and making an ill chosen comment).
Put the shoe on the other foot, and consider that it was the woman who pinched the man on the bottom and said, nice hiney. More than likely the man would not be offended, but see it as light hearted humor. I doubt that very few men (including pastors) would consider this as sexual harassment. And I’m almost certain that many women feel the same sentiment. It, at least, demonstrates that most men think differently than women in regard to sex. I would imagine this pastor was acting in accord with his innate male personality and saw his actions as light hearted humor.
It is often said a speaker should know their audience before speaking. Although this pastor thought he knew his audience (this woman) for a variety of possible reasons, he had misjudged her. What he intended as light hearted humor was taken as sexual harassment by her. He knew he was in trouble the minute she made his action known to her breakfast group (which, by the away, amounts to gossip). I cannot imagine this pastor had any designs on this woman sexually, especially with her husband present. Again she was going for his throat for what he intended as humor.
The fact that he would not apologize reinforces his position. Although his outward actions accorded to her statement, he would not admit to sexual harassment (her accusation), but only to an intended humor. And, also, the fact that the elders did not likely consider this incident to involve serious sexual harassment, they were willing to review the proposed course of action and reduce the charges.
As I see it, this woman overstepped reasonable bounds in wanting to destroy this man.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Has the comment section been closed down for this article? I've noticed several new comments, both pro and con, on my internet alert, that have not made it onto the website. Is the opportunity for comments closed down for this article? I won't write further comments if it has. Thanks.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Thanks, Bonnie, for your concern about me. I don’t want you to get the wrong idea or impression of me. I am definitely against sexual harassment. I read the news accounts about men like Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Matt Lauer, Bill Hybels, and Catholic priests taking sexual advantage of children and think such people should be prosecuted severely. And such real predators in our denomination should be taken seriously, as well. But to prosecute a man severely (take his career from him) for a pinch on the but does not make sense. My guess is that this woman needs counseling as much as this pastor, or more so. And remember, we never got to hear the pastor’s side of this story. There’s a reason that he wouldn’t apologize for sexual harassment.
Posted in: S.O.S. Sexual Assault at a Retreat by Clergy
Kelly, you questioned my understanding of the nature of a power differential of those in leadership, what might be the boundaries and possible abuse of such leadership of those holding office. Certainly our form of church government and even civil government protects against such abuse. A jury of twelve, or a consistory of several elders protects against placing the power in the hands of a single person. Even the pastor holds no more power or authority than the other elders in our churches. Power, authority, decision making is placed in the hands of many, not just one. An example or two might help.
In the city I live in, we are witnessing a widely publicized trial of a police officer who is being tried for first degree murder of a young man on the streets of our city. There is no doubt that this police officer shot and killed the young man. It was caught on the police dash cam and has been shown to the public many, many times. The charge against him is first degree murder. Although acknowledging that he shot and killed the young man, he pleads not guilty to the charge of first degree murder. He claims this was justifiable homicide. In this trial there have been and will be expert witnesses giving their testimony that shows, in their opinion, either innocence or guilt against this officer. Does the evidence against the defendant involve a possible abuse of power by an officer? Of course. Will he be found guilty of the charges against him? Maybe so or maybe not. It all depends whether the evidence weighs in favor or against the defendant beyond any reasonable doubt in the collective mind of the jurors. This is a trial that is taking place presently in our city. Those involved have an understanding of the possible ‘abuse of power of those in authority’ issues that are important today. If he is found innocent of the charge of first degree murder, he will be set free. He may still be guilty of murder in the mind of the plaintiff, but that is just his/her opinion and is not legally binding. Expressing his/her opinion does not determine guilt. That would have already been legally determined. So again, charges sought, or the plaintiff’s opinion (or story) does not determine guilt. The verdict will come from twelve people who equally have the power of decision. This protects against either the accuser (plaintiff) or the accused (defendant) of abusing what power they might have, and protects from either deciding the verdict.
