Text Comments On Tony Jones On Mark Driscoll - What Came First, The Thug or The Theology? - Nakedpastor

Tony Jones on Mark Driscoll: What came first, the thug or the theology?
BY NAKEDPASTOR DAVID HAYWARD

SEPTEMBER 5, 2014
"Chicken or the Egg?" cartoon by nakedpastor David Hayward
This drawing is inspired by the Ouroboros snake.
What came first? The chicken or the egg?
What came first? The thug or the theology?
I read Tony Jones' thoughts on Mark Driscoll. Jones has always admired Driscoll,
maybe envies him a little, wants the best for him, believes he can be redeemed,
and suggests that things can be restored.
What I found most interesting though is that Jones believes the problem with Dri
scoll is theological.
He titles his post is "Thoughts about Mark Driscoll"
He talks about the "heady" days of publishing and speaking.
He dismisses his disturbing personality traits by his use of the word "sure".
He says it isn't a moral issue (evil) but that he is passionate.
He says more than once that Driscoll is "extremely smart" or "brilliant".
He suggests that he will "see" (as in "think"?) his way out of this.
He writes that Driscoll has just embraced a toxic version of theology.
He hopes that Driscoll will turn away from this toxic theology.
He concludes therefore that Driscoll is not the problem, but his theology.
But my question is...
What came first? The thug or the theology?
That is, did Driscoll become the focus of concern because of his theology? Or wa
s it because of his behavior?
I'm concerned that Jones' post reflects the refusal of the church to understand
spiritual abuse. It neglects the pathology of its abusive leaders. I don't think
this is being fair to the victims or the perpetrators of spiritual abuse. Peopl
e are victims of not just a bad theology, but a pathological cruelty.
I don't think Driscoll's theology made this happen. Driscoll "embraced" his toxi
c version of theology because it aligned with his moral compass. It fit his pers
onality. It worked for him to achieve his goals. Then it manifested the worst in
him. Then he continued to develop his toxic theology in order to make more room
for his pathological behavior. Mars Hill Church too.
Jones' sentence, "It could have happened to any of us." is true, because I belie
ve we all participate in this dynamic. Theology is our creation. It is a reflect
ion of our drives and desires. Then, not satisfied to only be the product of our
drives and desires, it also becomes the producer of them. Theology is a vicious
cycle of our desperate need to understand and control our universe.
Step into this cycle at any point and you can see that we are both the root and
fruit of our theology and pathology.
And yes, it spins out of control by manifesting itself in toxic, controlling, an
d abusive behavior.
Nothing can be done about bad theology because of free thought and speech.
But we can do something when this manifests itself in bad behavior.
Cruel theology is a nuisance. Cruel behavior is unacceptable.
When Driscoll thinks bully to his people, we can say please stop.
But when he actually bullies people, we can step in and say you will stop now!
I don't think this is a theological issue. I think it is a pathological one. Not
just for Driscoll and Jones, but for the entire church.
If we would be healed, our theology would take care of itself.
Would you like some friends to walk with you through your healing? Join The Last
ing Supper.
OR you can talk with me one-on-one!
PLEASE NOTE: THE COMMENTS DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT OR EXPRESS THE OPINION OF T
HIS BLOG, NAKEDPASTOR, OR THE WRITER, DAVID HAYWARD, BUT ARE SOLELY THE OPINIONS
EXPRESSED BY THE WRITER OF THE COMMENT.
Likes(11)Dislikes(3)
Tags: chicken_or_the_egg_cartoonchurch_abusedavid_haywardmark_driscoll_cartoonma
rs_hill_church_cartoonnakedpastorspiritual_abusethug_or_theologytony_jones_carto
on
1 JAN, 2015
1,082 RESPONSES
Comments 1082
Pingbacks 0
Kenton September 5, 2014 at 8:56 am
I made a comment on Tony's post that I think needs to be brought up here. Mindse
t (of which theology is a part) and behavior can't be divorced from each other.
To say we need to intervene on the behavior and not address the theology inheren
tly makes that mistake. Those of us who come from the background you and I do ar
e often caught in that trap, but faith and works are married in spite of what we
have made of Luther.
Likes(9)Dislikes(2)
Sabio Lantz September 5, 2014 at 8:57 am
Fantastic, David. I totally agree. The person finds a theology, an expression, w
ebs of belief to hide within or use for their advantage.
Love your form of a Ouroboros-Chicken
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouroboros
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Jeff P September 5, 2014 at 8:58 am
Well if it wasn't for the bad theology Driscoll would have just been bullying a
handful of people. Mix in theology (claims to supernatural justifications) and t
he bullying gets amplified many fold.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
K.W. Leslie September 5, 2014 at 8:59 am
I'd also say the thuggery came first. But here's the caveat: When we first come
to Jesus, we all come broken. Good theology is meant to fix that.
Bad theology defends the broken parts, and justifies them to ourselves. Toxic th
eology says, "It's okay to be terrible to people; I'm doing it in Jesus's name."
If we're really following Jesus, instead of following ourselves and disguising
it as following Jesus, we're not gonna stay thugs for long. We'll repent, seek h
elp, and avoid leadership roles unless we have strong and safe accountability st
ructures to keep our unhealthy tendencies in check.

So I agree with Jones as well.
David Hayward September 5, 2014 at 9:31 am
Hey Sabio... actually I did think of the Ouroboros snake in drawing this picture
. I'm going to put that in my post.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
@Jeff:
That was fantastic! That is the power of theology/religion, it is marketable -it hits peoples triggers, which is why it is so dangerous.
@David:
Yeah, I love the symbol. I did a short post called "Reality Eats Us" which touch
es a bit on the issue you question here.
But more to the point, in 2011 I did a post on the exact thing you wrote here ca
lled, "Chicken vs Egg: You vs Your Religion" -- ha !
Are you pilfering my blog again for ideas?
;-)
Likes(0)Dislikes(1)
ha nope Sabio. We can share the glory.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Cecilia Davidson September 5, 2014 at 11:48 am
I'm actually going to go ahead and say that the theology came first, followed IM
MEDIATELY by the thug. It makes sense to try and suggest answers for what we don
't know how to describe, but I would think the belief would have to come first b
efore it gets violently pressed against others.
Granted, the more instances of theological violence, the more theology that is c
reated either to dispel/end or continue the violent rhetoric and action. It cons
tantly feeds into itself. As Kenton said, mindset and theology aren't easily div
orced if at all and they each reinforce the other.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Terry Hedges September 5, 2014 at 1:55 pm
Driscoll believes in a God who must punish. A Jesus who comes with a sword to sp
ill blood. It's quite possible the theology came first, because you become what
you worship. If you worship a "thug" god, then...
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Jane September 5, 2014 at 6:28 pm
I think most people would benefit from reading "The Sociopath Next Door," "Snake
s in Suits," or "Without Conscience." There are bad people out there that rise t
o positions of power in all walks of life, including church. It's helpful to kno
w who you're dealing with, and I'd love to see the church get its head out of th
e sand and stop denying the presence of sociopaths in our midst.
kris799 September 5, 2014 at 9:52 pm
It seems that the thuggery and theology feed off the other. Being a thug to spre
ad the Gospel is a means to end, and end which is exalted above all else. This o
nly emboldens them and allows them to grow confident in their thuggery b/c no on
e wants to question someone spreading the "Good News".
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Scot McKnight September 5, 2014 at 9:56 pm
Each version of the major options in theology is quite capable of distortion by
toxic people. The bold lines that emerge under the forceful hands of toxic peopl
e are usually healthy lines prior to the force. Calvinism has lines that are att
ractive to certain forms of toxicity, while Arminianism or the Anabaptist orient
ation ... Orthodoxy... Catholicism, each has elements easily turned into toxicit
y. On their own, however, those theologies are more or less healthy and capable
of expressing the gospel and grace.
DoctorDJ September 6, 2014 at 1:46 am
OYFG. It sounds like the whole of Mars Hill was rotten to the core, from the top
down. Go read the blog entries over at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthroc
kmorton/ to get the continuing sordid drama.
The crap that some will pull (and people will sheepishly support) in the name of
Joshua ben Joseph is astounding.
Likes(0)Dislikes(2)
Syl September 6, 2014 at 8:45 am
David and Sabio - great minds think alike!
Seems to me that if a framework of questionable theology ripe for exploitation d
idn't already exist, the sociopathic bully with religious leanings will create h
is or her own - which is how cults are born. Bad theology without someone to pro
mote, exploit, and expand it will either remain unpleasant background noise or f
ade away. But when paired with a charismatic personality and the will to power,
it can do great harm - and not only to those in the direct line of fire of the b
ully.
This Ouroboros births and feeds on itself. Hopefully the feeding cycle will outp
ace the birthing rate and it will eat itself into oblivion. (But I'm not holding
my breath...)
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Sabio Lantz September 6, 2014 at 12:37 pm
@ Syl : Thanx but I wish I had half of David's creativity.
@ David & Syl & ...:
I love the Ouroboros symbol and have used it a great deal in my writing and thin
king.
The Ouroborus is embraced by mysticism, alchemy, and many others -- and has many
uses. People and movements use it in different ways, so it has no one meaning,
of course (as is the nature of symbols).
As for me, I have always used it in a positive sense for the self eating the sel
f. The healthy release of identity.
(click here to see my posts on identity)
The double ouroborus I use in the sense of continual self creation.
Here, David, in his indomitable creative weirdness, has the Chicken eating its o
wn creation--the egg--but not really eating itself.
We raise chickens (both for meat and eggs), it is a great curse when chickens ea
t their own eggs
they must be then turned into meat-birds.
So David s drawing is perhaps less like an ouroborus than like Saturn devourin
g his own children. Or Mark Driscoll, creating blind followers and then eating t
hem. Conclusion: Driscoll needs to become a meat-bird.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
R Vogel September 8, 2014 at 10:26 am
If you read his blog you know Tony is quite often an intellectual bully himself,
so it is not surprising to me that he feels it could happened to any of them an
d that he wants to give Driscoll an out by blaming it on the theology rather tha
n pathology. I doesn't hurt that he also advocates a competing theology. I think
you are right that theology can often be a Rorscharch Test. Maybe always, I'm n
ot sure. Is the reason my theological musings have changed as I age because I am
discovering 'true' theology, or that I am adjusting my theology to my new persp
ective? I am inclined to think it is the second. I find that the underlying sin
of most theological abusers is rooted in false certainty born of insecurity.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
MichaelL65 September 8, 2014 at 2:18 pm
I agree. The bully embraced a theology that fit his moral compass. It's a warped
theology. But, I think it is one of the possible end results of embracing a rel
igion that emphasizes, and values men over women. Women are property. Women are
to be owned. Women are to be used. Women are 'penis holders' as Driscoll crudely
points out. If as a man, you do not agree with Driscoll's theology, you have be
en 'pussified'. You are less than a man. You should be berated. You should be mo
cked. You should be emotionally violated. The theology Driscoll, and sadly, many
others embrace stems from a culture far removed from ours in time. The culture
that this theology, or, more accurately, ideology stems from was a culture in wh
ich women were property. It was a patriarchal society far removed from the 21st
Century. It has no place in today's world. Driscoll does not seem to understand
this. The end result is the staggering mess that is happening at Mars Hill. Form
er leaders have either left or been 'released', (aka - FIRED) for daring to ques
tion Driscoll and his theology. Last night, KING 5 News in Seattle ran this stor
y about MHC closing and consolidating campuses. The numbers quoted are staggerin
g. Just 3 months ago, Mars Hill and the surrounding Seattle campuses drew over 1
2,000 people. Today, that number has dropped to less than 8,000. The leadership
of MHC blames, 'negative press and publicity over the past several months'. That
tells me that the leadership still refuses to accept that Driscoll and his faul
ty ideology have had anything to do with this. The real sad thing is that over 4
,000 former members and leaders of this church are now directly affected and suf
fering because one bully used his pulpit to twist theology to his way of thinkin
g.
Likes(8)Dislikes(1)
4,000 people are now closer to being happily religion-free.
Maybe he did them an ironic favor.
Likes(7)Dislikes(2)
Tony Jones September 11, 2014 at 9:49 am
David, your post is not a fair reading of my post, but I think you know that. I
make clear in the post that, in my experience, Mark had significant personality
predilections that led to this abuse. Whether his personality was the match and
Calvinism was the gasoline, or vice versa, I don't know. The point of my post wa
s that the two are a combustible combination.
I'm not dismissing any of the abuse or pathology. I'm trying to shine a light on
the theology for all of his (former) colleagues who are ready to throw MD off t
he bus but refuse to look at their own misogynistic, homophobic theology.

Hey Tony. Thanks for your comment. Um... that I intentionally gave an erroneous
interpretation of your post is an interesting suggestion. I guess either I didn'
t pick up the clarity or there wasn't any. I can be dense at times so there's th
at. I'm not sure it's Calvinism because we find misogyny and homophobia in all t
heological expressions. And I'm not sure what came first either. Hence the Ourob
oros-themed cartoon. I'm glad you're trying to shine a light on theology that is
created by and creates bad attitudes and behavior. That's what I'm trying to do
as well. Thanks again.
Danica September 11, 2014 at 10:54 am
I had hopes when Tony left for his Internets Sabbatical that he would come back
with a listening posture. I thought maybe he realized he needed time for introsp
ection. I thought maybe he was finally taking to heart what people (especially w
omen) have been trying to tell him about his apparent unwillingness to hear what
others are saying. His comment above points to my hopes being unfounded.
Come on, Tony. You're better than this. Would you listen to constructive critici
sm for ONCE, please?
Tony Jones September 11, 2014 at 12:56 pm
Danica, I did listen to David. I read his post twice, and I wondered why he chos
e to focus in on a single word like "Sure," without also telling his readers wha
t I wrote about Mark's personality. It seems to me that someone as bright as Dav
id would have to intentionally miss that, since it's clear in the post. But acco
rding to his comment, he did miss that.
For David to suggest that I "have always admired Driscoll" and even envied him i
s, to me, trolling. I have written thousands of words about Mark on my blog, and
not one of them has been in admiration. I have been chief among those calling o
ut his bad behavior for years. To acknowledge the strength of his intellect is n
ot to admire him, but simply to state what I observed when he and I were in the
same circles. He is smart. So are other bad people.
Why David would think I envy him, I do not know -- that is a judgment of my inne
r life, and I don't believe that David is privy to that. I've thought about that
today, and I cannot think of one thing about Mark's life that I envy. Not his p
ulpit, for sure; not even his book sales.
I get the constructive criticism that in this one, 500-word post, I did not full
y develop the argument. True. It's a blog post. I tried to be honest about my th
oughts, which a lot of people seemed to appreciate.
So, I'm open to the constructive criticism from David or you, Danica. But accusi
ng me of admiring or envying someone who is a pariah seems not the least bit con
structive. Should I write better posts? Yes, for sure. And I will try to. Did I
lead people to believe that Mark's theology, not his personality, are at fault?
Looks like it. And for that, I'm sorry. I don't think it's that clear.
David Hayward September 11, 2014 at 1:10 pm
Tony: If I am wrong to read in your post that you have admired Mark, then I apol
ogize for that. There's nothing wrong with admiring someone for something. I'm s
ure there were some things about him you didn't admire. But I seemed to detect s
ome admiration for him in your post. His intelligence, for example. And I never
said you envy him, but said "maybe" you did. That is not an accusation, but a qu
estion. Again, for one man to envy another man for his accomplishments is normal
. It wasn't really a judgment call. There are some things about Mark I'm sure ar
e admirable and enviable. No big deal. The point of my post is that I was raisin
g a question about your implicit suggestion that his theology lead him to where
he is today. I'm not sure that's true. That's why I framed the whole thing in a
question, "What came first?"
Well, I don't know what came first, but they make a combustible mix. When I was
in the same circles with Mark, he definitely intimidated me. I wouldn't say he b
ullied me, per se, especially out of respect for those he did bully. But I knew
that I never wanted to cross him
While I agree that many versions of theology produce bullies, I think there's en
ough evidence to support a claim that conservative Calvinism particularly lends
itself to misogyny and homophobia.
Finally, my favorite theologian, J rgen Moltmann, taught me long ago that Jesus
died for both the victims and the victimizers. So, rather than dance on Mark's
grave, I pray for him and all those who follow(ed) him to find a more gentle, lo
ving version of God.
He's not dead yet, never mind buried. :P
Likes(6)Dislikes(2)
He needed thrown under a bus a long time ago. I am amazed at people who dance ar
ound protecting these folks. It is like they are afraid to admit that they, like
the criminal, use same the same bullshit god-talk to meet their agendas. Holy t
alk needs to be seen for what it is -- in all forms!
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
Go home Tony. You're drunk.
Danica September 11, 2014 at 3:50 pm
Tony - you said to David, "your post is not a fair reading of my post, but I thi
nk you know that "
Then, to David few comments down, you said, "Why David would think I envy him, I
do not know
that is a judgment of my inner life, and I don t believe that
David is privy to that"
You take offense to David's assumption of what your inner life is, but claim to
know his? This is exactly what I'm talking about - the world revolves around you
, and if you are offended by someone, then it is an issue to be addressed. If yo
u have offended someone, they must be reading you wrong, or mistaken about what
you said. Basically, nothing is ever your fault. I cannot think you haven't had
this criticism lobbied against you before?
Also - on toxic theology. While I agree that theology is important, I think you
take it too far. I think you elevate 'right' theology over everything else, plac
ing it of utmost importance ... including, as I've observed, the need to treat o
thers with love and respect. You're a modern day Gnostic.
Karl Kroger September 11, 2014 at 3:57 pm
If I can chime in as a young Methodist pastor in the Dakotas (who admires you bo
th) I'm really glad David that you're hopefully coming to see that you and Tony
are on the same page more than you perhaps initially realized. As for those stil
l continuing to hurl stones at Tony, please stop. The man eloquently and gracefu
lly called Driscoll out (as he as done so on numerous occasions) while at the sa
me time encouraging people to realize that but by the grace of God, we could all
be assholes.
As to the main matter, I'd say that Driscoll's cruel theology along with other p
ersonality issues, resulted in his cruel behavior.
Grace and peace,
Karl
Hi Karl! I'm curious if you were referring to me in your 'hurling stones' commen
t? Could you please elaborate? You don't think it was a double standard for him
to assume David's motives, but not give David space to assume his own?
Likes(6)Dislikes(5)
Karl: I don't feel the need to be on the same page with Tony. I'm detecting the
evangelical obsession with agreement that I don't buy into. And you claim to fal
l on Tony's side of the argument, that as long as your theology is correct you'r
e going to be fine. That's what I hold as suspicious. I don't believe cruel beha
vior is the result of theology and other issues. I think we are nose-deep in the
complexities of our own pathologies, and theology is only a small part. And is
this small part the cause or the justifying ideology? That's my question.
The danger I see in elevating theology to such importance, is that it then eleva
tes human reasoning and intellect to a level that it really should not be at. Kn
owledge puffs up. And when someone approaches the table with the attitude of hav
ing the 'best' or 'most sound' theology, it effectively silences all other voice
s, marginalizes those who disagree, and shames the ones who can't keep up intell
ectually. Mark Driscoll did this. And I feel that Tony does it as well. In this,
they are similar (am I throwing stones, Karl?)
I am reminded of when Paul warned the churches about people who would come in an
d attempt to deceive them with "empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense th
at come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather
than from Christ" ... theologians' worship of their own intellect and their own
theologies is, I feel, a modern day application here.
shade ardent September 11, 2014 at 4:35 pm
which came first?
i will say that man came first, because it's evident that theology comes from th
e minds of men. the problem is that it's elevated to deific proportions after it
becomes theology.
so i would say a man-shaped person is dangerous for finding that which will allo
w him to be more abusive, *but* the theology is very very suspect and needs to b
e taken apart as well.
and no, 'there but for the grace of g-d go i'.... absolutely not. i know for a f
act that i am not abusive, nor have i ever been tempted to stray in that directi
on.
don't cast the sin on everyone in an effort to diminish the import of what has h
appened.
Well said Danica.
And Shade... you're right on there!
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Sarah Cunningham September 11, 2014 at 5:34 pm
It's so interesting to hear how this is framed, given that I've always thought T
ony erred on the side of being heavy-handed toward Mark (and anyone he saw as ab
usive etc.). For me, it was a showing of considerable grace when Tony chose to p
ause his previous criticisms and piece together a response that extended some hu
manity to someone who has clearly been called out--by Tony multiple times and no
w, it seems, by all of Christianity.
I stand in solidarity with victims. While doing so, I am reminded that the messa
ge of the faith is not an ideal story about an ideal people. That from the begin
ning, the Bible was always been about brothers who killed each other, and humank
ind turning on itself 'til it grieved the heart of God. I think the fact that th
ere is an over-arching, enduring covenant that somehow reaches out in the mess,
both standing with and healing the victims AND extending opportunity for growing
to the grossest offender, gets at the exact kind of mercy that will most right
the world.
In my mind, Tony's post pointed to that. I was surprised to read this take.
Likes(7)Dislikes(3)
I'm not sure what you mean by "this take". I said: "I don t think this is a th
eological issue. I think it is a pathological one. Not just for Driscoll and Jon
es, but for the entire church. If we would be healed, our theology would take ca
re of itself." All I'm asking is, are abusers the product of abusive theology, o
r is abusive theology the product of abusers? That's a legitimate question. Isn'
t it?
And I think some of the commenters are right! I ask: Isn't equating our theologi
cal correctness with our moral superiority dangerous ground to tread upon?
Aren't these valid questions?
Hey, David, Absolutely this post is raising some valid questions. By "this take"
I meant to suggest that Tony's post "reflects the refusal of the church to unde
rstand spiritual abuse. It neglects the pathology of its abusive leaders." That'
s just the opposite of how I have experienced Tony.
Tony is among those trying to stir more justice and mercy alongside you in my bo
ok. :)
Likes(5)Dislikes(6)
Hey Sarah. Thanks. I want to be clear this isn't a personal attack on Tony. I be
lieve, as I wrote, that "if we would be healed", as in if we would all allow our
ideas to be critically and seriously scrutinized by one another for the sake of
the people, then we'd all be better off. The church would be better off. Tony a
dmits that he might have written it hastily and it is just a blog post. But we s
till have to allow our words to be analyzed to detect if it is really true and h
elpful, or not. I only suggest his post over-emphasized bad theology as a motiva
tor of abuse. I think it is more complicated than that. That's all.
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
I'm glad you're in a good place with him. I agree that public words are open to
analysis... just adding mine to the mix. ;) Take care, David!
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
great recipe!
Likes(1)Dislikes(1)
John Hubanks September 11, 2014 at 6:18 pm
Full marks to David for at least addressing the women in this comment thread as
peers, even as he disagrees. Tony, on the other hand, has returned to business a
s usual after his internet sabbatical. One is forced to wonder if he spent a bit
too much time shooting skeet in preparation for his next hunt while ignoring th
e more pressing matter of how he responds to those he deems beneath him, especia
lly women. After that metaphorical head pat for Danica, one is forced to conclud
e that whatever reflection he may have given the latter has been quickly abandon
ed in favor of reflexive denial of any shortcomings on his part. Karl, it would
seem, is eager to emulate such smugness in dismissing challenges to preferred co
nclusions. But enough about inner lives and the need for the absence of grace in
order to be an asshole.
Driscoll is a rather easy target. His brashness and stunning arrogance are the e
quivalent of the storybook villain twirling his mustache. Tony is harder to pin
down. Adept at fitting in and playing to an overly credulous audience, he often
sings the same tune as Driscoll, but he's clever enough to change the words. Thi
nking his work is all done, he bristles at the suggestion that the problem is th
e tune itself, not simply the words one chooses to accompany it. Until Tony chan
ges melodies, not much else matters.
Julie McMahon September 11, 2014 at 8:47 pm
when my husband left for a 28 year old in the emergent movement it was Mark Dris
coll that sent us money for groceries and prayed for us. I know a very different
Mark.
Who here said he was a monster in every area of his life?
Likes(9)Dislikes(4)
What I resent (yes, resent) is that Tony blames all criticism on the person crit
icizing. He says that those who have something negative to say about him aren't
'reading me in the spirit I intended'.
Also, Karl never addressed the double standard I pointed out.
Motivating people using god-talk is wrong at its core.
Driscoll and Tony are just examples of it.
ISIS is a far worse example.
When will we see through this manipulation.
Instead, people continue to use the same rhetoric to solve the rhetoric. Duh!
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Julie: Sorry if I came across as blunt. What I mean by my last comment isn't mea
nt to be unkind. I think we human beings are very complex. My post suggested tha
t Tony Jones might admire Mark. Nothing wrong with that. I asked if he might be
envious. Nothing wrong with that. Why? Because Driscoll has admirable and enviab
le qualities. Jones himself suggested that. What we are concerned about in this
post is, is it theology that produced the fruit of abuse? Or, is it an abusive t
endency in Driscoll that found a suitable theology to support it? Jones should a
sk himself that. I should ask myself that. Until we really grapple with this que
stion we will continue to see it in the churches.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Julie McMahon September 12, 2014 at 7:35 am
in this case, their is such a hypocrisy, I could vomit. not your article....the
others. calling out another ones "bad behavior" while behaving badly, is quite i
ronic. the only difference is one got away with it. It's narcissism in many case
s, and the church is just the vehicle to feed their megalomania. they NEED an au
dience, a following, constituents, massive amounts of daily attention. there is
a reason disproportionate amount of narcissist are politicians, authors and past
ors! mark actually HAD a large and influential platform, thus greater the fall.
"admiration and envy?" oh, yes!! you didn't come across too blunt at all. you hi
t it. I don't know nor care about the details of Mars Hill, but I think it's pat
hetic for some to stand around and comment on the failings, while cowardly never
admitting your own sh*& (which is strikingly familiar!!) misogyny, mental and e
motional abuse all hidden behind a new found liberalism and feminism because the
times they are a changin', jumping on the same sex marriage band wagon because
its the hot new ride in town, and you just might get to be relevant again...thes
e people are very cunning and smart and they will use anything (theology, contro
versy, sensationalism) and anyone to get ahead. it's a clinical diagnosis and a
pathology that looks like this kind of carnage, and they ALWAYS leave bodies in
their wake. soliciting white male leaders of the emergent church willing to cove
r it all up for their crony. wipe out evidence on organizations website. lies an
d betrayal. it's all in there. the only difference here is...who cares?! because
it is so non influential with only a fraction of the followers as Mars Hill (en
vy). the ev leadership had only a small drop, instead of Mark's enormous free fa
ll from a very, very high place. my point....shut the f*&k up about another pers
ons "bad behavior" when you treat woman the exact same way and have a very, very
similar personality disorder....narcissistic personality disorder. the church i
s just the vehicle they use to feed their narcissism. they ARE god and what they
have to say is so, so very important. not. it's an untreated mental illness and
when left untreated, (and with all of the talent and charisma mark has)...it go
ing to eventually look like that, when survivors have had enough. marriages end
in flames...to quote Katy Perry, "This is how they do."
I agree Julie. The real body of concern is the pathology. Religion is the cloak.
Thank you, David.
My dad's borderline narcissistic, and my grandfather and uncles are full on. Thi
s feels SO familiar to me.
Maybe that's a piece to the puzzle in answering your question, David? The theolo
gy prolly didn't start out that way, but since religion allows a person to eleva
te their narcissistic image, and also change it as people lose interest, I can s
ee how claiming to speak for God would allow a narcissist safe haven to grown th
eir own particular empire. While a person who does not have NPD would simply qui
etly do the Lord's work.
What would be interesting to me, would be to look at abusive church leaders thro
ughout history and across denominations (including Catholic), and see if there i
t's a constant there. If the constant is that they all subscribe to a particular
theology, then wet could safely assume the theology probably came first. But if
the constant is that they all have some sort of pathology (and my guess going i
nto it would be NPD), then we would be able to draw the conclusion that the thug
came first.
I guess, as I'm sorting through this all now with a full cup of coffee in me, th
at your focus may be to narrow, David. Broaden your spyglass and see if you can
spot this in other places.
And to Julie - I'm so sorry that happened to you. I'm sorry Young Methodist Past
or hasn't showed up with this love he keeps talking about, to address what you'r
e saying about his idol. I want you to know I hear you and I am holding your sto
ry. I hope you're finding what peace and stability is possible when having a nar
cissist impossibly entwined in you life.
Oh Danica, believe me, I have seen it in other places. Non-religious places. Inc
luding businesses and universities. Which leads me to suspect that theology isn'
t the core issue.
Religion is almost inevitably a cloak. That is why, if you need a Pastor, be sur
e to choose a naked one!
:-)
EXACTLY SABIO!!! That's what I'm talking about!!!!
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
A psychologist who helped my family through the trauma caused by the emergent ch
urch cult said, "The church is a wonderful place to hide." It's a place to hide
your homosexuality, your mental illness, your social awkwardness, your deep unre
solved feelings of insecurity and inadequacy...all with a literal robe to cover
them up.
I believe this is true right across the board. yep.
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
^^ Woah. Word.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Scott Freeman September 12, 2014 at 10:10 am
Holy Crap. Julie is my new hero. Thank you for sharing your story. Peace to you.
thank you! danica and scott, I have met some really incredible people through my
adventures with a cult and narcissist...from the most unlikely places. THEY are
to me the body of goodness. that's my religion....just don't be an asshole. be
honest, vulnerable and transparent. say sorry. admit fault. forgive and be kind.
here's another gem from our family psychologist who coaches us on how to cope w
ith the NPD in our lives,
"Healthy relationships require mentally healthy people, and they always have a m
echanism for repair."
when people like this leave scorched earth behind, whether it be a church, busin
ess or whatever....congregations in ashes, there is always mental illness lurkin
g underneath. And, I would say most likely NPD. because they CAN NOT be wrong. i
t is far too crushing to their fragile egos to admit imperfection, so if you are
not with them, you are taken out.
Brene Brown TED talk on vulnerability and perfection may have saved some of thes
e disasters through history, but alas, they only listen to themselves because th
ere is no one more brilliant than they. barf!
Scott Freeman September 12, 2014 at 10:35 am
YES! I was a fundamentalist minister for 20 years until the weight of what it wa
s doing to me and others became too much to bear.
Losing my faith and my profession led to losing relationships, marriage, etc but
it was the necessary steps to leaving behind the shame, guilt and arrogance tha
t comes from such a position.
I've found much deeper friendships since leaving fundamentalism behind.
tru September 12, 2014 at 11:39 am
I've lurked and watched this conversation progress ... one nitpicky thing I want
ed to point out:
I think your statement "Nothing can be done about bad theology because of free t
hought and speech." is absolutely troubling.
Free speech can only be abridged by government action. If you proposed legislati
on to outlaw a particular theology, I would agree with you. There are things you
can do:
Proponents of the theology have the right to say/write/think/preach whatever the
y believe (some limits such as regarding political speech and incitement to viol
ence notwithstanding), they do not have the right to an audience or a platform.
In the face of troublesome theology and those who espouse it, ordinary folks can
:
- Speak out informally (like you and many are doing here)
- Boycott individual works, authors or even publishers
- Organize and protest
- Offer support FIRST to those who have suffered the abuse that stemmed from or
was abetted by troublesome theology (whether it be formal volunteering, donating
money or goods or even just validating that a victim is not crazy, not sinful a
nd is a worth human being and that their abuser was in the wrong. Stop forcing v
ictims into a theologically prescribed healing regimen.
- Call out victim discrediting, blaming and shaming (i.e. "You didn't pray hard
enough." or "Are you sure, he doesn't seem that bad to me.") Hear their stories
and really listen. Don't shut them down when it feels uncomfortable for you. It'
s not about you.
- Stop forcing forgiveness for the abuser the only avenue toward healing (i.e. I
don't care if Mark Driscoll never repents. I care about getting people away fro
m his abuse and helping them heal in whatever way is right for them [which may n
ot have anything to do with religion of any sort]. Mark Driscoll can look out fo
r himself).
Becky Garrison September 12, 2014 at 11:46 am
Don't foget Driscoll came out of the Young Leadership Network that spawned Emerg
ent Village - if you dissect Jones & Co. cyberbullying as David has done a numbe
r of times, you'll see their teatment of those who dare to differ follows the sa
me lines. Driscoll just had a better head for business and as such, his empire g
rew. They both picked different theologies on which to base their platform but t
he underlying psychology is more similar than either might want to to admit.
i totally agree with you tru. we're on the same page.
Likes(0)Dislikes(2)
When recommending the three books above (Sept-05 post), my intent was to agree,
David, with your central idea: the pathology came first, and found a hospitable
environment in the theology. My fundamental disagreement with Jones' original po
st was the idea that "this could happen to any of us." No. I could happen to ano
ther sociopath. But it isn't "just anyone" who engages in the level and severity
of domination and control that MD engages in.
I have frequently read people comment that MD is a narcissist. I disagree.
I can deal with narcissists. Their core emotional axis is the holy trinity of Me
, Myself, and I. A bit exhausting sometimes, but they can be dealt with. I have
a sister who's a narcissist. You have to wade through a lot of self-references,
but it's manageable. Although she lives several states away, I talk to her by ph
one once a week and we interact on FB frequently.
I can't deal with sociopaths. Their core emotional axis is power. That's quite d
ifferent from that of narcissists. There's a complete lack of empathy and consci
ence. Sociopaths make you question your own sanity. When you catch them doing so
mething crazy, you think, "Surely this can't be happening! Who *does* that?" Wel
l, sociopaths do that. I also have a sister who is a sociopath. After reading "T
he Sociopath Next Door" and saying to myself, "*OH!!!*" a thousand times, I have
no contact with her. Haven't for years. Blocked her from my FB wall.
Driscoll is a sociopath. Full stop. Has some narcissism thrown on top, but the c
ore of his personality is power and domination and the need to step on the throa
t of anyone who challenges his power. That's why he not only fired his assistant
who said to a friend that "Mark could use someone in his life to go toe-to-toe
with him" -- he actually accused her of heresy. Heresy. Let that sink in for a m
oment.
In addition to the three books I recommended above, I'd also recommend "Psychoan
alytic Diagnosis" by Nancy McWilliams, Ph.D.