Also, presently going on, is the sentencing of Bill Cosby, being found guilty of “sexual assault,” the same charge brought by the woman in our published story. There were many witnesses who testified against Cosby, testifying to being drugged and sexually assaulted while under the influence of drugs. The evidence was conclusive and the jury brought forth a guilty verdict of sexual assault. Although the charges are the same, does Cosby’s crime even remotely compare to the charge in our story? I can’t help but wondering if the same charge of “sexual assault” was brought against Cosby for pinching a lady on the bottom, if the case would even make it to court. My contention all along has been that what this pastor did (in 1995 or today) did not constitute sexual assault and the sought after retribution did not fit the act. The jury (elders) made their final decision in good faith and their decision would stand, whether in 1995 or today (whether considering the possible abuse of power by those in authority or not). Have a great week.
Posted in: Purposefully Putting Culture Before Christ
Thanks Anthony for this article on whether putting culture or putting Christianity should come first in one’s life. Quite frankly, I think you are rather naive in thinking that Christianity should win the battle for dominance over culture. On what grounds do you think your students should abandon their cultural values for those of Christianity? What makes Christianity any more valid than the Islamic religion or the traditional religions of Kenya? Are the core teachings of Christianity any more valid or verifiable than those of other religions? Don’t the teachings of the Bible, especially the New Testament, have to be accepted by faith, apart from any verifiable evidence? Is there any evidence to verify that God is a three person being or that Jesus is one of those three persons who has come down from heaven to be crucified and then rise in some kind of victory over the world which we can’t see or verify? So why would or should your students so completely abandon their traditional beliefs for those of Christianity? It can't be that our beliefs are more rational or verifiable.
You may suggest that the teachings of Christianity are true, maybe even verifiable, because the Bible, God’s inspired word, teaches those truths. But the Koran, and I’m quite certain that Kenyan traditional religions, will affirm that their teachings are also completely reliable because they are also inspired of God and therefore completely true. As to truthfulness, other religions make the same claim as Christianity. So, again, why should your students jump on your wagon and abandon what they have been taught all their lives? Certainly, the fact that you believe, shouldn’t convince them anymore than what they believe would convince you to change what you believe. Again, it seems naive on your part to think that your perspective is any better than theirs. What is your rationale for saying that my religion is better and therefore it makes sense to jump all ships but mine?
Posted in: Purposefully Putting Culture Before Christ
Thanks Anthony for your response to Bill Wald. It seems as though you put a lot of stock in Reformed theology to explain the effectiveness of the gospel and to further explain the effectiveness of your teaching, as to whether your students grasp and take hold of it. You explain that your teaching is simply the human means that God uses to effectually call students to commitment to Christ above culture. The bottom line, it’s not your fault if they don’t fall, hook, line, and sinker, for the message you’re trying to convey. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit who does the convincing. You can rest at peace and in comfort, that you’ve done your work. I’ll assume that you do an excellent job in your teaching, although some might theoretically question whether your teaching was truly effective. The deeper problem I see, is whether the message you are conveying is really reasonable and therefore palatable. If the message doesn’t meet a rational standard why accept it as true? Why shouldn’t your students also see value in their own religious traditions?
As I see it, Reformed theology (the five points of Calvinism) is just a clever way of explaining why most people aren’t interested in the Christian message. The truth may be that the gospel is unreasonable and therefore unbelievable. But Reformed Christians (and the apostle Paul) would try to claim that such refusal is only because these refusers have not been chosen or elected unto salvation. The rational explanation is that the claim of the Christian gospel is unreasonable and unbelievable.
I’m quite sure you think that your students (who are holding on to parts of their old religion) are being unreasonable in trying to accommodate both religions or to holding on to any part of their old religion. Christianity makes so much more sense. But it makes sense because you are looking at Christianity from within the box of Christianity. You are not looking at Christianity objectively from outside the box. An objective look at Christianity from outside the box will show that Christianity is no more reasonable than other religions. You seem to be asking your students to evaluate Christianity from within your particular box (a Reformed Christian perspective) rather than stepping back and evaluating your claims objectively from outside of the box. From outside the box, some people objectively see value in a variety of religions and might want to acknowledge and accept the good in each. But you seem to fault some of your students (and some Christians in the U.S.) for wanting to do this. Again, you seem naive in wanting your students to acknowledge the same narrow view that you hold of Christianity. If I were you (and I'm not), I would be glad that my students accept the core of Christianity, even if they don't accept it in every detail as you understand it.