David, thanks for the post. Very needed.
Thanks Jane. If you haven't read "Confessions of a Sociopath" by M.E. Thomas, yo
u should. It's a fascinating read. We've actually corresponded. She's breaking n
ew ground concerning sociopathy.
Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
Thanks, David!
Likes(0)Dislikes(1)
Becky Garrison...nailed it. It's mental illness. If you have a known and documen
ted serious personality disorder (NPD) that has been diagnosed through exhaustiv
e testing by an experienced and highly regarded clinical psychologist...then you
need to stop down, and shut up.
*step down
Likes(3)Dislikes(1)
Becky Garrison September 12, 2014 at 1:31 pm
Jane - your spot on re your assessment - by default a sociopath has narcissitic
traits but often narcissists can be "managed" if you to present concepts to them
in ways that reflect good on their character. Dealing with them is definitely d
raining psychologically and it's best to avoid them when possible. I would also
note though that there have been sociopathic tendencies present in some of the U
S emergent church's cyberbullying tactics and offline behaviors as well.
Just as an FYI - I tend to say "someone displays sociopathic tendencies" rather
than calling them a sociopath outright because one can get sued for libel/slande
r for making a mental health diagnosis if one is not a trained professional. And
if one is a trained professional then obviously releasing a diagnosis without a
court order is grounds to have one's license revoked and more. Driscoll and the
US emergents are known for gaslighting their critics so one tries not to give t
hem any ammunition they can actually use. :)
Likes(5)Dislikes(2)
Hypothetically, if you KNOW you have a serious mental issues....step down. That'
s my point. I'm sure people have given feedback somewhere along the lines to the
se individuals and they know that they are "difficult," "hard to work with," "ra
geful," "arrogant." To pretend none of that has any correlation with you and you
r own untreated issues, and to let "bad behaviors" go unchecked, is what I find
disgusting. Others riding on the coat tails of these "minor celebrities" in a ve
ry small fish bowl of life...say and do nothing because of their own self intere
st. book deal. speaking gig. it's rather disgusting. the closest thing I ever go
t as an apology was from a SF, CA EC leader who treated me reprehensibly said, "
some of what you said may be right." walk the talk or don't talk and certainly d
o not point a finger when your hands are filthy.
Here's an excellent critique of what's wrong with Tony Jones' and others respons
e from Wenatchee the Hatchet, a name given to an anonymous blogger who is withou
t a doubt the #1 source for insider dirt re MHC. http://wenatcheethehatchet.blog

spot.com/2014/09/more-thoughts-on-what-some-call.html
Likes(3)Dislikes(1)
Long but excellent analysis. Thanks Becky!
Likes(1)Dislikes(1)
You're welcome - and this gets at the heart of the need to listen to insider cri
tique. The real story is found in hearing the victims' stories as what they reve
al is a truly pathological system that went off the rails. And as this commentat
or noted, Mark's theology shifts according to his season/mood/audience (similar
to how emergents think no? ). But the pathology remains.
Also, a sizable chunk of those "outsiders" commenting seem to be using #Driscoll
as SEO Bait by posting running commentaries about the latest "outrageous" thing
Driscoll said/did - this feeds into the myth that Mark's being persecuted which
is used at MHC in very destructive manners. This is one of the better examples
of this ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christian-piatt/mark-driscoll-women-as
-pe_b_5804964.html
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Doug Pagitt September 13, 2014 at 8:50 pm
I know many people in this thread and love all of you. I also know this story ve
ry well.
After have read all the comments here I can confidently say that blogs and comme
nts are not our best way to convey our meaning, share our best or understand eac
h other.
May we all transcend blogging and let goodness flow.
@ Doug,
Goodness "flows" best when abuse is exposed.
John Hubanks September 13, 2014 at
You've read the comments, Doug, but
many of them. One really is left to
w Christ seem so terribly concerned
. It always has.
10:23 pm
clearly you've failed to understand a great
wonder why so many people who claim to follo
over transparency. Abuse thrives in the dark
Of course, Doug's desire to quiet things down likely has quite a bit to do with
his relationship with Tony Jones. Seems pretty clear.
Somebody please tell me what it means to "transcend blogging". My fallopian tube
s get in the way of thinking about hard smart man things.
Also ... shaking my head at Doug COMPLETELY ignoring Julie's story, and instead
trying to control the narrative by shaming everyone engaged in discussion here.
(Although if we need to"transcend" commenting in blogs, I propose Doug lead by e
xample)
John Hubanks September 14, 2014 at 2:39 am
Why would Doug NOT want to completely ignore Julie's story? Addressing it with a
ny honesty or integrity would make things, shall we say, awkward between him and
TJ, and that's to be avoided at any cost. We cannot afford to compromise the br
omance!
Hi Doug and welcome to my blog. I actually think blogging is an excellent way to
discuss serious and important issues. Even though I use cartoons to convey mean
ing, I also do a lot of writing. And I spend lots of care and time on both becau
se, well, these are serious and important issues. I'm not sure how else I can pa
rticipate in the conversation, particularly about the abuse of power, etc., in t
he churches, besides through blogging. I do, however, happen to know that blogs
are terribly annoying to those who would like to continue their wrongdoing. In f
act, this is one of Driscoll's complaints... that the internet is to blame for h
is unjust demise. Yay internet! Yay blogs!
@John, narcissists tend to attract those who need an image to worship. The pull
of being a' chosen one ' in a narcissists inert circle is very alluring, and the
refore the need to protect the narcissistic image becomes paramount.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
I tried to "transcend" blogging with these people who "through hours of prayer a
nd discernment" decided I was crazy while their crony was having an affair. Then
when I had evidence sex emails and a 22 page psychological evaluation to share
with the 6 Emergent leaders who "discerned" my family needed to break up so he c
ould be with his "spiritual wife" not 1 of those....NOT 1 wanted to "discern" th
at or anything else. Disgusting! Transcend that!
"Transcend that!" lol :P
"Blogs are terribly annoying for those who would like to continue their wrong do
ing" ding, ding, ding! A narcissist will choke and die before, "I'm sorry" passe
s their lips. It's a sure fire litmus test for NPD. Mark Scandrette is not a tru
e narcissist because he actually apologized. Thank you, Mark! That was horrid wh
at was done to me and my 3 children, but I forgive you fully and I thank you.
Bill Kinnon September 15, 2014 at 11:00 am
If you read through the comment thread on this post you will get a taste of the
length with which people have gone to protect the Emergent brand and do harm to
Julie. I had one interlocutor email me to tell me Julie was "batshit crazy"
except, when I confronted him, he admitted he had never met Julie. He simply tru
sted what he was told by Emergent Village leaders.
The only difference between how EV operated and what's happened at Mars Hill is
the size of the audience. Fortunately, the North American Emergent audience is s
mall and dwindling. The same will become true of Mars Hill, no doubt.
Wow. Interesting.
Likes(0)Dislikes(1)
Poor Emergents:
Evangelicals attack them as apostates.
Liberals attack them for this history.
I can never tell which of the commentors are the former.
Is "emergent" a brand name? I use to assumed it was just another name for "liber
al" protestant or "progressive". But is seems it is a connect group.
Curious?
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Bill Kinnon September 15, 2014 at 1:40 pm
Hey Doug (Pagitt),
As you represent yourself as a social media expert, I would expect you'd appreci
ate the conversation taking place here, rather than attempting to chat about thi
s via Facebook Messenger. Feel free to ask me your questions here in the comment
s. I will do my very best to respond to them.
Hi Bill, I actually social media messaged you today on facebook, and I am all fo
r this conversation happening. I will post more on my thoughts in just a second,
I sent them a head of time to David to get his input (that is one of the things
i like to do when commenting on blogs so it takes a little longer to post somet
imes).
But please check my message on FB or give me a call 612.730.7337
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Hey David, I am not saying that blogs are bad, what I was saying was that they a
re not the best way to convey our meaning and that this causes all kinds of misu
nderstanding. I am all for the truth being exposed and people sharing their view
s, I think you and I know each other well enough that you know I am not interest
ed in shutting anyone out or down.
My point is, and it seems obvious in even my small interaction here, that this f
ormat, when void of interpersonal interaction and with all communication being d
one in public, is not the best way to convey our meaning. And often people s f
eelings get hurt and the conversation strays from this crucial issues to somethi
ng else (like, "you know that is not what I meant" or "obviously...."
What I suggest is that people spend time, whenever possible, in contact with eac
h other before making public what they think about another persons ideas.
I know that is not always possible as many people don t have access to each ot
her, and I am not saying to seek the persons permission and thereby be shut down
, I am saying that when possible to give the benefit of the doubt to the person
and to talk with them or correspond with them directly.
To transcend blogging to me means using blogging as a tool, but not the only too
l. To be in contact with people whenever possible.
In this case I know you and have spent time with you in Haiti, have had you on m
y radio show and think very highly of you. And I know Tony very well. I also kno
w others in the thread and I know that it is quite simple and possible to have a
ccess to each other interpersonally.
So, when time is spent suggesting what people meant, or people being accused of
this or that, and that could be solved by a private conversation or message, it
only seems wise as then the important issues can be gotten to.
I am not saying that people should not share their perspectives and their challe
nges, I am saying that we are better off if what is being shared is as accurate
and generous as possible.

A few years ago when people were writing books critiquing what many of us were t
rying to do with our churches, I would regularly contact these folks and invite
them to come and spend some time with our community or stay at my house and we c
ould talk about all their concerns. Or, if that was too much we could talk on th
e phone or even email bak and forth. Almost to a person they said no. I was told
that is not how it works, one author told me
I know what you think from your
writing and now I will say what I think.
I am sure there are better ways. I am all for people sharing, but let s spend
the same significant time, when possible, talking with each other and not about
each other so we can let the goodness roll.
Brother Maynard September 15, 2014 at 2:22 pm
Maybe "transcend blogging" means twitter? I must have done that, since I so rare
ly blog anymore. But I'm still very opinionated, and especially so in matters li
ke this.
Love the image and the metaphor, David. To take a swipe at the question, I would
say it's cyclical: thug-theology-thug. There's an inner thug, whose theology is
affected by his character. The resulting theology lends justification to his ac
tions, which allows for thug amplification and thug discipleship. It's a perfect
venue for narcissists... did anybody see the recent article -- I think it was i
n Time Mag -- about what careers narcissists gravitate toward? #1 is CEO, and cl
ergy is solidly in the top ten. When you have pastors turning their role into a
command-driven CEO-style one, I think you can make your own inferences... but yo
u'll know them by their fruit, which is the measure of love, joy, peace, patienc
e, goodness, gentleness, and self-control. I suggest that where these are lackin
g, their theology is impacted.
I would take it as almost axiomatic that our character affects our theology. Eve
ry one of us. For example, are we greedy? Trust, me there's a theology for that.
Power-hungry? There's a theology for that too. Let's take the hypothetical exam
ple of marriage. If one is having an affair, or wishes to, or wants to divorce a
nd remarry for some reason outside of the evangelical or catholic norm, one's th
eology may begin to change in a manner that allows for these actions. Be very su
spicious when theology changes in a way that becomes more convenient for the the
ologian. So if a theologian puts forward some new concept of marriage and then d
ivorces and remarries, one might be suspicious of the motives involved. I did sa
y hypothetical, right? Huh. What a coincidence, that.
Bill is correct in drawing comparisons between MH & EV. They have the same roots
, despite their divergent paths. But whenever there's an empire involved, there'
s an interest in the status quo. Blame the internet or cover it up... whatever i
t takes to keep the publishing deals and speaking tours flowing. Follow the mone
y, they say. The questions are valid, and the answer is supposed to be transpare
ncy, especially for a nonprofit.
Doug,
I'll respond later today or tomorrow morning as I'm in renovation hell right now
, and then on the road away from the reno hell.
Likes(0)Dislikes(3)
^bullshit! You live 1 block from me. My son mows your lawn. You've never said a
word and repeatedly shut me down for years when the truth was in your face compl
ete with a psych eval and sex emails. Shut the f$&k up you fraud. Go home. You h
ad your 15 minutes of fame. Put a fork in it . Emergent is beyond done. Let me r
efresh your memory in a phone call you made to me while I was still married to y
our BFF although my kids report now dads no longer friends w/ Doug and they've h
ad a falling out...of course there was...you used each other up! Next! Onto the
next person the narcissist can suck the marrow out of and then discard. "Julie,
this is Doug. You and Tony's marriage is just words on a piece of paper. You may
be the legal wife but Tony has a spiritual wife now." Now THAT my friends is "b
at shit crazy!" Yes, that Mike Morrell, not me who in fact does not have the ser
ious clinical diagnosis but rather your idols you look so highly up to. Choke an
d die before an I'm sorry comes out. They can't! Their egos and pathology will n
ot allow it. I think it's fascinating your wife refers to you as "the Duke" Freu
d would have a field day! Cut the bull shit you coward...you tried to have me ho
spitalized to cover up an affair and rationalize a divorce! And when they would
not admit me (in fact the seasoned intake nurse said prophetically, "honey, what
you need is a good lawyer!" because there is nothing wrong with me, you said, "
I'll find a mental hospital to admit you." All while sitting on the knowledge of
Courtney Perry. Cut the crap Doug. It's over. O-V-E-R. Come clean. Apologize he
re and now.
I apologize for my Irish coming out but that was 6 years in the making and there
is nothing I loathe more than a fraud parading under the banner of "all peace l
ove and kindness" while twisting the knife in someone's back...Doug's been very
busy today private messaging people on this thread doing damage control....come
clean Doug. Prove you are not a pathological narcissist full of hot air but actu
ally able to admit, "I made a mistake. I'm sorry for my part in that deception."
You know he CAN'T but maybe if you say you are so open hearted...let's hear it!
! We're waiting. Led the way to this "missional generative friendship" you spew.
Scott Freeman September 15, 2014 at 2:47 pm
Somebody pass the popcorn!
I guess the question will be whether Doug has the cojones to respond to Julie in
a manner befitting a church pastor. Or whether he will just slink away. I'm hop
ing for the former... but expecting the latter.
And now back to the madness of renovations.
Annie September 15, 2014 at 3:32 pm
Could someone explain what a spiritual wife is? Is it just my womanly nature, pr
one to hysteria and easily deceived (like Eve, dontcha know), that assumed the v
ows made in front of the preacher and calling on God suggested a spiritual compo
nent to the relationship?
In truly delighted that men of god such as Tony have other menz of god to pressu
re, coerce, and threaten all their detractors into terrified silence so that the
work of the gospel may never cease. God be praised.
Sure, my individual gorge rises at the thought of someone trying to institutiona
lize me over a custody dispute. But obviously I will learn to quell such touches
of the vapors now that I understand it's for Jesus.
Also, I wouldn't want my womanly hysteria to hurt Doug's or Tony's feelings.
Doug- seriously. Everyone stop talking on the internet and have private convos o
kay?! Are you kidding? Tony is a public figure whose behavior has public effects
. If he doesn't like it he can grow up or stop being public. I'm surprised that
I'm still surprised at the variety of ways people tell those who've suffered to
shut their cake holes. You people are disgusting.
"I am all for the truth being exposed and people sharing their views..."
Provided, it would seem, such things are done in a very particular way. Even aft
er reading your lengthy comment, Doug, I'm having a difficult time understanding
how what you're up to here amounts to more than basic concern trolling.
"My point is, and it seems obvious in even my small interaction here, that this
format, when void of interpersonal interaction and with all communication being
done in public, is not the best way to convey our meaning."
I'm not really having any trouble following the meaning of anyone in this thread
. Perhaps I'm simply exceptional in my reading comprehension (doubtful), but it'
s all reasonably plain to me. Let me see if I can break it down for you a bit, a
nd you can tell me if it's helpful at all.
Tony Jones wrote a blog post which David took to indicate a certain degree of ad
miration for Mark Driscoll, which David took great care to qualify. Tony didn't
care for the suggestion that he admires Driscoll even in the qualified terms whi
ch David described. As a result, Tony jumped into the comments here to express h
is dissatisfaction, and, as is his wont, he proceeded to fail to offer any of th
e generosity you so highly recommend while becoming increasingly petulant as i
s also his wont.
When others began to take Tony to task for this all-too-familiar behavior on his
part, Tony became increasingly defensive and condescending, and so others began
to join in the discussion to wonder at Tony's rapid return to his old form afte
r what was meant to be something of a restorative sabbatical from the internet.
It was at this point that Julie entered the mix to suggest that the blog Tony po
sted regarding the causes of Driscoll's seemingly sudden tumble from the status
of Golden Boy contained no small measure of the pot calling the kettle black, an
d in the course of her comment pointed out that when Tony abandoned her and thei
r children it was none other than Driscoll who stepped in to help. It's really s
aying something when one loses a basic decency contest to Driscoll.
Then you, close friend and associate of Tony Jones, make an appearance on a thre
ad which features some rather disturbing revelations about Tony's private behavi
or (which served as fairly compelling evidence in support of Julie's accusation
of hypocrisy) to encourage us all to reconsider using blogs and blog comments to
discuss such important issues since there's such great potential for misunderst
anding. While you're correct, broadly speaking, to point out how notorious onlin
e communication is for misunderstanding, it's difficult to see your sudden entry
here as anything other than a thinly veiled attempt to help your good friend sa
ve face due to the extremely unflattering picture being offered by Julie of Tony
's truly heinous personal conduct, as well as the rather blatant enabling on off
er from Tony's cadre of defenders. ("Spiritual wife"? Seriously? People still tr
y to pull that one off? Sweet baby Jesus.)
When you were challenged on this frankly stunning, obvious maneuver, you decided
to throw a wall of expertly worded blather about how it's important to be gener
ous to one another and to attempt to establish relationship with those with whom
we differ. While I agree with the principle of generosity in interpretation, I

hold the principles of accuracy and integrity to be of a much higher order. As f
or the standard of interpersonal relationship you suggest, I would offer in repl
y the idea that if one is incapable of making one's meaning reasonably plain wit
hout taking the steps you recommend then perhaps one should either spend a good
deal more time reflecting prior to committing one's words to print or, failing t
hat, consider a full withdrawal from the grind of blogging. It's not for everyon
e, and there's no justification for placing the onus for clarity on one's audien
ce. To be blunt, "I know what you think from your writing and now I will say wha
t I think," is an entirely reasonable standard. The fact that you insist on othe
rs not taking your own words at face value says a great deal about your preferre
d modus operandi none of it favorable.
ttm September 15, 2014 at 3:49 pm
Years ago I discovered Doug Pagitt's blog and was interested to see what the "Em
ergent" thing was all about and if he was still the "same person" that I had met
once and knew in an acquaintance sort of way because I was friends with, and th
en dating, one of his best friends. When I read Doug's blog, I had a couple of q
uestions about things he had stated in an authoritative tone and "dared" to ask
them in the comments section. Within an hour I was lambasted for my questioning
and was told that I was attempting to "be cute" and was stirring up unnecessary
controversy in a format not appropriate for that sort of thing. Soon after, a li
st of "comment rules" was added to Doug's blog. I don't really remember if or ho
w Doug and I continued to "converse" in the blog comments (because I have, thank
God, learned to *mostly* let go of shit). I may have just done what I still bel
ieve Doug wanted me to do--which was to shut up. When I revisited the blog later
, I believe that my comments were removed by the blog administrator, i.e., the D
uke. I wasn't surprised by what seemed to be whitewashing ... having grown up wi
thin the church, I am highly familiar with that behavior (and am slightly ashame
d to admit I have engaged in quite a bit of it myself.)
But I do still have a copy of the email which Doug sent me that said "See how ni
ce it is when people follow the rules ;-)"
I also have a copy of the email I sent to him which, as I expected, never receiv
ed a response. Here's what that said:
Really...you don't seem to have changed a lot since college.
What intrigues me is that you were so positive you had all the
right answers then (traditional Baptist theology) and anyone
who questioned them was wrong.
But now, I think from reading your posts and listening to some of
your podcasts, that you have turned away from those formulaic
answers to embrace new types of answers. And now you are
convinced that these ways of viewing God and his Word are right.
Maybe you are not convinced...but it comes across as certainty
and even arrogance sometimes.
I don't think we all ever have all the right answers. Life is a process
toward truth for all of us. I don't think any denomination or church
or movement has a corner on the market of truth. Which is why it
so important that we remain open to one another's questions.
My questions to you in your blog were sincere...perhaps misplaced
(in your mind) but sincere. I wasn't attempting to skewer you. I wasn't
attempting to be mean or "cute."
I wanted to know if you could step outside your own theology for a moment
and consider what it looks like to those of us outside of it. I've found that
when I do that, my own position is often strengthened and solidified. But

once in awhile it is abandoned in light of the truth that others bring to the
table. I'm sorry if my questions came across as nasty, flippant, or threatening.
You have an uncanny knack for using your keen intellect and quick
wit to quickly address divergent points of view. But I wonder if that
haste serves you well in the long run. If Emergent really is all about
conversation, don't you have to be willing to converse with people?
Even if they are not as educated, not as sophisticated, and
not as sarcastically, crowd-pleasingly, funny as you are?
I am not a published author, a well-known speaker, and a world
traveler; but I am a minister to the world, too. And I care about how
we, as Christ's family, come across to those who are considering
applying for adoption into it. I also care about how we nurture and
challenge one another so that the church itself is maturing and
growing toward unity.
I want to be part of a family that always tells the truth, but always
exemplifies love. I believe that you have that same desire, but perhaps
I am mistaken. It IS nice when we all follow the rules, isn't it? And so
rare..."
It really does make me sad that leaders of organizations which are conceived, bi
rthed and nurtured through the process of questioning, so often come to perceive
that same process as a threat and, even worse, wage war against it as an enemy
instead of seeing it as an opportunity to be transformed.
I feel for Julie and for the countless numbers of sincere, holy, delicious indiv
iduals who have been dished up, chewed up, and spit out by church leaders on a q
uest to have more. Unfortunately, the gorging and purging won't stop until there
is nothing left to devour at the buffet.
I like that Doug ignored all the women on the thread, including the ones who add
ressed him directly. Classy dude. Real classy.
tru September 15, 2014 at 4:02 pm
@Danica - you'll notice that Driscoll's abusiveness and dreadful theology didn't
actually become a wider issue until it started affecting men.
Also... I just want to say that Doug's ignoring of the accusations Julie is leve
ling against Tony is mindboggling to me. What sort of bullying man's club do the
se emergent "leaders" run, to run roughshod over a woman (over ANYONE) like that
? And in the name of Christ?
(... and did any of you man-sorts happen to get inboxed with a message for me? S
ince Doug is private messaging everybody in the interest of 'personal relationsh
ip', I thought maybe he might have chosen to go through a penis in order to comm
unicate with us xx-chromosomal types?)
this felt like the grownups were talking for a while, so i felt like i should no
t be talking. because i didn't have much to add.
but then the whole 'keep things in person', cropped up.

1. i have done the in-person thing with an abuser, and it never ended well. it e
nds with me being called crazy, bitter, unrepentant, ung-dly.
so i do not do that anymore.
2. this conversation, this post, they both have value
ason that it's public. no more hiding behind suit and
the scruffy half-beard and smile, no more hiding. it
res to admit, that he's an abuser, and that jones has
with him.
to me for the very real re

tie, no more hiding behind
is plain for anyone who ca
to some degree identified
when enough time is spent sympathizing, it's hard to pull away and see what's re
ally wrong. because in sympathy, kinship is shared. in shared kinship, there are
too many sore spots and blind spots.
3. i feel the pull to obey still, to be quiet, to not speak. to let this become
a private matter, where men nod and pray. where the shape of my body means that
i lack the skills and power to communicate in any effective manner.
but i won't.
4. i will not peacemake with an abuser. and i will learn trust my own interpreta
tions of what i see, and take whatever steps necessary to expose what i see as w
rong. because talking is everyone's right.
no more hiding behind g-d.
p.s. julie, i'm so sorry for what happened to you. it's wrong, very very wrong.
BUT TRU, WHERE ARE THE WOMEN???? WHERE ARE THEY AT??????? WHY WON'T THEY TALLLKK
KK TO US????
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
@tru
I have also taken note of that fact. The dudebro elders at MH who issue
d their letter calling for Driscoll's resignation, and who are now being so wide
ly hailed for their courage and integrity as a result, were perfectly happy teac
hing his preferred form of misogynistic theology until it began to threaten thei
r jobs. So one is left wondering what, exactly,they've done to be courageous in
attempting to save their own skins.
While Pagitt and Jones (among others) aren't nearly so blatant in their disregar
d for women, it's on display for any who care to see it whenever they make appea
rances on these sorts of threads. When they deign to reply to a woman, which is
itself far more rare than their replying to men who issue identical challenges,
it almost invariably is for the purposes of condescension and dismissal. Unless
you happen to be Rachel Held Evans, and you words things very, very carefully.
Annie,
Great question! I think maybe a "legal wife" is entitled to alimony in the event
of a divorce, but a "spiritual wife" is not. That or a spiritual wife is the on
e with the marital trump card in polygamous or polyamorous scenarios. I could be
wrong about that though, or have it all backwards. I couldn't find the term in
my concordance, so I can only guess.
John,
You make some good observations about communicating in print. Maybe I'm just com
fortable with it, having done so online for 15 years now but I have to recognize
that this new form of communication must be used with extreme caution given the
literacy rate. Or something. Maybe I've been misunderstood all this time and I
never noticed, but I don't think I've had that much difficulty saying what I mea
n. Maybe it's because I'm a professional author and writer that I can express my
self so clearly. Oh, wait. That can't be right.
Shutting down conversation is a gaslighting tactic, as well as one which promote
s darkness and obscurity around the facts, and is often employed by those who do
n't have any interest in the discussion being public, like Mark Driscoll blaming
the internet. ("Damn internet, spreading facts at the speed of light! Who can c
ounter that?!") I know this because it's pretty consistent in my observation dur
ing the past 15 years of how this plays out online. You know, because this kind
of conversation is so new to inexperienced writers/readers.
ttm,
Belittling the question or the questioner and trying to shut them up is a form o
f spiritual abuse when it's done in a religious context or for supposedly religi
ous reasons by someone in a position of authority. Just sayin'... I've seen a lo
t of that elsewhere in my time too.
@Shade - please keep speaking your truth for as long as it feels right to you to
do so. It needs to be heard.
I can't ever speak for the abused, and I appreciate your and Julie's courage in
speaking out.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Annie, a "spiritual wife" you use because she is much cooler than you, and has t
attooed arm sleeves, dread locks, and an air of androgyny to give you street cre
d with the GLBT community that you have just now decided (and since it has now b
ecome mainstream) to reinvent your platform upon. You do this in desperation to
be relevant again. Also, a "spiritual wife" you don't have to pay alimony when s
he is no longer useful.
A "legal wife" you take back to court 12 times feigning financial destitution an
d try over and over and over not to pay child support. I hope that clears that u
p for you.
But then there is also the "polymorous" wife and that means you do whatever the
hell you want, and with multiple partners and genders and there is no consequenc
es...except maybe a pesky STD. There was an Emergent whackadoo blog post about b
eing "GGG with your partner: good, giving and game." Pretty sure that is tucked
away in the back of the gospel of John. I think that's the "generous orthodoxy"
they talked about (snicker). I tuned out way back when it went "cult speak" with
the "legal wife" and "spiritual wife" crap.
Circling back to the original post here....there is no difference between this,
and Mars Hill except they could choose to be bigger and better than Mark Driscol
l and admit fault, apologize and reconcile....isn't that what we are called to d
o? That's the only Christianity I can stomach. Where is it?! WHERE IS THE CONVER
SATION? Brian McLaren told me, "Never email me again." I guess he was all "disce
rned out."
I've received one apology from one of the six in the past six years. I would lik
e an apology from the other five on the "Discernment Team," Danielle Shroyer, Mi
ke King, Brian McLaren, Brad Cecil, Doug Pagitt. I will fully embrace your apolo
gy, but an apology is required here and now. This is the appropriate venue and m
aybe Mark Driscoll may even be inspired! I know "he who shall not be named" lite
rally would and will choke and die before admitting or apologizing to an iota of
what occurred, but you others? Do you walk the talk? Or, no? John Hubanks thank
you for that eloquent and succinct recap. Hilarious comment about, "Pass the po
pcorn." If memories are fuzzy I can post the Discernment Letter instructing me t
o check into a mental hospital if I want to save my marriage. Would that help? A
ll your names are on it in black and white. It's time....let's walk the talk.
Laura_A September 15, 2014 at 4:43 pm
Hi, David. Regarding the comment you made on September 12 about noticing the pat
hologies outside a church setting--the first place I encountered narcissistic pe
rsonality was in a one-two punch in the form of a self-professed feminist, Roman
Catholic department chair. She was truly terrifying in her ability to manipulat
e individuals--students, her colleagues, and her peers within her subject area.
She was almost revealed in a devastating way when the accreditation board came a
round for its routine 10-year evaluation, but she threatened students verbally a
nd there was an exodus of the most vocal students at the close of that academic
year. She managed to prevent individuals from getting tenure (and fired others o
utright) if their own academic subspecialties drew more positive attention, gran
ts, money, and attendance than hers. Universities are prime breeding and groomin
g grounds for these sorts of pathologies. Despite my own love for research, I ne
ver wanted to teach after watching what happened. I also spoke out and my reward
was clinical depression while sticking it out the remaining academic year to ge
t my undergrad degree.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Julie. You are brave. <3
@Danica- Where's *my* pm? Why isn't Doug trying to connect with *me*?
Maybe we should check our husband's inboxes, he's probably sent them messages an
d they can explain it to us later, at home, in all submission.
Julie- you have me alternately laughing and fuming. Keep talking.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
@Annie, if my husband got hit at work with this shite, there is seriously no fan
in the world big enough to disperse it.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
... but then again I'm merely a 'legal wife', so perhaps I should expect such a
reaction.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
funny how legal and spiritual got flopped around as to who gets protection from
whom... the amount of isolating and silencing that happens when a person faces s
omeone who apparently has g-d's voice, and has managed to find a way to complete
ly... destroy any hope of good.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Laura----It is really scary standing up to an NPD! The rage!! They are cunning a
nd will go to the ends of the earth to come out smelling like roses. "Crazy camp
aigns," whatever it takes. The "gas-lighting" is further scary stuff. 12 years o
f mental abuse I endured. Questioning your own reality. The sad part is they nev
er get help or get better. I want that for my kids. They refuse to look at their
stuff. A lot is being written about NPD lately, and I think in time these peopl
e will be put back in their cages. People are getting better at calling it out.
Take them out of leadership! They can do set up and clean up of the church spagh
etti dinners. Education and awareness are the first step. Knowing the signs. Spe
aking out. Refusing to back down. I know I am not the only person to be run over
by these people, but I can say this....they got the wrong marine! I will never
shut up until I get my five more apologies.
Wow. Shit's getting real.
One of the things I highly value, and I wish the church would, is mutual passion
for truth and the well-being of all people, rather than its own security or age
nda. The comments on this post are an indication to me that voices have been sil
enced, which builds up enormous pressure in the silenced, and once they find a v
enue where they can speak their minds, they do. I'm glad this can happen here. M
y hope is that rather than protect ourselves we lay that aside and put the conce
rn of all the people first. Truth, freedom and justice has to win. Eventually. M
ars Hill is an example. And probably not the last.
Peggy September 15, 2014 at 6:11 pm
David, you are my hero for hosting this most excellent conversation. More light
and fire, Holy Spirit!
I had no idea this would happen. Bring it on.
...even if you didn't know what was coming, I can't think of a better space for
this -- nor a more stalwart and generous host. Thank you, Holy Spirit...we will
have more, please! (HT: Baxter Kruger)
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Sonja September 15, 2014 at 7:31 pm
Challenges have been made and the crickets in response are deafening. Actions (w
riting) do speak louder than words.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
@Sonja, it's probably because we're all bitter. Better to follow the biblical co
nflict resolution strategy and 'turn us over to our sin' so that we might eventu
ally be saved back into the fold.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
So Doug.
It would appear you have chosen the second option.
Not surprising.
Just sad.
The crickets are indeed deafening, Sonja.
Stephen September 15, 2014 at 9:44 pm
I can ONLY imagine the emails flying behind the scenes here asking, demanding, t
hreatening this to all be deleted.
But seriously, it takes a lot of courage to speak up and folks here have done th
at. Kudos, you have my admiration and respect. Keep on being open and honest. Ev
en if it's just on the silly old internet. It does matter.
To other parties: the silence is truly deafening.
Barbara Tillman September 15, 2014 at 9:45 pm
Wow. Great discussion.
Likes(5)Dislikes(1)
Linda September 15, 2014 at 10:18 pm
An obvious lesson from the Mars Hill situation is that obfuscation escalates and
prolongs a situation that humility and transparency could quickly resolve. An o
pportunity to resolve long-standing pain could be embraced as a gift.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Cecilia Davidson September 15, 2014 at 10:59 pm
[blasphemy ahead - you have been warned]
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST TAP DANCING OFF THE CROSS, DOUG, you are an outright embarr
assment to the man you claim to adore as the Son of God.
[/blasphemy]
Holy fuck, it makes me realize that there are so many diverse problems within Ch
ristianity (and religion in general) - I thought many Catholics in the establish
ment (or siding with the establishment) were schizoid.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
I wonder if Doug would even address a woman like myself. Probably is thinking "w
ow what a foul mouth"
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
brad/futuristguy September 15, 2014 at 11:39 pm
Picking up on what Linda said a few comments ago, about how failure to resolve p
rolongs the pain ...
Initially, I was caught off guard that this thread turned into being about publi
c figures from Emergent Village who gained some degree of national-level promine
nce coming out of the "emerging church" movement. But my surprise dissipated. So
me critical disputes revealed here came up before. Had those situations been add
ressed more directly the last time they erupted, they might not even be under di
scussion now or maybe wouldn't seem so volatile for the recipients of Julie McMa
hon's pointed narrative and challenges.
As best I can remember, much of this same information of Julie's account about a
pparently very destructive behaviors and enablement by certain individuals withi
n Emergent Village was online around four years ago -- late 2009, early 2010. Bu
t that time it was in bits and pieces, scattered across various blogs in both po
sts and comments, over a period of months. And then it seemed to disappear befor
e there was any indication of resolution.
I recall there was a lot of what I could only interpret as shut-up type push-bac
k and protection like, "You don't know my life!" and "Why are you doing this to
him?" and "You don't know what you're talking about." And there was also a lot o
f silence in response to legitimate questions raised about people who have put t
hemselves in the public spotlight, questions about their behaviors and their qua
lifications to be seen as "leaders." And there was a flurry in deletion of comme
nts, and edits in posts, and attempts to capture or summarize details before the
y disappeared. And apparently a lot was going on behind the scenes, though from
the various tidbit trails left, I wonder how much (if any) of it could be consid
ered "Christian diplomacy."
So here it is, four-plus years later. This time, much of the case is all in one
place, which lets it be more concise and coherent. And Julie, I'm glad you've ha
d this opportunity to expand your thoughts and be more specific -- and also that
this time, thankfully, you've not been deleted, nor so denigrated and gaslighte
d and marginalized like last time. Who knows, perhaps you'll receive direct and
public responses from those who've been unkind to you or worse, either in person
, behind the scenes, or in the blogs. Regardless, I'm thankful you're having you
r say, sharing your story of spiritual abuse and survival, and advocating for li
ght to shine into the dark.
And thank you, David Hayward, for hosting this uncomfortable but crucial convers
ation. You're offering an opportunity for, as Linda said, "humility and transpar
ency" in the here-and-now that could've and should've been entered into lo, thos
e many years ago. This gives me more hope about other historically dark situatio
ns coming into the light.
Whoa Nellie September 16, 2014 at 12:31 am
Holy Mary, Mother of God. So many thoughts - none important except this - you wo
men here, standing tall and speaking truth to power, well done. The men standing
tall as encouragers and truth tellers of their own right - well done. I think I
might have stayed around had this fervor reached this particular pitch a couple
of years ago. As it stands, I removed myself from the equation entirely a coupl
e of years ago. I am now so glad I did. My perspective of the "leadership" and t
heir display (or lack thereof) and the unwillingness to be true to themselves nevermind the flock - is disheartening and sadly unsurprising. However, the voic
es! The callouts! What a breath of fresh air and hope.
David - very courageous to host this conversation and to challenge what so obvio
usly needs to be challenged. You are the bees knees.
Jen September 16, 2014 at 12:44 am
All that and I am still snickering at John's summary.
For the record...both the male and the female "pastors" from my former church ha
ve issues with apologies, admitting errors and brushing things under the rug by
"biblical" based attacks to the character of the accusers, along with shunning.
Sound familiar? They adore MH. All of these mega-emergent-seeker craps, I mean c
haps, teach each other their tricks. Blech.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
FYI - re spiritual/legal wife - I would not equate this with polyamory as this r
elationship structure has been explained to me by people in sex positive culture
s. A key component here is mutual relationships build on consent by all parities
. I'm not interested in using this space to sidetrack the discussion into this a
rena but simply noting that this teaching is seen as an out of sync with even th
e most liberal teachings on the topic.
And lest anyone think this scenario is limited to Julie, it isn't - similar (tho
ugh not as extreme) methods of gaslighting, shaming, dismissing, etc. have been
applied to anyone who challenges the holy hipster male missional crew albeit Mar
s Hill, Outlaw Preacher, Emergent Village, etc.
And while the focus has been placed on why Doug remains silent, don't forget tha
t EVERY published US emergent author knew about this pattern and not only stood
by silently, but defended Tony by participating in his projects, agreeing to spe
ak at his conferences, endorsing his books and the like.
Very telling that all this is coming to a head and crumbling ...
Scot McKnight: I agree. There are abuses in all theological expressions, as well
as good things.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
It would be a miracle if there was a public apology. As there should be because
I was publicly abused. It took me these many years to speak my truth without fea
r. When I had the evidence of "relations" I was told, "if you tell anyone I will
tear your head off. It will ruin my career and I will not be able to support th
e children." I'm not afraid anymore. I've been bullied and abused from my own Pa
stor at the time. I had no where to turn. The "community" told I was nuts and po
or him the suffering spouse who simply couldn't take it anymore. I was thrown to
the ground and my shoulder torn. I am not afraid anymore. There is nothing thes
e people can do or say to make me scared or silent. Whenever I spoke up before I
was threatened with "defamation of character lawsuits" or attacked by the circl
ing wagons or blog hosts instructed to delete comments, but my attorney assures
me the defense for defamation of character is the truth, and I have it with supp
orting documents and an MRI. I want peace. I want egos humbled. I await patientl
y five genuine apologies. Danielle, Mike, Brian, Doug, Brad...and the last one i
s beyond capable, so I'm letting that one go. The Holy Spirit can move but peopl
e have to be willing.
ttm September 16, 2014 at 9:09 am
Well, my eyes definitely aren't what they used to be! Earlier this morning I was
reading Becky Garrison's comment and saw what was probably intended to read "co
nsent of all parties" as "consent of all panties." :-) Ha! Reading it again now
just before posting this comment, I see that the phrase is actually "consent of
all parities." And that too, made me laugh because panties and parity (or lack
thereof) are often key ingredients in "thug theology" ...
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
brad/futuristguy September 16, 2014 at 9:33 am
@ttm. Am I a terrible person? I chuckled when I read "The pull of being a
cho
sen one
in a narcissists INERT circle is very alluring" in one of Danica's e
arlier comments. Oh the woes of auto-correct ... ?
But seriously, I am thankful for this discussion. I continue to learn about impo
rtant distinctions between sociopathology and narcissism, and other such points
relevant to expanding our understanding of the dynamics of abuse.

Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Having a vibrant (and sometimes bawdy) sense of humor makes us less terrible in
my opinion, futuristguy. :-) I too am thankful for this discussion. Bringing th
ings into the light is often the first step on the path toward healing ... even
if there are some who want to keep things tucked away in dark places. (See what
I did there? Oooh, and I almost had a typo!) :-)
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
To go back to David's original question ... I found this article last night (ok,
I peruse Buzzfeed to unwind, sue me). I was absolutely fascinated by the fact t
hat the stories of the women in the article, as well as the responses of most of
the men, are almost identical to what we've been talking around, over here. The
only difference being, in religious situations it's cloaked in god talk. So I'm
going to go with 'thug' as my answer to what came first. I think evil people ca
n (and do) hide behind any situation - behind Neo Calvinism and flashy marketing
, behind Emergent intellectualism, behind atheistic free thought.
And I also think what (John?) said above rings so true ... until the abuse start
s affecting the men in a situation, things won't change. I am so incredibly grat
eful for men who DO stand up and help support us women who really just want our
voices heard, and want to be able to enjoy (church, theological discussions, fre
e thought conventions, fillintheblank) without fear of being treated differently
(less than) due to our gender.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/markoppenheimer/will-misogyny-bring-down-the-atheist-mov
ement#46v9m7p
I know that because nakedpastor holds no allegiances to any certain groups or in
dividuals, it can be very annoying to some who would like to silence the voices
of dissent and victims. Again, I appreciate the vulnerability exhibited through
the amazing courage and strength of the commenters here.
Annie September 16, 2014 at 11:29 am
@Julie- Wow. Just wow. I'm glad you're no longer afraid and I'm glad you're spea
king up and saying what happened.
As for threatening to not be able to support the kids if you talk? That's just G
rade A manipulative victim blaming. I guess that's something else a "legal wife"
is entitled to. Also being assaulted. I guess we should hope, for his spiritual
wife's sake, that they are never legally entangled.
Danica, I'm surprised that Buzzfeed worded the headline like that, as quite ofte
n "question" headlines often have a no answer. Sadly, so long as men and women r
evere Sam Harris, Penn Gilette, Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins as mode
ls for atheism, and so long as men keep being told that they are superior, these
issues will continue
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
There is a myth that what was Emergent Village was fully egalitarian and pro-wom
en. What happened to Julie
the gaslighting , the disinformation campaign,
the abject nonsense of legal marriage vs spiritual marriage

rticipation of key EV leaders, strongly states the converse.
with the full pa
What was important was protecting the publishing and conference markets for EV a
s simply a part of the Christian Industrial Complex
and it mattered not who
got trampled in the process. Julie and her three children were thrown under the
EV bus, along with others.
Gaslighting: manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning the
ir own sanity: in the first episode, Karen Valentine is being gaslighted by her
husband.[from the storyline of the movie Gaslight (1944), in which a man psychol
ogicallymanipulates his wife into believing that she is going insane.]
And not to drive traffic to my blog but do understand I've been responding to th
is particular crap since January of 2010 Here's A Thought. Jason Coker's comment
is particularly apropos but please make a point of reading the vitriol from the
EV males who felt one of their leaders was being attacked
with zero compass
ion for Julie.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
If there is such a thing as Emergent anymore, I think the ones who think they ar
e at the helm would be best to clear things up if they care more for it to move
on more then they care for themselves moving on.
David,
I doubt Jones and Pagitt will return to this discussion as their only real optio
n is to apologize. Instead, their hope is that this discussion will simply peter
out and they can press on with how they have previously operated. No "important
" people the wiser.
Likes(8)Dislikes(3)
Two things @Julie, I'm glad (very glad) you have a lawyer. I'm hoping to hell that you were
able to pin Tony with battery on a household member.
@bra - hah! 'Inert' should have been 'inner' ... but my autocorrect is All Kowin
g and All Powerful, and often Prophetic. ;)
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Hey, Becky -- thanks for your response on Sept 12. I've been just catching up on
this thread, and I appreciate your perspective and advice!
I have to say how impactful (and somewhat rattling) the comments have been here.
I know some of the people Julie references, and I'm disappointed and sad that t
hey did not come to Julie's side during a horrible time in her life. Julie, I'm
echoing Danica's sentiment about being happy you found a lawyer. I found myself
praying for the physical safety of you and your children last night after catchi
ng up on the comments since my last visit here. How God-awful. You didn't deserv
e that and I'm so sorry that happened.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
I do wish Tony and Doug and others would continue in this conversation as well.
This passive approach, bowing out, is just another way of silencing others, in m
y opinion, because it isolates victims and creates a bubble of monologue. It end
s up having the same effect as segregating others through bullying. The challeng
ers and the challenged are cloistered in their separate quarantines. As usual.
What's happened on this post is truly tragic. I told Bill years ago and David la
st week: all the court records in our divorce and subsequent legal activity are
public. Anyone who really cared to know the truth would not have much trouble fi
nding the entire story. I have nothing to hide, as those records paint a clear p
icture.
However, I will neither air that dirty laundry nor defend myself in this forum.
The reason for that is one that I ask each of you to consider: my children (14,
13, and 10) have computers and mobile devices, and they read the internet. Do yo
u really think it is in their best interests to adjudicate these outrageous lies
here? I don't. So I am, indeed, bowing out. Anyone who would like to talk more
about this can contact me privately or, as I said, pull the court proceedings an
d police records.
I will not be coming back to this post or this blog again.
Tony,
Don't you ever get tired of playing the "Tony as victim" card. It is truly pathe
tic, sir.
Perhaps you should have thought about your kids when courting your "spiritual wi
fe" while married to your "legal wife". And "courting" is being generous.
And none of this would have been anyone's business, Tony had you not desperately
wanted to be seen as some kind of Christian leader, and had simply exited stage
left "years ago."
Jen September 16, 2014 at 6:18 pm
Tony, I don't recall anyone asking you to defend yourself. Julie, as a friend re
cently reminded me...
"You own everything that happened to you. Tell your stories. If people wanted yo
u to write warmly about them, they should've behaved better." Anne Lamott
Thsee publicity seeking "pastors" make me sick to my stomach. I can't even "do c
hurch" anymore.
Lydia September 16, 2014 at 6:41 pm
"I apologize for my Irish coming out but that was 6 years in the making and ther
e is nothing I loathe more than a fraud parading under the banner of
all peac
e love and kindness
while twisting the knife in someone s back
- See mor
e at: http://www.nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-f
irst-the-thug-or-the-theology/#sthash.AYAFUGZ6.dpuf -"
You don't have to apologize to me. More of this sort of TRUTH needs to happen. I
am with you on hating the fraud parade. I live with it every day, too. "Great m
en of God" who do evil behind the scenes and then blame the very people they hav
e trampled on.
You know what is the worst part? They do their evil in the "Name of Jesus". I wo
uld not want to be them.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
"I apologize for my Irish coming out but that was 6 years in the making and ther
e is nothing I loathe more than a fraud parading under the banner of
all peac
e love and kindness
while twisting the knife in someone s back
- See mor
e at: http://www.nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-f
irst-the-thug-or-the-theology/#sthash.AYAFUGZ6.dpuf -"
You don't have to apologize to me. More of this sort of TRUTH needs to happen. I
am with you on hating the fraud parade. I live with it every day, too. "Great m
en of God" who do evil behind the scenes and then blame the very people they hav
e trampled on.
You know what is the worst part? They do their evil in the "Name of Jesus". I wo
uld not want to be them.
"Spiritual wife"? That is barf worthy.
Sounds very "Mormonish" to me.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
"I know that because nakedpastor holds no allegiances to any certain groups or i
ndividuals, it can be very annoying to some who would like to silence the voices
of dissent and victims."
Now you are talking my language..
Likes(5)Dislikes(1)
"One of the things I highly value, and I wish the church would, is mutual passio
n for truth and the well-being of all people, rather than its own security or ag
enda. The comments on this post are an indication to me that voices have been si
lenced, which builds up enormous pressure in the silenced, and once they find a
venue where they can speak their minds, they do. I m glad this can happen here
. My hope is that rather than protect ourselves we lay that aside and put the co
ncern of all the people first. Truth, freedom and justice has to win. - "
This is exactly how I think. And one reason I can no longer attend "church". It
is too fake. And no more listening to anyone who says it is sin to speak negativ
e truths out loud in public.. Our Lord loves truth, transparency and justice.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
This quote fromthe just published Forbes article on Mark Driscoll seems so appro
priate for both EV and Mars Hill.
"Personality cults end badly, because anyone objective finds themselves mauled b
y loyalists trying to hold the cult together."
Great quote Bill. I know this first hand and personally.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
I noticed Tony didn't deny that any of this happened.
As my husband, who works in criminal justice, always says --- people are always
very concerned for their children's welfare after the fact. When they need to be
bonded out of jail (but my children need me to work, and take care of them), to
go home for the holidays (my children need their parent now), to have a lesser
sentence (my children need me with them) ... and yet there was no concern for th
ese children when the parent was driving drunk with his kids in the car ... or h
uffing paint while pregnant ... or stealing a pocketful of makeup from Walmart .
.. or beating their mother.
Nice try, Tony. Something tells me this is not the first time you've used your c
hildren as pawns.
Um ... Did he just invoke Maude Flanders?
"Won't someone PLEASE think of the children???"
David,
Our sincerest apologies for driving Tony away from this blog, never to return...
however will you deal with that loss of status?
Tony,
Why on earth would you assume we haven't looked up the public records on this? I
t seems the courts found Julie sane enough to give her custody of the kids... yo
u know, the ones you are trying to enlist the aid of the entire internet to keep
them from learning the truth. As far as I'm concerned, the matter has already b
een adjudicated but there's been an attempt at obscuring the facts of the case b
y those that have the megaphone.
To be clear, I don't think anyone's asked for a defence... just an acknowledgeme
nt. And perhaps apologies where due. Good thing nobody's holding their breath.
My 3 kids are wonderful, brave and courageous. They live with me full time due t
o the discoveries in the custody evaluation and psych evals. MN law awarded the
minimum visitation. My children and I attend weekly therapy to cope with the des
tructive personality disordered family members we must interact with on the prov
erbial "every other weekend." They have learned coping tools and mechanisms and
are incredible kids. They have survived such as being weighed with the remark, "
Your mother is making you all fat." That's just one gem. Too many to list here.
I am all for raising children who readily admit mistakes and have the ability to
wholeheartedly say I am sorry. The ability to say I am sorry truly is the NPD l
itmus test. In my family we say, please forgive me. And then we move on. I'll le
ad by example. I am sorry...for my part that may have hurt you or the Emergent "
Discernment Team" I forgive you all. I think going public is wonderful and since
public records do not include sex emails, psych evals, hospital reports, phone
calls from Emergent leaders, MRIs or discernment letters....I will post them all
here. Why the hell would I or anyone ever make this nightmare up? Isn't it a lo
t more plausible it happened? Especially if you live together now? So, maybe I w
asn't "insecure" or "paranoid" to wonder. And maybe you weren't just "platonic"
and they were not just "flirtatious emails." I don't know about any of you, but
I don't ask MY male friends to be "hard pressed on me and in me : )" Don't forge
t the smiley face as it is very important to the email sent to the married man.
Can I get an amen? Or do we need to keep going? A simple I'm sorry for my part i
n the sordid tale can wrap this up, otherwise I have more stories...how about th
e one where the Edina police chaplain throws his wife across the room tearing he
r shoulder and her 7 year old helps her up and moves the furniture from off of h
er? Then when she goes to call 911 he says, "They'll never believe you. Haven't
you ever heard of the code of the blue?" More? Or no? It's all very sad but sadd
er still that a choking death need to occur before a confession. I can email all
corroborating evidence to the naked pastor for verification. In the name of eve
rything being public and full transparency...great idea. I think we are getting
somewhere. Please note every Easter I send an email asking we bury the hatchet i
n the name of God, and for our kids and because we profess to be Christians....c
an. not. do. It. silent treatment and punishment only for causing the narcissist
ic injury. I must pay. I had really hoped light could come from this darkness...
I still hope but I just don't think they're capable. Oh, and to answer the blogp
ost question? It's Pathology before Theology! Peace and thank you all who PMd me
and emailed me. This was very cathartic and healing. A beautiful person sent me
a poem about abuse and the silencing. Thank you for sharing that. Thank you nak
ed pastor for allowing me to speak freely. Love, light, truth and forgiveness. Y
es, Doug! Let goodness flow. I'll start...
Julie, I have so much love for you, and I don't even know you. Your courage is a
mazing, and your stength is inspiring. All the love to you and your kids.
Julie,
We are practically neighbors. I live in MN too. If I was standing next to you, I
would give you a big {HUG}. You are one strong mama!!!
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Colina September 16, 2014 at 9:24 pm
I do not understand the persistent demand that the comments section of a blog is
sufficient--can hold--the (voyeuristic?) adjudication (using that word due to t
he litany of accusations) of what must have been an enormously painful divorce f
or all parties. Does not divorce occur in part because parties have ruptured and
differing interpretations of events, of each other? Obviously these two formerl
y married people do not share the same interpretation of events. How can any of
you claim to know--or even demand--the truth about the truth of what happened in
order to then take sides? Unless you know these people intimately and were ther
e, in which case why in hell sift it all out again on a blog?
Julie can demand whatever she damn well pleases -- obviously -- and doesn't need
any encouragement or validation to do so. Obviously . All respect for her pain.
And for Tony's. I just don't see how it's any of the damned business of the peo
ple on this forum to demand responses to what you know are complex, deeply emoti
onal, painful events lived out in the intimate lives of others. There is an arro
gance at play here that is deeply troubling.
So what came first, the voyeur or the victim trying to work out past shame of ha
ving acquiesced and given up their voice in the first place? Take up your voice
and sound your barbaric yawps as you wish... good on you... but for the love of
God (literally) do you really have to do it by simplistically demanding a new on
line divorce trial? Do you truly think this immense pain is going to be redeemed
or healed within the comments section of this blog? Egad.
any g-d that supports this level of abasement and abuse deserves to be burnt in
the fires of molech.
I honestly think that the 'immense pain' is being healed through the comments se
ction of this blog. Julie even said it. She's been trying to tell her story for
years and has been deleted and silenced. I applaud her and encourage her because
I applaud and encourage any sister who finds her voice to speak against her abu
ser.
Colina, you can take your shaming concern trolling and stick it where the sun do
n't shine.
... but you know, I'd honestly be defensive, too, if it got out online that I ha
d texted, "hard pressed on me and in me" to a married man.
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
Thank you. THIS is the kind of community I want to worship in. After all of this
shit and the Emergent cult and Solomon's Porch with a crack pot Pastor Doug who
covers up affairs, and rationalizes divorces, and tries to have sane people adm
itted into mental hospitals...then instructs Steve Knight (the webmaster at Emer
gent Village) to wipe out all of the posts and cross posts between he and Courtn
ey Perry's and take down her bio from the Board of Directors page and "clean up
the website," all within 24 hours of my coming to his home crying and sharing th
e sex emails. to MY PASTOR...to which he whoopsied out of his mouth before think
ing, "God dammit! I asked him so many times about her!" I still believe in the g
ood. There are really good people here.
Danica, you forgot the smiley face.
Fascinating that Colina used the exact same word as he whom shall not be named..
.."adjudication." With all do respect, Colina....it's not complex at all. There
were lies and deception by public figures. So, it is public. There is irrefutabl
e proof. They are in leadership. It is wrong, abusive and should not be tolerate
d. No complexity there at all. This coming clean is long overdue. One of them di
d and I accepted his apology. The others need to. This is a conversation spurred
by the Mars Hill abuses and the striking similarities. Public figures denying b
ad behavior while blogging about another preachers bad behavior, is just too muc
h to tolerate. That is why this is all coming out in technicolor. Get it now?
I wonder if Colina and Tony are sharing the laptop, or if she's on her phone?
Likes(8)Dislikes(1)
Ha Ha Haaaa! Tony, pretending like anyone believes the official court record eve
r tells the whole story.
Colina- I'm sure you're right that there's a lot of deeply emotional stuff we ar
en't privy to related to this painful divorce. That said, all horseshit smells t
he same, and it's not hard to recognize a load of the stuff when a guy with some
thing to lose/cover starts shoveling it under your nose.
Julie, again, you're awesome. Thank you for speaking.
So, Colina, if I am to understand you correctly, I should not show love or compa
ssion to a woman who is obviously trying to overcome great pain because she had
the Furtickian like audacity to publicly discuss it? You must have missed the pa
rts about shunning, shaming and obfuscation. I do not have to pick a side in ord
er to support someone in their pain.
Tony's comments led me to believe he is so far above this nonsense that he doesn
't need kind words of support from anyone especially from me, a lowly woman who
is already legally and spiritually married to, get this, THE SAME MAN. :)
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Gary September 17, 2014 at 8:29 am
Wow. I am thrilled to see this discussion take place and Julie...plain and simpl
e...you rock!!
I have no dog in this fight other than the same overwhelming urge to confront th
e abusers and seek an end to spiritual manipulation and abuse. But I do have one
comment/clarification to make concerning the polyamorous/"spiritual wife" bulls
hit. Whatever some may think of poly, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with cheat
ing, abandoning and abusing one spouse in favor of another. Tony, and any who wo
uld defend his style of emotional and spiritual abuse and manipulation slander b
oth Christians and polyamorous people. (Which can sometimes be one and the same)
Carry on. ;-)
Even more telling, this: "Take up your voice and sound your barbaric yawps as yo
u wish
good on you
but for the love of God (literally) do you really have
to do it by simplistically demanding a new online divorce trial? Do you truly th
ink this immense pain is going to be redeemed or healed within the comments sect
ion of this blog? Egad."
Barbaric yawps? Shaming. Going all "good on you" when someone sees the need to s
peak out about bullying theology in action? Shaming. Oversimplifying a complex i
ssue into an "online divorce trial"? Shaming. Telling someone that releasing the
ir pain in public like this and feeling as if NakedPastor/The Lasting Supper is
not the proper place to discuss anything human?
You guessed it. SHAMING.
During the Christianity 21 event where there was a PR effort by Emergent pig mal
es to appear pro-feminist all the while a very interesting and pig-like drama oc
curred behind the scenes. The event got changed from its original venue to the s
ame location as where my son attends preschool. I arrived at pick up time to all
of these Emergent people milling about and who several were given marching orde
rs to tell me to, "Leave! Now" and "What are you doing here?!" Some person ran a
fter me and said, "I know who you are and you have been asked to leave." Even th
e police were called! Doug lunged at me and grabbed me forcibly by the arm and s
aid, "Leave!! You are not welcome here." I said, "I am here to pick up Aidan you
FREAK!" He was quite literally foaming at the mouth and said, "Where is Aidan?!
Show me Aidan right now?!" Doug then followed me like a rabid lunatic all the w
ay through the church, and down the stairs, and down another long hallway to my
child's classroom. He said, "Oh." when he saw Aidan coming running towards me, a
nd then he turned and left. Yes! These things need to be aired out. It is abuse
of power by narcissist in leadership. Emergent people then spread a rumor and li
es that I showed up at Christianity 21 to "make a scene" and "I'm crazy." No, as

sholes...I came to my kids preschool to pick him up. How interesting out of all
of the venues available in Minneapolis that the place where my son attends presc
hool was the one chosen by he whom shall not be named. A set up? I think so.
From what it seems, the shamers are taking to PRIVATE means to be on the offensi
ve/defensive. This is ridiculous. Are these people so afraid of having their ego
s shattered by a SINGLE PERSON speaking their words?
Ladies and gentlemen, the people who hide from Julie (and attack David because o
f Julie's words) are the thugs that feed the theology and twist it. These are th
e people who eat the twisted theology, shit it out, and re-eat the same shit, as
it did not change by any means in the process of digesting - Hell, there's no d
igestion, just blind acceptance, swallowing, and shitting back out of this hatef
ul theology.
I feel the personal need to make a comment giving my take on what's happening an
d why I think it is important. Basically, I'm copying and pasting a letter that
I've sent to those who are contacting me privately, outside of this forum, calli
ng what is happening here into question. There are subtle and not so subtle atte
mpts to silence what is happening here.
So here it is, in gist:
I want to make clear up front that I have not, up to now, held anything personal
ly against Tony. Or Doug. My original post was simply intended to raise the ques
tion of what came first, the theology or the abusive tendencies of a person, Dri
scoll particularly. I think that is a valid and important question for the churc
h and its leaders. This is what the post is about.
There was no intention on my part for the post to turn into what it became
a
forum for those who feel they've been silenced to freely express themselves. Alt
hough that is the ethos of nakedpastor.
As I told Doug and Tony and others, I am not in the habit of censoring the comme
nts of my readers. Read any online platforms for news, etc., and all kinds of co
mments are being made by all kinds of people. They are never intended to express
the views of the writer of the original article. Everyone knows the comments ar
e the diverse responses from the readers.
What are you suggesting I do? Delete that post? Disable comments? Block certain
commenters? Censor comments? Lay ground rules for how to be angry and express th
e injustices perpetrated against them?
I'm not about to begin censoring comments now, even as disturbing as some of the
m may be.
Although divorce is painful for all those involved, the primary issue is not the
divorce. Everyone knows divorces are messy. I don't think the intention is to g
ravitate people to one side or another concerning the divorce in and of itself.
And of course I don't want to moderate another divorce proceeding. But I want to
be clear: that's not what this is about. It seems to me the issue is the appare
nt silencing of people who were speaking out against what seems to be cover-ups,
concealment of evidence, and the protection of leaders by their peers. It seems
that some information and people were marginalized, ghettoized, and silenced fo
r the sake of the progress of the Emergent machine and its heroes.
This may or not be true, although it's increasingly suspicious that it was. Neve
rtheless, people have the right to raise this concern. Do they not? Why they hav
e chosen to do so on nakedpastor is beyond my understanding. But this is where i
t is happening. So be it!
In conclusion, I do find it interesting that those who are raising concerns abou
t all that happened and is happening are doing so unafraid in the public forum o
f my post with a lot of emotion and intelligence, while those who are trying to
silence the discussion or at least control it are contacting me privately outsid
e of the public forum with words that attempt to direct, intimidate or shame me.
This is a pretty strong indicator to me and others that some are more worried a
bout the apparent aggressors than they are the apparent aggrieved.
Nakedpastor is in the habit of exposing abuse, elevating the dignity of the abus
ed, and providing a safe space for this to occur.
I don't see this ending anytime soon.
Josiah September 17, 2014 at 11:12 am
Having recently gone through a divorce myself, I can unequivocally assert that w
hat exists in the public record provides only a glimmer of the full truth and of
ten serves to obfuscate it. Tony's claim that the full reality is available thro
ugh public court documents is simply disingenuous. And, his "think of the childr
en" defense is patently absurd. It is not the job of parents to protect children
from the truth, especially when they are caught in the middle of messy and pain
ful circumstances in which one party has so clearly attempted to wrest control o
f the narrative to salvage his own reputation.
It's clear that Julie has been subjected to abominable treatment by men in posit
ions of power, and that her attempts to expose the truth have been thwarted by t
hose very same people. I'm glad this forum exists as a vehicle for her story. Th
e truth can only be properly adjudicated if all voices are heard. And, from my p
erspective, the truth falls 100% on Julie's side.
As has been well documented, this abuse goes well beyond to one emergent leader
demonstrating what they like to term "Driscoll-like behavior" - what Julie descr
ibes is how those who critiqued Emergent Village, Outlaw Preachers, Wild Goose (
though it seems to now be dominated by the Sojourners crew), Pathroes Progressiv
e blogger portal and other incantations of this group. There are a host of other
victims out there, who for the most part remain silent because they've seen wha
t happens to those of us who speak out both professionally and personally.
Don't forget, EVERY author/agent/publisher who markets via the US emergent brand
is responsible for this culture of abuse - those who did not participate in it,
stood by silently as it happened. This includes - but is not limited to - those
Julie listed who owe her an apology. IMO the only way to end this is to refuse
to buy into the brand - EVEN if someone is your "personal" friend, do not buy an
y more product from abusers, pay to watch them play, etc.
David, we need to figure out how to add a like button. :-) Well spoken response.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Hey Jen. Thanks my friend! You can "like" it on that floating facebook like butt
on on the left. If you dare yahahaha ;)

Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Excellent response, David. What you describe with private intimidation tactics t
o combat public assertions is the same as what happened the last time this came
out publicly around 2010 or so. A number of folks (myself included) either said
things or had comments appear on their blogs that called out Tony for his behavi
or, only for the blog owner to be subjected to intimidation tactics from Tony an
d other EV leaders. Some of us edited posts or pulled back on the challenge. I'm
sorry to have done that -- at the time it was all still fresh with court procee
dings pending, so letting it drop seemed wise back then. I'm not sure if it was
or not, but if it was the wrong thing then I'm sorry for not pressing the issue
harder at the time. One small mercy, I suppose, is that Tony and Julie's childre
n are older and perhaps better able to process it... this must have been pretty
tough on a preschool kid. (Oh, the irony, oh, the hypocrisy.)
What's important in this forum is that the tactic of silencing the victim or tho
se who call out abuse is an established pattern here, and David's comment above
confirms that the pattern is ongoing. If it's lost any force since then, I'd sug
gest that's only because EV is a much smaller and less influential animal now th
an then.
This is also illustrative of the parallel between Mark Driscoll / Mars Hill and
Tony Jones / Emergent Village (and why the segue on this post). Tony wasn't so m
uch the Grand Poo-Bah of EV, but his misdeeds were covered the same way as Mark
Driscoll's were at Mars Hill. The difference with Mars Hill is that Mark started
throwing more people under the bus sooner, until his co-conspirators were a sma
ll group of men he could control. The tactics were much the same. With EV, the g
roup was larger, so you'd think the conspiracy was weaker, which is where the pa
rallel causes one to wonder if EV itself wasn't thrown under the bus in favor of
JoPa to help cover what happened here, but at the moment that might be a bit sp
eculative.
Remember that the people engaged in the coverup had a financial interest to do s
o -- especially Doug, having become Tony's partner in JoPa, but also those with
existing or pending book deals. The other leaders had an interest in covering it
up for different reasons... they were rewarded with status and approval from th
e big guns in EV at the time. Some of those leaders made efforts to shame the bl
oggers at the time, but when pressed, they had no more personal knowledge of the
situation than any other outsider, just the say-so of a more well-known EV lead
er.
These leaders are the people I would want to call on now to own up to what happe
ned... if they spoke out in favor of Tony, Doug, et al without direct personal k
nowledge, they were just spreading the hearsay of the abusers. I have great symp
athy for these leaders, who acted in the pattern they were shown. I came out of
an abusive church situation, and very close after the realization that I'd been
spiritually abused came the realization that as a leader in that system, I too h
ad been a spiritual abuser, repeating the pattern that had been taught to me. My
own grief over the latter realization was greater than over the former... but o
ne has to acknowledge it, right what they can, and move on. Withdrawing support
now for what went on in EV then would be an important way of doing this.
And David is completely correct in his statement that this is not about a divorc
e... it's about the coverup, and per the title of this post, it's about the theo
logical justification for sin. "Spiritual Wife"? (Give me a break!) Doug used th
e term in a comment above, indicating they're still sticking with that nonsense.
Even though EV has considerably less influence now than Mars Hill, the fact tha
t the system continues with the same leaders in place using the same patterns me
ans that others are being abused spiritually at the very least. This is the reas
on why it has to stop at Mars Hill, and the reason why it has to stop where any
of the unrepentant EV leaders are attempting to continue ministry.
Before anyone gets concerned, WordPress is GLITCHING. I do not believe there is
intentional "disappearing" of comments going on.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
There is some glitching going on because I'm switching servers. No comments are
being deleted. Promise. They're all still there and will reappear in due time.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
I meant individual comments. :)~ But I liked your FB too.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
well then i wish there was such a thing jen! ;)
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Thank you, all. This has absolutely zero do to with divorce. The 6 Emergent Lead
ers who gathered in Dallas, Texas while on a book tour stop and who "through hou
rs of prayer and discernment" diagnosed me without ever saying a word to me, and
came up with an "action plan," which by the way, only he whom shall not be name
d was present for, and I was in Minnesota with the kids. A church person once to
ld me that is a real no-no in "spiritual discernment" etiquette to spiritually d
iscern about someone, without them present! So, poor Mark was sent on a mission
to fly to Minnesota and get me to pack a bag and leave with him to a mental hosp
ital. My sister was there and said, "Get the F*&% out of this house." My kids we
re taken by another Emergent leader for 10 terrifying hours, I had no idea where
they were, or if they were ever coming back. When it was clear the big plan was
an epic fail....Mark flew back on book tour and my kids were returned home. So,
would any of the 6 like to apologize for just that?! How about just that day?!
No?! Too much? How about just the spiritual abuse of "discerning" someone withou
t them present? I'm sure you 6 are incapable of even doing that. So, when I had
the psychological evaluation I went back to the 6 expecting full apologies and I
THOUGHT they would ask the mentally ill leader to step down from leadership. No
such thing. I was shunned, shamed and silenced. Doug said, "I don't want to rea
d it. Do not send it to me."
Interestingly enough, very recently John Hagee said similar in tone as Doug may
have more subtly stated in his comments here:
"I am tired of hearing about race. If you come to the cross, you're all brothers
and sisters." In short, he doesn't want to hear jack shit about racism because
CHRISTIANITY SOLVES EVERYTHING IT CAUSES.
(not implying that only Christianity caused racism, but it sure has helped)
Likes(8)Dislikes(2)
Ooops, part 2.
The point being made is that Doug and others don't want to hear about it because
they know it exists and seeing their actions in a mirror makes them uncomfortab
le.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
kate willette September 17, 2014 at 1:02 pm
Julie, thanks. David, thanks. It feels as if the world got just a tiny bit more
balanced this morning.
For some.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
I think that what is so cathartic and compelling about Julie's story/stories is
how very awfully true they ring. If one has been targeted by an organization, or
powerful person within an organization, there's a way the wagons circle and the
aggressions a pile up. It makes you feel crazy, paranoid. Trying to tell someon
e about it or get support and help makes you LOOK crazy and paranoid. And people
start to back away.
There are a thousand tiny and not-so-tiny things that are said or implied or, to
family and neighbors and community; many more things that are said and done to
the targeted individual. Many are too small to be taken seriously (so many call/
hang ups in the middle of the night. So. Many. And let's not forget the occasion
al bill missing from the mailbox. Hard to know for sure it was them, but it only
happened during that 3 year period) but taken as a whole they wear you down. An
d none of it is the kind of thing you ever imagine anyone would do before you ex
perience it, the half-truths mixed with bible verses, the twisting of one's own
words, the sudden legal threat despite promises to the contrary. If I were tryin
g to make up a sympathy sob story I would make up better details, more believabl
e ones, than the grinding, boring, crushing, and banal reality of what it was li
ke to be targeted by Men Of God protecting their image and bottom line.
The quote I leave you with, from the director of the organization targeting my h
usband, came when he finally looked at the facts and acknowledged that the org h
ad done us wrong. We asked him to fix it using biblical standards for reconcilia
tion between brothers in Christ (ha ha haaaa. We were so effing naive back then)
. He looked at us apologetically, almost like he was begging us to be understand
ing of his awkward position, and said: Of course you always want to follow the B
ible, but sometimes, when you're running a Christian organization, you can't aff
ord to.
I think that sums this shit up nicely.
"Nakedpastor is in the habit of exposing abuse, elevating the dignity of the abu
sed, and providing a safe space for this to occur."
David, standing slow clap for your response to all the private bullying, legal t
hreats, etc. that you are no doubt receiving offline. The time for justice is no
w. It's always now.
i hear that ;)
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Please forgive the rhetorical devices of my first post. Divorce, and affairs, ar
e a particularly difficult subject for me and I've experienced my own hell over
the competing violently clashing truths that force people to take sides with bro
ken lives and relationships in the wake. I don't believe in treating them with p
itchforks or a with any lack of humility.
I don't know Julie, I don't know the intimate details of her divorce, and I don'
t know Tony's story, or what any of the EV leaders would say in response. Of cou
rse moral justifications are not the point. As flawed imperfect people trying on
some level to get to an experience of truth -- it seems to me that this convers
ation is in part about the fact that the "truth" is not just about right ideas,
or right ideology or interpretations. To David's original questions. Moral codif
ied perfection or justifications are think rarely the point -- or at least not t
he primary point of the gospel.
So I have a hard time understanding why a blog forum would be an appropriate ven
ue to air the intimate agony of a divorce and invite counter-accusations and jus
tifications in defense. If Tony were to respond in detail with his version of ev
ents, if EV leaders stepped in and rather inevitably started saying, "but Julie
was or did X or Y," and THAT's why I did Z... then suddenly the conversation is
immersed in counter-accusations over the agony of a divorce, something that is r
arely if ever simplistic and one-sided. A divorce is by definition a clash of co
mpeting truths and do you think we can get to the truth of it all on an online f
orum in order to then make a larger point about theology and spiritual leadershi
p? The attempt or demand to do this on a blog forum just feels wrong to me.
You all say this isn't about divorce, but it obviously is the context and where
the anecdotes and accusations derive from. I understand that Julie's accusations
are not just about an affair, or a 'divorce', but are also about silencing. Jus
tice. She's inviting apologies, or what most likely would be a set of counter-ac
cusations and justifications, or at least explanatory context that would likely
invite scrutiny into her behavior at the time because again divorces are competi
ng clashing stories about pain and betrayal and rage and brokenness.
I'm honestly asking -- when I do not know these people or their story, but I do
know the murkiness and agony of divorce -- is it wrong of me to not want to rush
to grab a pitchfork after hearing just one side in a series of anecdotes derive
d from a divorce? Is it wrong that I don't want to invite (much less demand) tha
t either Julie or Tony air their most profound, intimate pain in this public for
um in order to have a conversation about theology and abuse?
And if I am wrong -- then help me understand how you want this to go?
If Tony et al legitimately believe their own version of events (objectively righ
t or wrong) but if they really believe it, and if they start airing their versio
n... then how do you expect this to go? Hyenas I suppose will "pass the popcorn"
and find the gossip delicious. But what good -- GOOD -- do you expect will come
of it? Really not asking rhetorically.
I can respect her no-bullshit courageous fighting spirit. And don't claim that I
'm patronizing anyone. She's got game. But it seems wrong to assume that the onl
y reason why Tony or EV leaders choose to be silent on this forum is because the
y're ashamed, or hiding, or cowering in the darkness of their narcisistic evils
in order to protect some sort of fame that many of you claim they don't have any
way. I am not in contact w/ any of them, have no clue about what they are thinki
ng, but I know if it were me I wouldn't want to force or participate in an onlin
e debate with a group of virtual strangers over the intimate details of a person
al divorce. And any reluctance to do so does not mean that I am a coward or a vi
llain. **Particularly** if I was inviting the conversation to be had in person,
face to face, or voice to voice.
Are any of you having this conversation in person, or voice to voice?

Saying to a virtual group of strangers, "you don't get to walk into the intimate
pain and failures of this divorce", or saying that it's inappropriate to do so
on an online forum when I am simultaneously inviting conversation in person... j
ust doesn't mean that I am a -- bwa-ha-ha -- victimizer.
And Danica -- "where the sun don't shine?? You're not trying to "silence" me are
you? :)
None of this is to take sides w/ EV leaders I don't know. I take seriously the p
sychological/spiritual manipulation of leaders who exert influence to control ot
hers for personal gain. Where leaders take advantage of peoples acquiescence in
order to achieve greater domination or success. It's horrific, and didn't Jesus
say something about tying huge rocks around their necks and drowning them in the
sea? That's His justice. And its far more terrifying than social media debates.
And why a prayer for mercy from all our flawed lips is so perhaps necessary.
You all clearly have more history in the EV village world than I do, and there i
s much that I don't know. So Godspeed literally in your quest for justice.
Colina: My first response towards your last comment is curiosity. After I made i
t clear that this isn't about the divorce, you seem to want to pull it back into
a he-said-she-said thing. When you say "help me understand how you want this to
go", you seem to think there is an agenda underneath the emotional and intellig
ent comments. Since when is someone just telling their story an agenda? Since wh
en is telling their truth considered strategic? You know what I mean?
It just seems to me that if Julie were just any other woman telling her story ab
out her divorce from any other man, there would be no issue. There would be tons
of sympathy and encouragement to share. More than there already is! But because
there are famous people and important ministries at stake, we are being encoura
ged to tread lightly and cautiously. Am I wrong here?
I do get what you're saying. There are no intentions to post a retrial. This is
new territory of people speaking their truths about what happened mostly around
the divorce. I suppose we are more interested, not in the collision itself, but
in the factors that lead up to it, the pressures that contained it, and the rami
fications that came from it.
Todd Hiestand September 17, 2014 at 2:55 pm
Julie, I was a little connected to the EV stuff back in the day. Not a ton, but
enough to (loosely) know some of the people involved in this discussion. It was
never directly told me to that you are crazy (that I can remember) but it is som
ething that I inferred pretty clearly.
I confess, I've repeated that same thing (that you are "crazy") to at least two
people when your marriage/divorce came up in conversations. I'm sorry I did that
. I do not know you at all and its not likely that I ever will. It's completely
unfair and wrong of me to perpetuate an idea that I cannot verify, especially so
mething as significant as this. It's especially awful to share that a person is
"crazy" to write them off and thereby justify someone else's actions or behavior
.
I'm not writing this to make myself look good (I tend to think it might be doing
the opposite!) but I commit to going to at least one of those people (the one w
ho I am still in contact with and know how to get ahold of) and apologizing for
passing on things that I have no actual knowledge of.

In short, sorry for perpetuating an uninformed and harmful narrative and thereby
hurting you and your family in the process.
Todd
You rock Todd. As well as the rest of you. :)
Todd, that's awesome. Respect.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Well done, Todd. May yours be the first of many!
Colina - What David said is true - you keep trying to control the narrative by p
ulling the conversation back to it being about a 'divorce', when nobody really t
alked about that at all until you initially brought it up, then David addressed
it (everyone else ignored it because obviously they weren't interested in the 's
ordid details'), and you again directed the conversation (attempted to direct it
) right BACK to an over simplification of it being about the divorce between two
people!
For me, this is about allowing a victim to have a voice. I honestly have no eart
hly idea how a person would be able to overlook statements such as, "He threw me
down and pulled my shoulder out of socket", "They took away my kids for 10 hour
s and I didn't know where they were", "They tried to commit me to a mental insti
tution without my involvement" (all paraphrased) ... I have no EARTHLY idea how
you would be able to overlook these and many other statements with a blithe, "Oh
, well, everyone has their truth! There are two sides to the same story!!"
So when I told you to stick your platitudes where the sun don't shine, what I wa
s saying was that I reject your shamy concern trolling and refuse to allow you t
o control this narrative ... like you tried to control MY statement by calling i
t 'silencing' (the very word we've all been using to accuse TJ's EV crowd ... ve
ry clever), and you tried to control JULIE'S story by diminishing it to "well th
ere are two sides", and how you tried to control this entire conversation by say
ing what we think about it isn't important or relevant unless we're having faceto-face convos (and yet you're commenting here? Because it's ok for you to speak
but not everyone else?) ... which is, by the way, the EXACT tactic currently in
use by Tony and Doug against David.
I'll end by saying that I'm honestly open to real conversation with you here, if
you acknowledge the abuse Tony perpetrated against Julie. Until then, I will ha
ve to believe that you've got skin in the game somewhere (pun intended).
And Todd ... you are awesome. That was encouraging to see!
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Another reason why this conversation is important, and how what Julie is doing (
speaking her story) is bringing good into the world, is that it is giving others
on this thread the courage to tell THEIR stories. Like Annie just did, and a fe
w others upthread. Openness begets more openness.
Catching up on everything now, from the past two days. +1000000 to David and +10
00000 to Julie, too. Thank you both for your courage and integrity, and you're a
wesome, Julie.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Thank you, Todd. I accept with my whole "crazy" heart your apology. Sincerely, I
thank you.
Off line I received a warm and heart felt apology a few weeks ago actually from
Andrew Jones the Tall Skinny Kiwi...I thank him too. The real deal!
Truly healing and I feel God's work is being done here, and now, and virtually C
olina. Do you have a problem with that?!
Every single word I have shared is the truth. It is my Emergent Cult Story. I am
somewhat creative but how can you even make some of this junk up? You couldn't.
Isn't calling out a person in leadership being the body? And, Colina, this is a
forum for those who have experienced abuses within the church....what aren't yo
u c-o-m-p-r-e-h-e-n-d-i-n-g? I know this tactic ALL too well....smoke and mirror
s folks, smoke and mirrors....nothing to see here.....just a "messy divorce." Lo
ok away this is private....look away. But it's not!!!
It's Brian McLaren, Brad Cecil, Danielle Shroyer, Doug Pagitt and Mike King invo
lved in a really awful scheme and they need to act like the Pastors that they ar
e, and publicly apologize. They had no qualm publicly launching a "crazy campaig
n." They need to put their big boy (and girl) panties on, and address this piece
of their past. Again, I warmly welcome any apology. I was wronged and this is a
n opportunity to make is right.
Rick Meigs September 17, 2014 at 4:46 pm
Todd...Thanks, that was well done and so important.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
@Todd Hiestand, thanks for your vulnerability and courage in sharing your apolog
y.
I'm in the middle of finishing a blog series about responsibility, culpability,
and complicity when it comes to spiritual abuse. My last post deals with what I
had to realize about my responsibility toward brothers and sisters in Christ bec
ause my own actions within situations that turned out to be spiritual abusive hu
rt them as well. So I get how it is grievous to deal with, but freeing, like Bro
ther Maynard talked about earlier in this thread (September 17, 2014 at 12:05 pm
, paragraph 5).
Hope and pray that contact you'll be making will bring light and no unnecessary
heat.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
David -- because it's seems disingenuous (to me at least) to say that this isn't
about a divorce when the entire narrative context is in fact about a divorce. T
here are accusations of EV leaders deleting emails and blog comments in the past
, etc.. but the context/juice of this thread are pain-filled anecdotes from Juli
e's experience of her divorce used to accuse EV leaders of abuse. Sure there are
larger themes people are trying to make, but they are making it primarily off o
f Julie's narrative, using it as evidence for proving a larger point about the c
orruption of EV leaders.
There does seem to me to be an agenda. To take the content of Julie's story arou
nd her divorce and use it to directly or inferentially accuse EV leaders as bein
g complicit in extraordinary abuse -- even to the point of physical harm and try
ing to have her institutionalized -- all so they could keep their speaking and p
ublishing careers intact.
Am I wrong? Is this hyperbole? Is something else being suggested?
I am not saying tread w/ humility because there are "famous" people here. These
people aren't famous. I mean maybe within their own publishing/speaking ghettos,
but it's a small number comparatively speaking.
I am saying tread with humility because these are extraordinary accusations to m
ake of anyone. Our entire justice system in based on the premise that guilt shou
ld not be assumed simply because someone makes an accusation on an internet blog
. And that premise seems wise to me, to protect all of us. And the substance of
that premise is NOT dismissive of Julie's story. I know of lives destroyed becau
se of false sexual abuse charges made. And more to the point, we all know of liv
es destroyed because of accurate abuse charges made.
Meaning, if you're going to use Julie's divorce stories to accuse EV leaders as
being corrupt abusers, then wouldn't you want to get to the hard, naked truth of
it? And can you really do that without talking to Tony et al, or without their
participating on this blog, without hearing their story? And lo, they've decline
d, and lo, it is just lazy -- intellectually and morally -- to then say their si
lence proves the accusation. When they may be silent for a myriad of reasons. As
I said, I have no idea about them. No connections. But this is an extraordinary
conversation about incredible accusations -- is it really wrong to say tread wi
th humility and care?
Lastly, look. It could very well be that the rallying of encouragement and affir
mation for Julie is a sacred, holy thing and more important than anything on thi
s blog. And if so, I don't want to detract or distract from that inertia. Not tr
ying to be a fly in the soup. But humility, mercy, poking at the question of whe
ther a blog forum can really serve as a place for such intimate pain and extraor
dinary accusations of abuse... especially when, again, parties are apparently as
king for direct, private conversation... just doesn't seem all that outrageous t
o offer as thoughts to the conversation. I'll let it go having said my peace.
Colina: You say "I don't want to detract or distract from that inertia". I disag
ree that it is inertia. Actually, if you stay tuned, you will see how this will
actually help people, clarify the situation, and even hopefully produce the frui
t of repentance. I've seen it too many times to call the raising our voices iner
t.
Julie, like I said... letting it go and wishing you and your kids all healing an
d comfort.
Likes(0)Dislikes(1)
David, apologies. Inertia was the wrong word. Nevertheless, you get I think my p
oint.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Colina: what word did you mean then? I'm interested. It makes a difference to yo
ur point.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Momentum.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
A certain level of involvement by EV leaders in the "discernment" meeting and le
tter is easily verifiable. When would it NOT be spiritually abusive for leaders
of a national christian organization to exercise that level of interference in t
he "intimate agony of a divorce"?
Defending one's position is not the only valid option at this point, particularl
y for the called out ones.
Todd, I appreciate your example of transparent humility.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
For what it s worth on the importance of this thread and the sharing of Julie'
s narrative accounts
As for me, I'm all about context and consequences, not
about the intricacies or intimacies of a telenovela as providing a source of gos
sip for those thrive on romance, malignancy, and malice.
No, this is not about a divorce per se -- never was -- or ping-pong statements t
o figure out who owns more culpability in the demise of a relationship. Or about
protecting the children from online information, when, according to Julie s a
ccounts, they have already been eye-witnesses to numerous key incidents of evil.
I would suggest that it is at the core about the intertwining of pathology and t
heology, and so is on-topic for the original focus of the post. Unexpectedly, it
moved to a parallel public situation that comes from the opposite end of the "e
merging" lake out of which Mark Driscoll s version of New Calvinism originated
.
Ultimately, this was (when I first followed these same incidents and patterns in
2009-2010) and is now all about issues of duplicity. It was and is about person
al character issues of public figures, when their actions end up in widely repor
ted behaviors that affect the Body of Christ in detrimental ways. It was and is
about what hypocrisy does to the name of Christ, both in the Church and in the c
ommunity.
It is like Ted Haggard preaching vehemently against homosexuality and working at
the political level to carry out what he considers policies for national righte
ousness. And then we find out that this has been one of his own moral issues all
along.
It is like C.J. Mahaney and other high-up leaders in the Sovereign Grace Ministr
ies movement denying for decades accusations of culpability for not responding t
o known/suspected child sexual abuse within their churches. And then in the tria
l of now-convicted pedophile Nathan Morales, Grant Layman -- another high-up, lo
ng-time SGM leader -- testified under oath that he believed he was obligated to
report Morales to police authorities, but did not.
It is like Bill Gothard talking about "umbrellas of protection" to shield from h

arm those within your realm of authority (e.g., church/ministry leaders over flo
cks, fathers over wives and families and single adult daughters). And then we fi
nd out there is testimony after personal testimony exposing his sexual harassmen
t of young women who served at his ministry headquarters, under his authority, f
or 30+ years.
It is like Mark Driscoll being paraded around for nearly 20 years as controversi
al and edgy and prophetic and flamboyant. And then the record of things he has c
ontinually said and done seem to repeatedly demonstrate his base contempt for pe
ople, uncontrollable anger, spirit of violence, and inflammatory language.
And now what is emerging involves key public figures from Emergent Village and i
ts theological and organizational spin-offs that all supposedly promote women as
peers to men, and they hail C21/Christianity 21 which let some women of consequ
ence release their voices, and they cheer on celebrity female authors and speake
rs who hold their views ...
... and we then find out publicly from Julie McMahon ex-Jones in her online comm
ents in 2009, 2010, and 2014 that at the same time those seemingly good things w
ere happening, apparently she was enduring emotional and verbal and physical and
spiritual abuse.
... and also there was apparently marital infidelity, theologically justified by
The Doctrine of Spiritual Wives versus Legal Wife, and gaslighting of Julie and
labeling her as "crazy" apparently as a way to blamer her as the cause of the d
ivorce.
and there was mostly silence in public by the EV celebrities involved, thoug
h enough blips of evidence of their views from themselves and others associated
with Emergent Village, plus documentation of their appeals in private to delete,
edit, direct, control, shame.
And so, from my own studies of online evidences then and now, I think I can legi
timately wonder what other unjust actions may have gone on behind the scenes to
hide what I can only interpret as misogynistic, self-serving, perpetrator-protec
ting behaviors under a guise of generosity, goodness, and light. Shouldn't such
allegations deserve to be researched and documented, verified by witness testimo
nies, and exposed to the light? Hopefully under the sun they will be bleached in
to oblivion and those who perpetrated and/or perpetuated such damages to others
can clear their conscience and move forward in their true identity as siblings i
n Christ.
I myself am a survivor of multiple incidents of spiritual abuse by leaders in a
range of evangelical, moderate, conservative, and fundamentalist churches and pa
rachurch settings over the past 40 years. For the past seven years I have writte
n extensively on indicators of malignant ministers and toxic organizational syst
ems, principles and practices for personal recovery from traumatizing abuse of s
piritual authority, and constructive system solutions for dealing with destructi
ve organizations.
My own most basic conclusion is this: I believe that men and women who put thems
elves forth as public thought leaders and therefore as personal role models with
in any Christian church, ministry, or movement obligate themselves to be held ac
countable for their character as demonstrated through actions -- IRL and virtual
. They are the equivalent of elders, whether acclaimed by others in a church or
ministry, or self-proclaimed through publications, speaking engagements, and min
istry positions. Hence, 1 Timothy 5:20 applies:
But those elders who are sinn
ing you are to reprove before everyone, so that the others may take warning
(
NIV).
And that is why, for me, I m all about context and consequences, and open-air
discussion so there can be, hopefully, redemption and restoration.
Maybe Julie is suffering from the same affliction I was accused of. I was accuse
d of being upset because I wasn't getting enough attention. Yeah, that was my pr
oblem. Every time I went to the church office to inquire why things weren't matc
hing up to my understanding of the Bible and they brushed me off.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Chris Hill September 17, 2014 at 6:10 pm
:( ... <3
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Eric Fry September 17, 2014 at 6:17 pm
Brad, excellent analysis in your comment @ 5:41pm. David, kudos to you for allow
ing the conversation to continue without censorship.
Though a lot of church leaders would love for it to be otherwise, this is real c
ommunion and community with each other. Preachers love to paint it in a rosy lig
ht, but the reality is that real, heart-level communion and community isn't alwa
ys pretty. And we need to reclaim our right and ability to lament and grieve, to
each other and to God. Perhaps some church leaders need to go back and re-read
some Brueggemann, revitalize their sense of prophetic imagination, and realize t
hat they are the Pharaoh that the people's pain is being proclaimed to. And mayb
e read Richard Beck's Unclean and The Slavery of Death after that.
And thanks to Bill for bringing this thread to my attention. I've been in a domi
neering spiritual abuse setting before, and it's very helpful to me to be able t
o see these dynamics at a distance, and try to improve my own reactions when pla
ced in closer proximity to such events. my natural tendency is to cuss 'em and w
alk away, but that doesn't improve me as a person, nor help people who need an a
dvocate to proclaim pain to power.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Scott Jones September 17, 2014 at 6:47 pm
I came across this feed today and was saddened. I'm sad because divorce ruins li
ves (I'm divorced, and re-married). I'm sad because we're trying something that
most of us don't know in the court of public blogosphere opinion. I'm sad becaus
e Tony's a friend, as is his lovely wife. I don't know Tony's ex-wife, but I'm s
addened that she's felt the pain divorce causes; I'm sad for the kids whose back
story is now part of the inter-public-social-frenemy-blogosphere-web. Some of th
is is of course inevitable in the time and place where we live.
[At this point I should say I think a lot of things that have been said about To
ny are untrue and unfair. I don't claim to know every detail of the story, but I
know Tony and others involved pretty well. I'm pretty uncomfortable with some t
hings that have been said, but that's not what I want to talk about...]
I find Hemmingway's prose rough sledding, and sometimes just oppressive (I have
ADHD). But at other times he's prophetic. The following passage is from Farewell
to Arms:
If people bring so much courage to this world the world has to kill them to b
reak them, so of course it kills them. The world breaks every one and afterward
many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It
kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you
are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no spec
ial hurry.
(the only thing that makes this passage excusable, let alone beara
ble, is Deuteronomy 29:29.)
Because of the culture we live in we put people in the place where they can spea
k to trans-local communities. Mark and Tony are both in those positions (the fac
t that Mark has a bigger network right now than Tony doesn't erase the fact that
they share an office into which most of us implicitly push them). Tony wasn't u
ncritical of Mark. He did pull a few punches.
Tony is a friend. He's been a good one. Do we agree on everything?...No. Do we a
gree on more than he and Mark do?...Yes, probably so. I know him as someone who'
s been faithful as a friend, brother and compassionate child of God.
Someone asked Calvin about Luther's tendency to excess in matters theological (a
s compared to Calvin). Calvin's response was akin to, "when God raised Luther up
...we needed a trumpet!" God raises up strong voices and strong personalities in
certain times in the church's life to pave the way forward. But in God's wisdom
he makes them as broken as the rest of us. I'd like those of us on this feed to
take something like the ice bucket challenge. Let's challenge ourselves. Let's
take this to the sphere of real life. Let's build relationships with the people
involved where feasible, wise and practical. If we have relationships with folks
mentioned already, let's strengthen them. If folks involved are too removed fro
m our the limits of our lives let's move to the places where God has called us t
o be gracious witnesses in our spheres of influence. And above all let's commit
ourselves to prayer for families, faith, friends and foes in our fallen world wh
ich looks expectantly to redemption.
s
Intentionally or otherwise, Scott Jones, you are missing the point. This isn't a
bout Julie and Tony's divorce. It is about the gaslighting of Julie by leaders i
n the EV movement to protect their movement and their, at that time, key leader.
Making it about the divorce is simply obfuscation.
Scott feels bad that Julie has suffered the pain of divorce ... but not that she
's a victim of domestic violence. Got it.
If Tony's been convicted of that offense, or even charged with it, I'd be the fi
rst to say let's go where the facts lead. But if we're going to try this in the
court of privatish-blogosphere opinion, it's the gutless version of the Salem wi
tch trial.
Actually, Scott @ 6:47pm, just read Brad's comment at 5:41pm. Your level of unde
rstanding should increase
assuming that is what you want to have happen.
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
And the same dynamic of denial and minimization continues...
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)

Julie's lying, then?
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Also ... let's say (for assumption's sake) ... that a husband DID throw his wife
on the ground and pull her arm from her socket. If the husband was at that time
connected to the police force, and threatened the wife so that she was afraid t
o report the incident, so that she felt powerless ... then when she finally *was
* free of him, the statute of limitations had run its course ... what then? No t
rial would be possible. Would you refuse to acknowedge the abuse in that scenari
o?
Sad Scott is sad. Sad Scott is sure the things said about Tony aren't true but h
e doesn't want to talk about that.
That Hemingway quote is awesome and made me cry. And it's a little weird in cont
ext of the rest of your comment.
I know several folks pretty closely involved. But if this is what you're saying
constitutes anything "from my own studies of online evidences then and now"...We
are as the Body of Christ laying not just sinful accusations at a brother's fee
t, but criminal ones. If they are true we should escort him to jail. Who's willi
ng to go to his house to do this?
Likes(1)Dislikes(8)
I'm saying if you don't know at least one of the parties involved, or have some
evidence, like say the Rice video, and there's not reliable reporting like devel
oped in the Driscoll scenario, let's just stop being the Christian paparazzi. Wh
o has posted has first had knowledge of what happened? Or evidence?
Likes(1)Dislikes(8)
I have a friend going through a divorce. She's been counseled not to press charg
es for the physical assaults and harassment because it will hurt her in divorce
court and with the custody dispute. She allows herself to be at risk because it
is more likely to protect her children in the long run by giving her primary cus
tody of then. So you can shut your sanctimonious cakehole about how it only coun
ts if it's in the official record and he was convicted of it.
Well, Scott, Julie certainly does.
I'd also ask if you're going to weigh in on something so public and so sensitive
and you're not directly involved (I understand why both parties would want to k
eep their contact info private), you'd put your contact info our there so the co
nversation can continue beyond this distant, walled-up forum.
"beyond this distant, walled-up forum" Pardon?
Scott Jones, you're not going to silence anyone here, so you'd probably be bette
r served by taking your opinion to your like-minded friends.
In re your last two questions, Julie and others have had first hand experience w
ith the gaslighting used on Julie. As far as evidence of that, you obviously hav
en't paid very good attention to your friend's reactions in this thread.
But, as Bill noted earlier, you're just trying to obfuscate and distract.
Michelle September 17, 2014 at 7:31 pm
@Annie (7:26pm) I am in the same boat as your friend. The legal records will nev
er reflect the years of gaslighting and abuse that I endured. My kids' safety an
d protection is more important
@Michelle- hugs. Hope you make it through safely.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
If the statute of limitations is passed, he can't be convicted of it. And I cons
ider what we're doing now a virtual 'going to his house to do this'.
Again, you have not answered the question of, "Is Julie lying?" Is she?
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Julie herself gave online evidence here in this thread earlier. Twice.
Julie McMahon
September 16, 2014 at 7:31 am
[ ] I was thrown to the ground and my shoulder torn. [
Julie McMahon
September 16, 2014 at 8:39 pm
[ ] A simple I m sorry for my part in the sordid tale can wrap this up, othe
rwise I have more stories how about the one where the Edina police chaplain th
rows his wife across the room tearing her shoulder and her 7 year old helps her
up and moves the furniture from off of her? Then when she goes to call 911 he sa
ys,
They ll never believe you. Haven t you ever heard of the code of the
blue?
More? Or no? [ ]
Either Julie is lying, or Scott is deliberately turning a blind eye to Tony's ab
use.
Is there a possibility that we can't convict someone in even the banal court of
public opinion on the basis of online evidence? What if I have indisputable evid
ence to the contrary, which was asked not to be disclosed. Isn't this a degenera
tive game of he-said-she-said...without-face-to-face-truth_telling?
Scott, you're saying Julie is lying?
No Danica, he's saying there's no way to know if she's lying because internet so
we should frown discouragingly until she stops talking about it. Duh.
Danica, I'm saying I don't know the whole truth. But I know multiple parties per
sonally involved. Is there a possibility someone you don't know is being less th
an truthful? Is there a possibility, in a fallen world, that someone you do know
well has been less than truthful to you? I think awfully difficult conversation
s like this in a forum that requires no transparency (how do we know any of us i
s who we are unless we practice some disclosure) and involves kids that will hav
e access to this whole conversation, especially amongst Christians, ought to be
marked by caution, prayer, discretion and deliberation. What if we all just ceas
ed the online chatter and talked to people directly involved. Wouldn't that get
us closer to Matthew 18?
How about we dispense with what Christians should do and focus on what we, as hu
mans, should do. It doesn't matter if you know multiple parties involved. The ma
in party involved is here and she is saying this happened. The VICTIM is saying
it happened.
When the high and mighty Tony himself posted in this very thread he didn't deny
anything,. So, how about you stop trying to silence a victim and let her have he
r say. Don't try to hide behind the bible, especially since one of the people "d
irectly involved" is saying her piece.
Scott,
I called for something less than new creation with "let's bring charges here". B
ut this is not a support group, nor does it have the level of public accountabil
ity. I'm totally fine with anyone saying whatever they want on forums defacing w
homever they want, whenever they want. Perhaps this is a forum that leads to exp
ression better than to truth, love or justice. If we're concerned with any of th
e latter, let's move to forum which could lead to such ends.
Hi Scott Jones. Nice to meet you. Are you calling me a liar? Do you need to come
to my house and read a 22 page psychological evaluation? Would you like to read
the discernment letter written by Doug Pagitt, Brad Cecil, Mile King, Mark Scan
drette and Brian McLaren and Danielle Shroyer from Dallas, Texas where Danielle
was the Pastor of Courtney's home and emergent church? I will show you the MRI w
ith the Doctor notes and you can see the tear on the X-ray I have. We can read a
llowed together, if you wish, and in round, the custody evaluation detailing the
emotional, physical, and spiritual abuses. You can call the psychologist we as
a family see weekly who specializes is dealing with and learning ways to manage
narcissistic personality disordered individuals. We can read the sex emails toge
ther too. BUT somehow none of that will make a difference. You drank the kool ai
d. I'm SURE you're hearing fantastical spin but at the end of the day one has a
serious mental illness and the other not. Co morbid traits of sadistic, porn and
sexual maladjustment. Why would I ever make that up? Don't you dare allude to m
y making up lies. This is my story. It happened. It is the truth whether you car
e to accept it or not. I found a safe and supportive place to tell it so shove o
ff because you are just here to try and defend something you know nothing about.
Spiritual abuse took place. It's wrong. The people involved should apologize. T
his has little to nothing to do with your friends who were BOTH married at the t
ime..you interlopers keep bringing him up. It's about people in power abusing th
eir position. Thou dost protest too much my dear, about someone's character. Cha
racter speaks for itself. It's my dads birthday today. He died in 2011. Amazing
man of faith brimming with integrity. 52 years married to my mom and they had 7
kids. I feel like he is present in all of this. He referred to my abuser simply
as "pond scum." My kids are WELL aware of the issues and this we work on it week
ly in therapy openly and naming it for what it is. Peace Scott Jones. If you liv
e I'm minneapolis come over for show and tell. I will NOT be called a liar by so
meone whose clueless to the issues. BTW anyone can seem nice until you disagree
or cross them...you'll see
Scott Jones and anyone else for the record. I tried discrete decorum FOR YEARS a
nd was silenced. I tried seeking reconciliation and discernment, and through who
I THOUGHT were people of God and leaders who would discern the mess and right t
he wrongs....shut down....silenced, spun as crazy. Their common bond? Book sales
, speaking circuit and minor celebrity status.
Scott Jones, I'm read your long comment and concluded that if a jackass appears,
it must be because God needed a jackass, and so raised one up. Or maybe that's
not quite what you meant. ;-)
I suggest you scroll back up to the top of the page and read *all* the comments,
because you evidently haven't done that, or people wouldn't have to go back and
quote things said earlier in the same thread.
I find that it seems to bear repeating / clarifying that the point is not to get
Tony locked up in jail. The point is to call attention to the gaslighting / sil
encing / theological balderdash tactics that the EV leaders went to in response
to the situation. Since Colina has stopped posting, it's nice of you to take on
that line of protest to illustrate some of the tactics that have been used to si
lence victims.
So Scott, you haven't outright accused Julie of lying, just that you don't belie
ve her because there's no arrest record (because of course every felony results
in a public record) and saying that you know many of the people involved, but no
t Julie, and you're a friend of Tony's. And on that basis, you've made up your m
ind to tell people here that they should shut up because they aren't omniscient
and couldn't possibly be correct. Because, of course, if Tony had done these thi
ngs, he'd lead with that information when making new friends. Makes sense to me.
Did Tony point out this discussion so you could defend him?
Scott, as a descendant of the Towne sisters, who were among the witches hung, I
don't appreciate you dragging my family into your argument.
Scott Jones, here's the problem. You said:
[At this point I should say I think a lot of things that have been said about To
ny are untrue and unfair. I don't claim to know every detail of the story, but I
know Tony and others involved pretty well. I'm pretty uncomfortable with some t
hings that have been said, but that's not what I want to talk about...]
We're in a conversation about spiritual abuse -- the process by which people who
have spiritual authority (pastors, preachers, priests, etc.) take advantage of
that authority to do harm to those entrusted to their care. The harm arises from
an imbalance of power in the pastor-congregant relationship that leaves a congr
egant vulnerable and defenseless.
Julie's experience was exactly that, only multiplied by six, because there were
six people in positions of spiritual authority involved in the effort to control
her. She's asking for a long-delayed apology from the 5 of them who haven't yet
offered one.
That's the conversation. At one time, apparently, it was easy to erase her comme
nts and spread rumors about her that she had no way to confront. I'm not surpris
ed that you don't want to talk about the things that have been said that make yo
u uncomfortable because you think they're "untrue and unfair."
Okay, so don't talk about them. Talk instead about what exactly Julie and all th
e others who have been called crazy and pushed out of polite society should do t
o restore their good names. Talk about the obligation of preachers and spiritual
leaders to be transparent and straightforward in their dealings with those they
presume to lead. Talk about what you want the remedy to be when they aren't. Th
at's the conversation.
Michelle I stand beside you as your sister is surviving and thriving life beyond
abuse and gas lighting. We can teach our kids to recognize the signs, tricks an
d tactics. To stand up for themselves and refuse to allow that mental abuse to s
ink in. I am sending you an enormous virtual hug.
This is a quote on Brad Sargeants blog. Seems to fit in well with this conversat
ion.
"Every account like this makes a difference for those of us who ve survived sp
iritually abusive situations.
And hopefully, in the long run, courageous people like yourself and others who c
hoose to do something will help turn the tide."
~Brad Sargent
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Scott Jones (not the other Scott, you're okay), I'm going to say this as my own
thing IF A VICTIM NEEDS TO TALK, YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO SILENCE THEM.
IF YOUR GOAL IS TO SILENCE A VICTIM, THEN YOU NEED TO SHUT IT.
Not everyone's going to agree with that sentiment, but I made damn sure I worded
it carefully. Julie's speaking out about extremely painful events. You have no
right or obligation to try and attack her credibility when she's being outright
frank. [SWEARS TIME] Really, if you're going to be a fucking asshole to people a
bout it and you claim to be a Christian, I can tell you right now that you're tr
ying to take the religion (and Jesus's message) and make it something you contro
l. Your religion is a cult of personality rather than a religion of peace and lo
ve. If you absolutely refuse to make the world better by REDUCING suffering and
instead INCREASE IT, then you are an outright horrible person.
If you are ever going to try and tell people that their pain is irrelevant and t
hat your own feelings are more important, you can kindly kiss my ass and fuck of
f back to Sodom, you hateful monster.
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
Catherine Siena September 17, 2014 at 10:53 pm
This comment feed has become a giant lynch mob. Julie, I feel bad for whatever h
appened to you. If you want a safe place to talk which it sounds like you do...m
ight I suggest somewhere other than a public blog where anyone with an email add
ress can insult you and drag you and your children through the mud. Although air
ing your anger seems to be your purpose which if so is what it is. I find the pu
rpose of this entire comment feed is anger if not gossip. As a culture we enjoy
dragging people through mud, delighting in their failures and jumping on the ban
dwagon to shame one another. I don't even think it's our culture, it's ancient.
Jesus stopped stonings, had dinner with those tax gatherers nobody liked, was fr
iends with sluts, and was in the end betrayed by a mob for a thief nobody really
liked.
So keep dragging people through the mud, insult dissenting voices, argue and be
angry. It's part of the fallen human condition. And at the end of the day, there
is grace. There is a God who can handle our anger, our brokenness, and our mist
akes. As an abused person I can say anger is natural. I can say an apology won't
make what happened to you go away even when you get it. My journey led me to mo
ve to a new state, make all new friends, and seek out therapy. I'm sure yours wi
ll be dramatic as well. Is Catherine my real name? Of course not, because I reco
gnize this is NOT a safe place to discuss domestic violence and personal conflic
t. It's a public blog. It's like many churches I've encountered, willing to thro
w stones at the most likely perpetrator and forgetting that while we can't ignor
e injustice we need to comfort, forgive, and be good to even our enemies.
"Perhaps this is a forum that leads to expression better than to truth, love or
justice. If we re concerned with any of the latter, let s move to forum whic
h could lead to such ends."
That would be a real feat without hearing Julie's experience in the situation--in her own words. You offering to moderate? :o)
But nice try...very "platitudiness". The more you guys talk, the more I believe
her. Seen it way too many times in the evangelical world. Is there a playbook so
mewhere? Or is it anything to save the guru?
Oh look! A dead saint can type! Because of this, we should take everything we re
ad in anonymity seriously.
--Abraham Lincoln
Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
I appreciate your concern, but I'm good. Not angry just telling my story. This w
as years ago and it only came up because of the Mars Hill sitch. I welcome and e
ngage in the dialogue publicly, because it involves public figures. This experie
nce has made me as invincible as a cockroach after nuclear war...I'm still stand
ing. You do not have to read this thread. I am very sorry for your situation. It
's awful and harrowing, but I can also thank my abuser because of the strength a
nd clarity of self this process has led me to. Peace. I like me and I sleep rest
fully through the night. I know there is no peace when living a life of lies and
deception or abusing positions of power under the banner of God.
Catherine Siena September 17, 2014 at 11:23 pm
It's not about whether we believe or don't believe. There is a hurting person he
re and this is a terrible place to get help. Somebody just told somebody else to
fuck off back to sodom which I can only assume is not a nice thing. Why do WE n
eed to hear Julie, why is it our business if her famous husband did something du
ring a nasty divorce? Because we like gossip, we like dragging people in mud, an
d we love a juicy story. Hate me if you like, but a place were people are allowe
d to say things like fuck off back to sodom is not a good place to get help when
somebody has been violent to you and emotionally abusive. How do we know that "
fuck off back to sodom" won't be said to Julie by somebody else who doesn't like
her side of the story.
Catherine Siena tl;dr- Julie, I totes understand where you're coming from and wh
at you need from this and some day you'll grow up and do it more maturely (headp
at, concern troll)
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
"It s a public blog. It s like many churches I ve encountered, willing to
throw stones at the most likely perpetrator and forgetting that while we can t
ignore injustice we need to comfort, forgive, and be good to even our enemies."
Would you explain how a long time professing Christian can be an "enemy"? Jesus
hung on the cross so "His" people could abuse others and no big deal? I do not u
nderstand your Christiantiy. You take proof texts written about dealing with Rom
an occupiers and apply them to Christian relationships. (Did you not notice Jesu
s was not so warm and fuzzy when it came to the "religious leaders" of His own t
ribe who were using people for their own gain?)
If someone is professing Christ and making a living off teaching about Him yet i
s abusive in private then there is a bigger problem. Forgiveness is not being si
lent or not warning others. You want others used abused in the Name of Christ?
Yes, it is very uncomfortable for you to read. But Julie had to LIVE IN IT. Her
kids have to live with it and learn to manage it. You want to make sure a kid gr
ows up unhealthy? Then just try to make them think it is a sin to discuss what w
as done to them. NOt only that but they have to deal with having a "spiritual" s
tepmother? What on earth does all this mean to their view of Jesus Christ?
Again, I appreciate your concern. Again, this was years ago and I am in a very g
ood place. This resurfaced in context to Mars Hill...are you tracking? I can tak
e the heat. I spent a decade in hell. Thank you though and again...no one is for
cing you to read or comment.
"There is a hurting person here and this is a terrible place to get help. "
That is not how I read this thread at all. She has made it clear she has gotten
help in the appropriate places for her and her children. She is sharing the trut
h of experience here when she has been silenced in other places. It takes a lot
of courage to do that when your abuser is a minor celeb Christian leader.

I. Am. Not. Broken.
Tony Jones and Mark Driscoll aren't "just like the rest of this" and I'd stay fa
r away from people who think they are. If they are God's strong voices, I don't
need them or the God they represent.
Ian September 18, 2014 at 12:30 am
Hi Julie. I want to apologise. I jumped on you on a thread on Andrew Jones' Face
book page. I am sorry. I didn't know about this and was wrong.
Well, since folks are getting all quoting (oooh, Hemingway) - here's one just fo
r Julie, Michele, Shade and others who've been abused.
You own everything that happened to you. Tell your stories. If people wanted
you to write warmly about them, they should have behaved better.
Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life
Dan September 18, 2014 at 1:51 am
Wow. Everything is terrible.
Julie, stay strong.
One thing I've learned (painfully, from personal experience) is how to pick up w
hen a narcissistic or psychopathic person is playing the victim card. Tony's pos
t definitely tripped my radar, just like Mark Driscoll's announcement about goin
g for super-extra vacation or whatever they are calling the period where he does
nothing until his minions can cobble together their acquittal.
Even though we might personally prefer someone not say go fuck yourself back to
Sodom, and perhaps some of us are uncomfortable with that kind of language, I th
ink it is possible to read through the strong words and emotions, get the gist o
f their message, and translate it into understandable language. I simply take it
to mean that the writer wishes you would take you and your ideas home. However,
even though we might disagree with each other, I also prefer we stay in this co
nversation until we achieve an agreeable clarity.
Kimberly September 18, 2014 at 7:04 am
Annie - "I think that what is so cathartic and compelling about Julie
stories is how very awfully true they ring" YES!
s story/
Julie - You are a courageous and amazing woman. I believe you. I don't need to r
ead any documents or evidence. I believe every word as I've seen this before (th
ough your story needs to be a movie of the week at the least). Just sent you a F
B friend request. I'm in MN and would love to buy you a drink and give you a hug
if you're up to it.. You aren't just speaking out for yourself but for so many
women this horrible scenario has happened to. You are bringing healing. Thank yo
u.
Thank you, Ian. How could you know? As Bro Maynard or Bill Kinnon said up top, t
he only one telling the story had the megaphone. Thank you, David for this space
...I go to court today probably for the 15th time because of the inability of an
NPD to release their narcissistic target once they've caused them narcissistic
injury. I take all of the love and support from here with me. Renewed strength t
hat what happened was indeed very wrong. I forgive you Ian, fully, and thank you
for your apology.
Scott Jones: I do appreciate you coming by to get involved in this conversation
because my hope is that everyone would learn from this and prevent such things f
rom happening in the future.
But I would like to show you how your comment is actually not helpful. You exhib
it the sad but typical response to people who claim to be victims of abuse. Here
's why:
1. You dismiss the way in which the alleged victim expresses themselves. You say
that it is inappropriate for her to say such things, and that this format is an
inappropriate medium to say them in. It's just another way to control the disse
mination of information and silence the offended.
2. You normalize abuse by saying nobody's perfect and everybody hurts. You're as
king the alleged victims to accept that their alleged abusers are just human and
make mistakes and they should let it go. Plus you're saying that pain is just a
part of life and they should just accept it. The fact is, abuse is not normal h
uman behavior and is totally unacceptable in all forms.
3. You elevate the importance of the alleged aggressors, suggesting that they ar
e important and good people, and that we shouldn't speak negatively of them beca
use not only do they have an important ministry, but they are also sent by God.
This is the whole "thou shalt not touch God's anointed" fear tactic that worked
effectively on me for decades. I finally came to see it was just another way to
give leaders a pass to be unaccountable.
I claim that the alleged victims seem relieved and thankful for this medium beca
use it is finally allowing them to express themselves freely in an uncontrolled
manner. Apparently they've been shut down and silenced for years in the more "ap
propriate" mediums. Not here.
Can you now see how your response to what's happening here is in fact disrespect
ful and dismissive to those who claim to be abused?
Thank you, Kimberly. And YES!
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Syl September 18, 2014 at 9:17 am
David, you are awesome!
This cathartic train wreck of a comment marathon has been for me, in alternating
sequence, fascinating, appalling, and inspiring. It brings back lots of memorie
s of things I witnessed and experienced during my decades in related flavors of
Christianity. Some of the names are different, some are the same - but the psych
ology, tactics, and rationale are oh so familiar. Part of the fascinating aspect
is that, after many years away from that environment, so much of it pops back l
ike it was yesterday. And that, I think, goes directly to the need for the used
and abused and disenfranchised to speak up and tell their stories. If you are un
able or unwilling, too afraid or intimidated or self-dismissive to talk about it
, vent, dissect, and deal with it openly it will stay with you. It might be push
ed down, covered up, dormant. You might consciously have moved on, removed yours
elf from the environment, be living a completely different life far removed from
the cult of personality and manipulative control. But, without speaking openly
about it - to yourself and others - it is still there. It may be diminished, it
may have lost its power. It may be shadow without substance. But the memory reta
ins more emotional content than it otherwise would. The stories need to be told,
messy or not, unpleasant or not. Until it sees the light of day, vestiges (or m
ore) of the rot remain.
David, at the time it felt like something that needed to be said, but you are ri
ght in calling out its being inappropriate.
The sentiment that I really want to call out is the constant victim-blaming that
people like Colina are unintentionally doing to people like Julie. It's outrigh
t ridiculous to boil down something into such a simple matter and, honestly, it
looks downright hateful to do so.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Claris September 18, 2014 at 10:11 am
There are a countless number of leaders/pastors today who are turning to what th
eir itching ears want to hear (cf. 2 Tim. 4:3). You can easily twist and add to
Scripture--so that it says what you want it to. I tend to agree with this: "I do
n t think Driscoll s theology made this happen. Driscoll
embraced
his
toxic version of theology because it aligned with his moral compass. It fit his
personality. It worked for him to achieve his goals. Then it manifested the wors
t in him. Then he continued to develop his toxic theology in order to make more
room for his pathological behavior. Mars Hill Church too." But as said, we can a
ll fall. Let's pray for every person and family who were harmed by Driscoll to h
eal, and also for Driscoll to seek help, come to true repentance, and begin a fr
esh start with the one and only gospel capable of providing salvation to all who
believe. "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not f
rom yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works, so that no one can boast."
(Ephesians 2:8-9).
Likes(2)Dislikes(2)
Oh Cecilia... I didn't mean to say it was inappropriate, but that it needed to b
e translated to its root meaning. That's all. I say fuck and shit all the time,
but don't use it in my blog posts because I want to make my understanding as dir
ect as possible without the need of interpretation or translating. But sometimes
there are no other words.
Chris Hill September 18, 2014 at 10:56 am
@Syl: Very, very well-said. Your words have affected me with deep resonance. Tha
nk you.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
I'm going to echo Kimberly - Julie, I believe you. I stand behind you.
I also want to address a couple of things I think are insidious:
1. Healing doesn't require forgiving the abuser. Some things are too deep and to
o ugly to abuse. A survivor can move on and heal without that.
2. Forgiveness should only come if and when the survivor is ready. All of this p
ushing survivors to forgive just makes me feel like the reputation and needs of
abusers and their organizations takes precedence above the needs of those who've
been abused. And that just sucks.
3. That whole Matthew 18 stuff only works if the abusers and their supporters ar
e honest and humble. Which ... yeah, right. Otherwise it's simply another way to
shut people up.
Correction on 1
Should read: "Some things are too deep and too ugly to forgive."
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Sometimes, David, it's just so much easier to come up with a creative stream of
swears to emote, as some situations (like what I read in this thread) are beyond
words.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Tru, that's for sure. Some things are too deep of cuts to forgive.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
@Cecilia, re: swearing:
An analogy I like for swearing in situations like this Say you pull up to the curb and park your car square on my foot. Most likely you
're going to get a strong reaction from me. If I say "Hey, get your fucking car
of my goddamn foot, you moron!" are you going to say "Well, that tone isn't real
ly helpful. I think you should really be more respectful when you are asking for
this. It hurts my feelings that you called me a moron and just because I made o
ne mistake doesn't mean I should be labeled as a moron. Now, go ahead and ask ag
ain nicely and I'll pull right off your foot. Then you can contact my insurer if
you need anything, though I have a really little car so I doubt it's as bad as
you're making it out to be"
Or would you say "Oh my gosh, I'm so sorry!" then move your car off my foot and
offer to render whatever assistance is needed to get me the appropriate medical
care?
So ... yeah, hurting people use angry words. And they get to. And anyone who tel
ls them that they won't listen or shouldn't say their say, I suspect of an agend
a other than the safety and healing of those who are hurting.
Cecilia: What tru said.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Cecilia: I'm sorry if i hurt you about the swearing thing. I was trying to ackno
wledge someone's complaint about the strong language while at the same time expl
aining that it is only another way to speak that might require a small effort to
translate. Anyway, it didn't offend me at all. I like the unrestrained nature o
f this conversation. There are a lot of people, nervous about commenting here, w
ho are letting me know via other means how meaningful this post and discussion i
s... like twitter, facebook, and emails. Some people have been so burned because
they've spoken that they are still leery of trying it here.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
See, they (6 Emergent leaders: Brian McLaren, Mike King, Doug Pagitt, Mark Scand
rette, Danielle Shroyer and Brad Cecil) needed the crazy campaign to work. It se
rved two purposes: the suffering spouse narrative and the rationalization for di
vorce. It failed. In fact, through court ordered psychological evaluations...it
actually backfired. The NPD will not be deterred.
Onto the next campaign. The Julie is a criminal campaign came next. A lawyer who
charges $450 an hour was hired (but I can't pay support) and on her website she
brags she is the best at flipping custody. But how? Julie is a really great mot
her....hmmm.....a plan was hatched. December 8, 2012 (my birthday) I was served
with an Order for Protection. When I glanced at it, I thought what is he up to n
ow? I threw it away thinking...why the hell would I want to talk to you? See, I
had no contact with him for about 6 glorious months. It was bliss. The NPD neede
d to get his target...but how? In a domestic moment, I was grabbed by the neck a
nd pushed up against a wall and told, "You'll NEVER get the kids." So, years lat
er a plan to take yet another run at flipping custody was launched. Numerous fai
led prior attempts.
Fast forward to June 2013. The children were having visitation with their dad. I
had just recovered from a surgery. I asked if they could stay a day or two more
, if I needed it, because I was not supposed to drive. I felt better the next da
y and asked for their return. He refused. I let it go....smelling the gas fumes
from the gas lighting a mile away. The next morning, I asked for them to be retu
rned immediately. Your visitation time is over and they have dental appointments
. Before I left the house I called his cell phone and said, "I'm on my way. They
have dental appointments." When I arrived 3 Edina police cop cars where there w
aiting. He was waiting with a recording in his hand and said, "Arrest her now sh
e just called my cell." Officer Joy Frogadt, his friend from police chaplain day
s, and ride-a-longs, and chili fests was the arresting officer. I did not know i
t but I had violated the OFP from 6 months prior by calling his cell instead of
internet communication. A humane cop there said, "Do you really want to do this
in front of your kids?" All 3 kids watching in the window. "She broke the law, a
rrest her NOW. Do your job!" THAT is why he would like you all to google the pub
lic records....the arrest has been continued for over a year without conviction,
because its bogus. The courts amended the OFP and that could never happen today
.
THE KICKER??? He had a pre written an Ex Parte Legal document in his hand asking
the family courts to "Immediately change custody because their mother is in jai
l." This was written BEFORE I arrived to pick up my children. Bone chilling...I
know! Sociopath behavior. Luckily, the wise judge saw straight through it immedi
ately and with a red marker x'd it out and wrote DENIED.
So, a person up top said, "What about the children?!" This is the person so conc
erned with the children?!! My 8 year old asked what happened to mom? The answer?
"Your mother is a criminal. You are with me now." Through therapy my 8 year old
shared he had planned when school started to ask his teacher if she could pleas
e help him see me. I know....that made me want to be sick.
I spent 12 hours in jail. Post op with no pain meds. my gauze was ripped off in
a strip search and I was bleeding. It was on a Friday and planned as such so I w
ould have to spend the weekend maybe, and no lawyers would be available. Luckily
, there was. So, this story gets more amazing....
Cornerstone a battered women's shelter was called by him and he told them he nee
ded this conviction because he and his wife do not feel safe. Further, the Edina
prosecuting attorney told us he wrote her letters touting the "crazy campaign"
and please help me I AM THE VICTIM. This very young advocate woman with presumab
ly little experience with diagnosed narcissist, wrote a letter to the prosecutin
g attorney on his behalf stating you must convict because she is crazy....JUST b
ecause he said so.
Then we sent the psych evals and the 15 court proceedings instigated by him and
suddenly he wasn't a battered woman after all.
Today in court it was again continued until December 11, 2014 (two years later).
The OFP expired and amended. Point is now moot. I am taking it to trial. Abuse
of position as a police chaplain. Again, abuse of power.
Why this story? To illustrate how NPDs never tire. They never stop until their n
arcissistic target is destroyed. There is no depth to which they will go to be p
erceived perfect and spotless. I MUST be perceived as crazy or a criminal. I am
neither, but I did marry a mentally ill person who has abused his position as a
chaplain and as a Pastor just as Danielle Shroyer, Brad Cecil, Doug Pagitt, Bria
n McLaren, Mike King and Mark Scandrette did by aiding in this spiritual abuse a
nd diabolical behavior.
(((Julie))) I"m glad it went well for you in court today. Stay strong!
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Thank you, and I absolutely will!
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Jane September 19, 2014 at 12:24 am
Thinking about the six people listed above -- as well as many other authors who
have blogged with or shared a stage with Tony Jones -- it seems to me they have
only two options. They can either tell themselves that Julie is lying, or they c
an believe she's telling the truth. Choosing the latter means admitting that the
y themselves have been duped...had...bamboozled. That makes one option much easi
er. Just restating what Julie said...such a sad situation.
Julie, I'm also glad it went well for you today.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Rob Grayson September 19, 2014 at 5:00 am
I've been following this conversation from a distance after being turned onto it
by Bill Kinnon a couple of days ago. All I can say is
wow.
On the one hand, I feel sick to my stomach to find out that yet more highly este
emed Christian public figures have major skeletons in their closets. I know very
little of Tony Jones
I was vaguely aware of the divorce from internet repor
ts
but I have read books by at least one other EV leader, and had some admir
ation for them. Another bubble burst.
On the other hand, being something of a realist when it comes to human nature, I
'm not really all that surprised. Disappointed, but not surprised. People are pe
ople, and people with controlling and narcissistic tendencies tend to gravitate
towards positions of authority and celebrity. In the absence of any kind of mean
ingful accountability, cue train wreck.
It really is about time people stopped being so damned naive about human nature
and the lengths to which people will go to protect money, power and status. I fi
nd Christians (and I've been one for 30 years and still am) among the most naive
in this regard.
Oh, and I get sick and tired of being told every time I share anything on Facebo
ok about Driscoll and his appalling behaviour to stop being critical, that I hav
e no right to say anything unless I'm part of his church, that I'm being divisiv
e, that God has used him to do a lot of good and we should be thankful for that.
My answer, at this point, is "bullshit".
Finally, let me just say thank you to Julie McMahon for your honesty and courage
in using this thread to shine some public light on your story. Reading your com
ments gives me hope that a day will come when all that is hidden will be made kn
own, when all the liars and deceivers and narcissists and manipulators and abuse
rs will have nowhere to hide and will be forced to face up to and own the horror
of what they have done. You might call it judgement day. Major kudos to you, Ju
lie, and I wish you and your kids well in your journey of healing and renewed li
fe and freedom.
Lydia September 19, 2014 at 9:49 am
I had no idea the "mentally ill" tactic was so widespread in Christendom until I
started doing some training/consulting stuff with megas years ago. I recommend
people really take a close look at this one it is more prevelant than people thi
nk. It was bizarre how people would be written off by the "Great men of God" dec
laring in their fake humility voice in some high level meetings: She (sometimes
"he" is emotionally unstable. Or "she is close to a nervous breakdown", etc.
And you know what? Folks believe it because the "great man" said so and it serve
s as a perfect tactic. People instinctively avoid that person and if that person
shows any outward signs of anxiety, anger or even crying it serves to affirm th
eir diagnosis.
It is pure evil. Satan is delighted.
No one thought to delve into it and find the REAL reason why the great men of Go
d had a problem with so and so. They were simply declared "unstable". Of course
it was never declared in public because that could bring a lawsuit. It was decla
red in specific settings where the whisper campaign would make sure it got out.
Deception is pure evil. It is harder to counteract and prove. And they know it.
Since those times I had done a ton of reading, research, etc on trends in Christ
endom and I am convinced that over the last 30 years more and more narcissists a
re now attracted to ministry where they have instant audiences, power, etc and a
re paid for it. Where else could you get such a gig that quick?
I have seen so much evil done to people in the Name of Jesus from the institutio
ns/parachurch orgs/ evangelism that when someone tells me they are a pastor my f
irst reaction is not what they might expect. My first reaction is "beware".
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
I want to share a side note to this situation with people who might not understa
nd how it works with custody. Phyllis Chessler wrote a very interesting book abo
ut how wrong public perceptions are about this issue.
Most men do not go for full custody. So, the ones that do, are often percieved b
y the courts as automatically being great dads because they want their children
full time and there must be a reason why. Therefore about 70% of dads who actual
ly go for full custody, win. And it is a grueling fight. So the mother starts ou
t with this impression of the dad by the court when she fights. She ends up havi
ng to "prove" herself. And she usually has less resources to do so.
Most courts do not recognize narcissism/sociopathy-- they mostly look at outward
stuff like abuse, neglect, etc. And most narcissists are adept at passing the p
syche evals, etc. It is a real problem and I am glad Julie fought it.
Narcissist want their children for specific reasons that have to do with their o
wn image/credibility. They see their children as extensions of themselves and no
t as unique individuals even though they present something totally different in
public. Life with a narcissistic parent is hell for kids.
I will say this: The narcissist is getting his "reward" now on earth. He/She is
able to fool a lot of people a lot of the time. The only way to deal with them i
s to NOT deal with them. So custody situations becomes a long time hell where ev
erything must be documented and catalogued. I have several friends dealing with
this same situation right now. Some, too, are pastors ex wives.
Pastors are often actors who have a stage persona. Very few people can get real
close to them to truly know them even though they think they do. They do not und
erstand they are interacting with a "persona" who is a great sincere guy. They h
ave no clue.
@Lydia
Luckily up here in Minnesota they call the mentally ill "demon possessed". Much
harder to prove in court. :)
Although I have heard of many accused of mental illness AFTER the breakdown or l
eaving the abuse and speaking about it. Myself included. :(
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Still Cynical September 19, 2014 at 10:47 am
"I had no idea the
mentally ill
tactic was so widespread in Christendom...
"
___________________
Last time I stood up to an abusive church leader was in an elder's meeting, the
pastor was there. When I presented evidence that pastor was engaged in a pattern
of lying and manipulation--and he most definitely was--he looked over at anothe
r elder and said "See, I told you he was a DSM IV psychopath." The time before,
at another abusive church, also when I was an elder, when I confronted the two m
ain leaders in the church at a meeting at my house with similar behavior, the pa
stor said "This is the craziest thing I've seen." and his right hand man said "Y
ou're wacko...you live in Wacko-World." This was in front of wife, children and
my best friend.
They love to slander you by calling you crazy, that way no one will ever listen
to you again, it's really a way of killing the person, making them a nonentity a
mong their family, friends and associates. As stated in previous posts, it's cal
led gaslighting, and you're right, it is pure diabolical evil. Of course, the Lo
rd warned us about this, those who present themselves an angels of light.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@ Jen
The hard part is, someone who's dealt with a person who legitimately is disturbe
d, personality-disordered, and perhaps just plain given over to evil, is often l
osing it themselves. Those people will make you question your own sanity, turn f
amily members against you, push you repeatedly to the edge, turn your head clean
round.
When you compare the behavior of an otherwise normal, healthy person who's under
extreme stress from abuse to the cool, seemingly rational demeanor of their nar
cissistic of sociopathic tormentor, the latter usually appears to be the voice o
f reason. I can't help but believe in God, I know He's real and loves us in spit
e of what I see happen in His name, and I know He will bring justice one day, bu
t it sure is hard to wait for it sometimes.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
I have just been contacted by my lawyer. He has sent a copy of the post to the p
rosecuting attorney to threaten and intimidate me. Every word I wrote is truth.
YOUR lawyer is trying to threaten you, or is it your ex who's trying to do this
and that's the "he"? By the way, truth is an absolute defense to libel.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
We're staying tuned Julie.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
You may want to check on laws in your state but writing about YOUR experience is
not usually libelous unless there is some gag order. Yeah, had that one thrown
at me from some celebrity seeker gurus.
The thing about narcissists is that they are bold and never tire. Their boldness
is what helps them. People do not think they would dare proclaim the things the
y do if they were not true. It can take years to figure this out about them.
Another thing is that you spend all your time dealing with them. They never stop
. And with the celeb Christian narcissists they have the benefit of all those ot
her celebs around them who blurbed their books and shared stages with them who m
ust save face at all costs. They could never admit they lacked such wisdom and d
iscernment. Or they had been duped. Or perhaps they are narcissists too. Note ho
w long it took some to back away from Driscoll and only after it became so obvio
usly bad and the media was picking up on it. Now it is "Mark who"?
It is all another variation of the white coat syndrome. People tend to believe t
hese guys because of a title, pulpit or a white coat. You guys ever ever seen th
e Milgram Experiment? It is on youtube. Amazing what people will believe when so
meone in a "position" of authority tells them something. That is why people beli
eve them when they say someone is mentally ill.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Not my lawyer.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
"Luckily up here in Minnesota they call the mentally ill
demon possessed .
Much harder to prove in court. :)
Although I have heard of many accused of mental illness AFTER the breakdown or l
eaving the abuse and speaking about it. Myself included. :("
I advise anyone who knows this was said about them to deal with it legally---imm
ediately. This is nothing to fool around with and can have long term repercussio
ns for your life and career. I am to the point that these guys have to be challe
nged in ways that make it clear to other gurus that road is not worth going down
and they are accountable for what they say.
The problem is often it cannot be traced back to them as it is a whisper campaig
n their sycophants carry out . There is a time and reason to fight back. Jesus l
oves justice. I am not sure why so many do not understand that.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
I have been silenced and threatened for years. This is nothing new. This happene
d. It's real and I'm being silenced for speaking the truth.
Picking up on the NPD megachurch pastor commentary - here in us emergent world,
you have the combustion of two NPD worlds - first the evangelical quest to follo
w the next Xn celebrity rock star coupled with the strain of male dominated NPD
found in palces like Silicon Valley where there's an obsession to discover the n
ext big thing. I started interviewing US emergent folks in 2004 and attended my
first US emergent event in 2005. I could run EVERY one of these interviews today
and it's SNAFU - but back then there was such a longing for community that I ig
nored some warning signs that something was amiss. My apologies Julie for promot
ing a few voices and not really speaking out until 2007 butI was blinded briefly
by the BS.
Then when some of us spoke out against Emergent Village and Outlaw Preachers' bu
llying tactics, we were told to "make nice," "be good girls," "you're just whinn
ing because you weren't asked to speak" and other phrases that completely dismis
sed the bullying as "boys will be boys" behavior. This dismissal caused most vic
tims to stay silent - there have been some eruptions most notably after Phyllis
Tickle's Memphis snafu and Tony's obsession to stop @emergentdudebro but eventua
lly the US Emergent crew managed to silence the convo ...
Don't let
e done in
we create
his is by
ul.
this happen again. We need to follow Julie's lead re what can/cannot b

her paticular case at a given time -- but this is much bigger. How do
spaces for all those victims who have been silenced to come forward. T
no means not the only abusive story I've heard. And that's just godawf
Julie- so glad you are speaking.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Thank you for the support. Christ was a truth teller and that is why this is so
important to bring it to light.
Josh September 19, 2014 at 3:19 pm
The darkness wants to silence truth, but the light brings healing and truth. Mar
k Driscoll's fall has illustrated that we can expose this darkness.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
When I despair, I remember that all through history, the way of truth and lov
e has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers, and, for a time, they c
an seem invincible. But in the end, they always fall. Think of it. Always. Whene
ver you are in doubt that that is God s way, the way the world is meant to be,
think of that, and then try to do it his way.
~ Mahatma Gandhi, from the 198
2 movie *Gandhi* produced by Lord Richard Attenborough
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Harv September 19, 2014 at 4:06 pm
"Speak on, dear heart." -- Aslan
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Dee Parsons September 19, 2014 at 4:52 pm
Julie McMahon
If you would ever like to write your story for a post on The Wartburg Watch, we
would be happy to publish it. In fact, I can think of a few other blogs that wou
ld want to do so as well. I am sick to hear what has happened to you. I believe
you and will pray for you. I have had a number of people contact me about this e
xchange. I am so, so sorry for your pain.
Thank you, Dee. You know what I would like the outcome to be? Simply this, by Do
ug Pagitt, Brad Cecil, Mark Scandrette, Danielle Shroyer, Brian McLaren and Mike
King (and the other is incapable). "Julie, I am sorry. We handled that poorly.
It was wrong and for that I am sorry."
That's not asking for much, Julie. But maybe for some it is.
I've been thinking about all the stuff in this thread on stigmatizing someone wi
th a label of "mental illness."
Lydia speaks above (September 19, 2014 at 9:49 am) about abusive leaders who mas
querade as "great men," which gives them the stature needed to play "The Crazy C
ard" on people successfully. The thing that's so insidious is that this "poisons
the well" on another person by innuendo or outright labeling, especially if som
eone's behavior under stress *seems* to support the conclusion pronounced agains
t them.
But things are not always what they seem. If I remember right, there are at leas
t 50 different sources that can have symptoms that make someone look like they'r
e drunk -- disoriented, swaying, stumbling, slurred speech. (If that number is o
ff one direction or the other, someone with a medical background please correct
me.) One source is diabetes, when the person's insulin level is way off and they
get woozy and can talk incoherently. Another is Parkinson's Disease, where they
've lost motor control and stagger. Strokes can have symptoms of slurred speech.
So, just as apparent drunkness is not itself an automatic diagnosis of pathology
, "crazy" behavior is not always what it seems. That's especially true if the "d
iagnosis" comes from someone in a role of authority over others who benefits by
gaslighting his/her victims to think they're going crazy, or by labeling them as
if they *are* crazy.
Here are some of the Crazy Cards I've heard being played (some onto me, others i
n malignant ministry situations I've personally been in):
* They're quite "ill," if you catch my drift.
* You're the most self-centered person I've ever known.

* They're mentally unstable.
* There was a "personality conflict." [Meaning, I'm the calm, sane, rational one
, and they're not.]
Labeling is often an effective way for bullies to implant doubts, to discount th
e truth that is told by others, to reinforce denial in the hearts and minds of t
heir own followers. It is as my favorite philosopher -- okay, so it was Dana Car
vey -- said: "To label me, is to ignore me."
I have been labeled, ignored, minimized by bullies. I know what it is and how it
hurts. I've been where it makes me want to yell my story louder so, hopefully,
someone finally hears it -- which unfortunately only reinforces the false percep
tion that I'm crazy. "See how angry and irrational he is?" Or, "Look out -- stay
away from that one!" Or, "The next church you go to, I'll be warning the elders
there about you."
So, when it comes to dealing with issues regarding supposed "mental illness," I'
ve learned that it's best to proceed with caution. I make observations, consider
patterns, and if/when I speak of it, I try to do so tentatively: "It looks like
they do obsessive compulsive things." Or, "They seem overly wrapped up in thems
elves and have no conscience about hurting others, so it could be they're dealin
g with narcissism." Or, "IMO, that showed a complete lack of compassion!"
That's because I don't have the credentials to diagnose -- even if I have credib
ility from a track record of noting patterns of problems. Becky Garrison makes a
n excellent point about this in her comment (September 12, 2014 at 1:31 pm).
Anyway, I talk tentatively unless I can verify that there is a clear diagnosis o
f mental health issues, reached by a professional (e.g., psychologist, psychiatr
ist), who is qualified/certified to make such evaluations and draw such conclusi
ons. And even when there is substantial objective evidence to go with the subjec
tive observations and interpretations of myself and others, I refrain from talki
ng about it unless there is a *need* for me to say something specific.
Even then, I'm still cautious when speaking about such problems -- or about much
of anything related to spiritual abuse, actually. But if need be, when there is
reliable evidence to back it up, I use the sentence-starter-line that I crafted
a few years ago to put questioners and challengers on notice that we're dealing
with evidence, not mere opinion. It goes like this (and has saved me from flame
-war exchanges numerous times): "It is documented and verifiable by witnesses th
at ..."
And from what Julie has shared in this thread, it looks like there may be a lot
of clinical evidence available in this situation.
That is so true, Brad. No one has the right to label or diagnose anyone else wit
hout the process of thorough clinical diagnostic testing. I inquired of the 6, a
nd their credentials and not one of them is a licensed mental health clinician,
but Doug said, "We are all Pastors and we work with people all the time, and we
just know." From a remote location without 1 minute of clinical assessment, I wa
s assessed. Unless you have seen a diagnosis written in black and white by a lic
ensed psychologist, no label should ever be uttered. So, I speak because "it is
documented and verifiable..."

I've attempted numerous times to post here in light of the evolved topic at hand
. And, until now, I just haven't be able to. I keep typing and then deleting eve
rything that I had typed. My heart goes out to Julie, just to make clear where I
stand. And at the same time, my heart goes out to abusers, and I think the reas
on why is because I was severely abused most of my life, and have had to fight t
he latter 20 years of my life to make damn sure I didn't become an abuser myself
. It's been very difficult. My heart breaks firstly for the abused, and after, f
or the abusers. I think I'd rather be abused than become an abuser. I realize th
ere has been an awful lot of justified anger and expression on this thread; stil
l, I'll risk hitting the "post comment" button in any case. I feel a bit out of
sorts here, because I am a white male venturing to risk being vulnerable, and I
have zero intent on drawing any attention whatsoever to myself. It's just that t
o a difficult degree, and can identify with abusers, with myself suffering a sig
nificant degree of abuse and fighting off (and constantly) the urge to become th
at which virtually ruined my life (though some of it has been "salvaged," so to
speak). Much peace to all here, and if I have offended anyone in any way, it was
not my intent to do so. And my aim has not at all been to shift any attention t
o myself, but simply to raise a voice to be heard, for whatever it may be worth.
Mark Simon September 19, 2014 at 6:52 pm
Yup, I just read this entire thread... and this is just another file in the file
cabinet of why all religion is useless.
Julie, I'm sorry you (and anyone else who has experienced mental & physical) and
your family had to face this type of tragedy.
I've grown to hate religion... while struggling to still believe in a god. It's
not going well, and this truth that was exposed certainly is helping me think th
at the struggle of attempting to believe... isn't worth it.
Grace and Peace
Likes(8)Dislikes(1)
Mark Simon September 19, 2014 at 6:53 pm
*mental & physical abuse
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
I get what you are saying Chris Hill. Can you imagine living a life where you ha
d to expend so much energy having to maintain your persona....exhausting. Never
allowed to admit mistake or a flaw. Constantly having to appear superior?
I have been reading for a few years the writings of Brene Brown. She kinda blew
my mind with her books on vulnerability, and the courage to be imperfect. She is
actually a researcher who did a study of the affects of shame...her discovery w
as that the cure for shame is vulnerability. Her TED talk on vulnerability expla
ins it all. Darling Greatly is her latest book. THAT is what is missing in these
people who are incapable of saying sorry. or admitting they made a mistake.
Yes, I would rather be the abused than live the life of an abuser. But how about
can we have healthy people that get the psychological help that has been recomm
ended, so they no longer abuse others? They abuse because they are overcompensat
ing for deep feelings of inadequacy, and that is very sad. Someone did that to '
little kid' them. But getting well is now their responsibility, especially if th
ey are in leadership. I do feel for the abuser because there is no peace for the
m, only a false self created to cope with life.
Mark Simon....there are really good people...but I so relate to your disgust of
the church as a whole. We can't let the bad guys win! I'm now at a little episco
pal church with some very real and good people. I hope to have a better faith ex
perience than my Solomon's Porch Emergent cult-like experience. Don't lose faith
. I see elements of God at work in this long thread of posts. I got a finger cra
mp just scrolling down to post a comment. God is present, even in the mess.
Andrew Hackman September 19, 2014 at 8:09 pm
With ya Mark. I was a believer for 30 years... Hell Fire and Brimestone, then a
church planting evangelical, then a liberal Universalist.... peace came when I l
et it all go. I wish everyone could read this thread.
Thanks NP, you provide a good forum for people to be empowered... the fact that
a few of the would be leaders ran themselves off, nursing their egos, was a bonu
s.
Oh, some of the concern trolling in here was priceless... and really needs to ex
ist as a linked footnote to any dictionaries that give the definition of concern
trolling. :)
I emailed this letter to the 6 Emergent leaders who gathered in Dallas, Texas an
d "discerned" me without me present. I am praying for goodness while expecting c
rickets. Danielle Shroyer, Doug Pagitt, Brad Cecil, Mike King, Brian McLaren and
Mark Scandrette.
Hello Discernment Team,
I am asking for a public apology for the spiritual abuse you inflicted on me. Yo
u can make your public apology here.
http://nakedpastor.com/2014/09/tony-jones-on-mark-driscoll-what-came-first-the-t
hug-or-the-theology/
As Pastors, you abused your power and it was wrong. I am offering you an opportu
nity to right that wrong.
Sincerely,
Julie McMahon
Gordon Schneider September 19, 2014 at 11:16 pm
Julie - I admire your courage in dealing with all this. I'm happy that you
found a safe church to offer you love and support. I pray that your letter
in fact result in the apologies you request. Thank you so much for sharing
story. Every story a victim of abuse shares gives courage to other victims
eak. Grace & peace to you!
have
will
your
to sp
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
artistglover September 20, 2014 at 2:39 am
Nakedpastor and Julie:
Bravo for your transparency and courage! That which has been hidden is being exp
osed! I am so touched by what you are doing for people and the healing that's
being generated through all of this. You've renewed the wind in my sails. Thank
you!
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Brad,
Very rarely is there verifiable evidence and/or witnesses to spiritual abuse. Mo
st of the charlatans are too clever to put anything in writing or to speak publi
cly in any way that is not vague with plausible deniability. (This situation is
different because of domestic violence, custody, etc)
Therefore, I encourage people to "tell their story" from "their perspective" sti
cking with events. Very few people who have been spiritually abused are "documen
ting" anything while going through it. Sadly.
The irony is once they tell their stories from their perspective, often there ar
e others who have experienced similar in the same venue. That is how the SGM stu
ff started. And they found that by following the "rules" of SGM teaching that sp
eaking any negative was sin, SGM was able to keep it all under wraps for many ye
ars.
Narcissists and even sociopaths are rarely diagnosed. Therefore, it is accepted
to say that someone is exhibiting what looks to be narcissistic patterns of beha
vior.
But one thing I am emphatic about is encouraging people to deal with the "mental
illness" or "emotionally unstable" charge from the charlatans or their sycophan
ts. That can become very serious down the road when it affects things like custo
dy, careers, etc. You don't leave that one hanging.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Lydia @ September 20, 2014 at 8:16 am
That's very wise advice for survivors in telling our stories! And the more of us
who share our stories, the greater "cloud of witnesses" we create to the abusiv
e environment in a church or ministry or elsewhere. In the past five years or so
, think of how many spiritual abuse situations have reached a threshold of detai
ls from testimonies that make the allegations about the abusive people and speci
fic patterns involved harder to dismiss. Sovereign Grace Ministries. Institute i
n Basic Life Principles. Mars Hill Church.
One of the most freeing things I ever did in working through situations of abuse
that I survived was to go through the 20-question survey that Barbara Orlowski
used for her doctoral research on abuse and recovery. It helped me recall many d
etails that helped give me much more perspective on what happened as I reflected
on them. (And because I'd spent over 15 years in several different "malignant m
inistries" by then, I had to go through some sections of questions multiple time
s. Wow, did I start to see patterns then!) From this research, Barb wrote the bo
ok *Spiritual Abuse Recovery: Dynamic Research on Finding a Place of Wholeness*.
Here's the link to the page where you can download the survey.
http://www.churchexiters.com/take-the-survey/
A while back, I also posted an article called, "Is It Time To Tell My Story?" It
's a combination of questions and tips for both working through our own accounts
of what happened to us, plus doing research reporting or archiving if we happen
to be called to that as well. That might be useful, too, if we're feeling the n
udge to share what happened to us.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/is-it-time-to-tell-my-story/
A note about researching/archiving: This is something I've done for half a dozen
case studies or websites on abuse situations. That's in part why I mentioned "d
ocumentation" and the need for "sourcing" where we got our information so it can
be "verified" and gone back to. Sources I've used include the details from peop
le's stories, organizational histories, online blog and website links, timelines
, by-laws, court papers, contracts, minutes of meetings, non-profit reports, etc
. Often, it seems, when there is a controlling person or group in an organizatio
n, their abuse isn't just in how they treat people, but how they misuse resource
s of the organization for their own benefit. (For instance, I think we're seeing
internal financial and organizational issues as key factors that keep bringing
Mars Hill Church into the news.) So this kind of research can turn out to streng
then a case about control tactics.
Anyway, I know that kind of detailed or research work isn't what very many peopl
e do. But it does seem like a lot of abuse situations have a group of at least a
few people who work together to compile that kind of information and/or create
websites. And these sites seem to become a focal point for support and community
, along with resources that help in recovery.
Final thought: I've been actively reading, commenting, and researching in spirit
ual abuse survivor communities since 2008. It's amazing and encouraging to see t
he advances made in getting our stories out there, and letting the truth of what
happened shine light on abuse and call for justice and change so that what happ
ened to us doesn't happen to others. I'm thank for this thread, as another part
of of that calling out of darkness.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
lost September 20, 2014 at 10:52 am
But how long does the pain last? Every time I think I am over it a trigger makes
me want to pull a trigger. It is a vicious cycle. @Mark - I can totally relate.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
lost- I would say that you are not lost, but found. You are not alone. I think t
alking about it helps. I meet weekly with a professional that understands the ab
use that only a skilled narcissist can inflict, while outwardly appearing spotle
ss. Keep talking. I am so grateful to have stumbled upon this community of survi
vors and there is strength in numbers, and there are advocates willing to stand
alongside.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Julie is right. I've seen it too much for it to be denied. When people are given
the opportunity to talk, to share their struggles, then healing comes. And it c
omes through supportive listeners and communities like this and The Lasting Supp
er. Promise!
I love this quote:
"Trauma is not what happens to us, but what we bear inside us in the absence of
an empathic witness." (Peter Levine)
Let us be your witness!
Lost September 20, 2014 at 11:30 am
I saw a therapist for awhile. Turned out she was associated with THE church. Yea
h, no wonder I didn't get anywhere. Trust Only One became my motto. But I proved
I can't even trust myself, so who does that leave?

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
I don't know your particulars but if abuse occurred with gaslighting it can make
you doubt yourself. Find a better non church related kick ass therapist to help
you listen to your truth. It may start as a still small voice but get stringer
as you work on releasing the abuse back onto where it belongs...on the abuser...
not on you. Also, I joined the Lasting Supper to get on going support from a sup
portive listening empathetic community and I suggest that too. You are not alone
. Be gentle with yourself as this takes time and you just took a step.
Rose September 20, 2014 at 12:32 pm
Wow, wow, wow. Just read through all the comments. Julie I am so sorry, I know t
his kind of story firsthand and I am still living it. David, thank you for being
an advocate for victims, and for being and advocate for women. I am a female pa
stor in Seattle that publicly called Mark D out in 2006, met with him then and v
oiced concerns for the past 8 years. I have been silenced by many because of his
platform and influence. I think it is circular, thug-bad theology-thug-bad theo
logy. Bad theology and his charisma gave him the platform to manifest who he is.
I am so tired of all the male-centric bullshit that happens in the celebrity ch
urches. Not one mega church pastor in the city of Seattle has commented on MD an
d the tragedy of Mars HIll Church publicly. Why? Why do we think it's okay to al
low this kind of abuse to continue in any shape or form. God have mercy on us.
brambonius September 20, 2014 at 1:28 pm
Oh my...
I"m a complete outsider in another part of the world who did see glimpses of thi
s very ugly story 4 years ago in some blogposts and comments including Bill Kinn
ons 'Here's a thought' blog. I also did for some reason around that time write a
blogpost about marriage in reaction to something T had written, just theoretica
lly because I didn't know anything about the backstory until I read Bills post a
nd some comment elsewhere on a blog that I can't remember.
I can remember being shocked, and praying for you, Julie. I'm shocked even more
after reading this whole comment thread, and I'll pray again.
Writing down your story for the Wartburg Watch might be not such a bad idea. Evi
l must be brought to the light...
I also swear here and now I'll never use the word 'emergent' for myself again in
the future. Not that I did use it much, I'm more oldschool-emerging probably an
d have always liked '-ing' more, but I really am completely done with the 'emerg
ent'-label now.
Btw, David, you need a like-button for comments here! Very important things are
happening here on this comment thread...
John Umland posted the definition of gaslighting. This is a psychological abuse
tactic abusers use. I was told, "That never happened." regarding certain events.
And you actually start to ask yourself, "Did it?" Yes, it did!
Recently in court he was asked have you ever entered Julie's home uninvited? He
said no. My lawyer asked, "But isn't it true you turned on the gas fireplace in
Ms. McMahon's home at the insistence if your son? Were you not in her home for a
pproximately 45 minutes complete with asking for tools to use? His reply, and un
der oath sent me chills because I was amazed at the depth to which this kind of
person will go.
"I have never touched her doorknob."
Gaslighting or gas-lighting[1] is a form of mental abuse in which false informat
ion is presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own memory, perce
ption, and sanity.[2] Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser th
at previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events
by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.
This term gaslighting is often used in regards to Narcissistic Personality Disor
der.
The term owes its origin to the play Gas Light and its film adaptations, after w
hich it was coined popularly. The term has been used in clinical and research li
terature.
Rose, I am so glad you stood up and called out the abuse you observed in 2006. I
t is all coming out now! Keep talking.
I contacted Mike Morrell about the "Julie is bat shit crazy" proliferation that
I believe he did do, and confirmed by two separate sources. He denies but I beli
eve he did indeed proliferate that abuse, and having never actually met me. In h
is defense, he was just delivering the company line and drank the kool aid. He d
enies he ever said that to my two confirmed sources, but he does admit saying th
e exact same phrase "batshit crazy" about Becky Garrison to which I requested he
re and now a public apology that I assume will be accepted....the time is now an
d the place is here. Mike, lead the way.
I DID, however, call Becky Garrison bat-shit crazy once upon a time
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Well then, I guess the emails I received calling you that are just figments of m
y imagination, Julie.
artistglover September 20, 2014 at 3:04 pm
I agree with Brambonius - David, you need a like button for these comments!!!
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Again, Julie - I can't thank you enough for sharing your story. This is all utte
rly shocking, but I know it to be true. I've seen gaslighting manipulation in my
church growing up from 2 different pastors who were trying to cover up affairs.
(non-related situations.) It disgusts me. To think that my patient, kind, and t
ender father who loves God and people more than anyone I know, served as a suppo
rtive deacon to these scumbags, and began to question his own observations when
they put their spin on the situations
SICKENS ME. Many of our friends began l
eaving the church, and our family felt betrayed. Yet it was they who were correc
t .we had been deceived by master spinners. NEVER AGAIN if I can help it. Shou
t if from the rooftops if that's what it takes.
One more pressing thought Julie, since you have lived with an extreme example
of NPD, what is the answer? Is there a solution for this disorder? Maybe I shoul
d rephrase; I'm sure there is therapy for a narcissist who wants to change, but
it appears the problem lies with the ones who have no desire to change (which I'
m guessing is part of the disease.) I'm really not familiar with this at all s
o, how do you counteract NPD? Will they stop at nothing? Is their goal to conque
r all? Do you shame them? Does that cause them to back off a bit? OR do you pret
end to play into their game just to pacify them? I am TRULY wondering what type
of communication would cause this type of person to do the LEAST amount of harm
to others.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Anyone can be made new but you have to be willing to get the help and for that t
o happen you have to be brave enough to look at your junk. So with this certain
type of person, it's a non starter because they are above all. They choose enabl
ers all around them willing to hold up the image they want to see. I pulled back
the curtain and thus have been a target ever since.
"One more pressing thought Julie, since you have lived with an extreme example
of NPD, what is the answer? Is there a solution for this disorder?"
I am not Julie but have done a lot of research on this after dealing with narcis
sistic pastors and family members and trying to figure out what on earth was goi
ng on. How can deception, lying and evil be "good" in the Name of Jesus?
Among other resources, I ran across Sam Vaknin who admits to being a narcissist
and has quite a bit of information you might find interesting. He is the author
of Malignant Self Love. and has a channel on youtube. They are harder to detect
than you might think----unless you live with one. They often target fair, just p
eople they know will always question themselves out of a sense of conscience and
wanting to be "fair". They love those types. Easy to manipulate.
" Maybe I should rephrase; I m sure there is therapy for a narcissist who want
s to change, but it appears the problem lies with the ones who have no desire to
change (which I m guessing is part of the disease.)"
How do you teach someone to have a conscience? How do you teach empathy to an ad
ult? The research I have read says this is formed early on but can also become i
ngrained when brought into certain movements as a youth where entitlement, becau
se of a perceived superiority, is expected. An example of that would be an SS of
ficer. Young pastor has that feel to it for me. Often they come with entitlement
because of some "spiritual" superiority but act "humble" to gain street cred. O
ften they are different people when not in front a group speaking.
" I am TRULY wondering what type of communication would cause this type of perso
n to do the LEAST amount of harm to others."
I have a friend who developed a technique for her tween and teen to use with the
ir narcissistic father. It protects them from being used. Younger than that it i
s almost impossible and they need to be in therapy because it can become their n
ormal. I am wary of mentioning it here. But it has worked well for them. And the
ir father was extreme narcissistic on par with some of the things Julie has ment
ioned here. Bold liars and deceivers who are more often than not, believed. The
key is to communicate as little as possible.
The key to adults communicating with a narcissistic sociopath is every word must
be in writing --ONLY. Even then it is a nightmare.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Mike Morrell refuses to apologize here publicly. He says it is "not appropriate.
" Isn't that what the above interlopers have said that this is not the appropria
te venue? Trying to shame me and shut me up.
I cannot think of a more perfect place for apologies and healing than a Pastors
blog.....MY pastor because I am now a part of the Lasting Supper community...a p
lace for people who have been abused by the church and are victims of spiritual
abuse. No more dodging it. It's OVER. Come clean. Otherwise, do not call yoursel
f a Christian. We are supposed be different. People of reconciliation. This matt
ers. To me and to every victim of spiritual abuse by Pastors in a position of po
wer and influence.
Doug Pagitt
Brad Cecil
Mark Scandrette
Steve Knight (deleted the EV website content)
Brian McLaren
Mike King
Danielle Shroyer
Mike Morrell (proliferated the Julie is "bat shit crazy" and Becky Garrison is "
bat shit crazy" campaign)
You have all aided in this spiritual abuse that is now out here in the light of
day. I am asking again and for a fourth time for a public apology. Maybe you wer
e all bamboozled....if so....say it. But I cannot help think this was entirely d
riven by self interest. His pathology will not allow for any sort of remorse or
apology. I understand that on a clinical level. What is your excuse?
Whoa! Just noticed the addition of the "Likes" and "Dislikes" buttons. Not what
I came back to post about, but that's pretty cool.
I did a bit of thinking about Julie's situation, Mars Hill, and tangentially not
related to this thread in any way Sam Harris (noted atheist), whose speaking gi
g at my church next week was cancelled due to serious death threats. My question
is this: what would it take for the American church at large (American church i
n this case meaning mainline denominations, other individual sects like the Menn
onites with their huge variety of conservative to liberal congregations, nondeno
minational churches of all sizes mega and not, etc.) to make a concerted effort
to call out abuse demonstrated by clergy in both church, public, and private set
tings? Is it simply a lack of seeing certain behaviors as abusive? Is it also an
underlying unwillingness to examine current behaviors or acknowledge past behav
iors that are abusive or borderline? Is it also because some of these abusive be
haviors also have deep roots in US culture to some extent because we expect to s
ee said behaviors and it's normalized consciously or subconsciously? The consequ
ences are real--ranging from hurt feelings to ruined reputations, legal actions,
and impacts on careers. I'm also concerned because I think that certain types o
f abusive behaviors are actually growing in encouragement and are attractive--Ma
rs Hill didn't gather a huge following because Driscoll was a warm, wonderful pe
rson. Even in the case where Sam's speaking date was cancelled, the church itsel
f didn't strongly denounce the threats--even though the church clearly didn't ma
ke the threats--it did speak disapprovingly and disappointingly of the threats.
I just wonder why there is such institutional reluctance to address abuse and th
reats by American christians.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Ya lots of people have been asking for the like/dislike button so... there you g
o :)
Moimeme September 20, 2014 at 4:48 pm
Chris Hill, you have my sympathy and respect. You recognize yourself as a potent
ial abuser, and do your best not to act on that. You have my respect because you
DO fight it, and my sympathy because it cannot be easy.
Julie, you, too, have my sympathy and support. As both of you have pointed out,
active abusers must always live with what they are, and that can be very ugly. T
hey surround themselves with enablers who are as repellent as they themselves ar
e, and that is the only support or company they ever get to keep. I have been si
ckened to read what was done to you, and pray for your complete peace and healin
g.
I find the inability of NPD victims to see how very BAD it makes them look not t
o apologize to be curious. They are not stupid, they are fully aware of the cont
empt in which such people are held, yet that is their chosen path. They don't ev
en seem to get it that a false apology will raise them tremendously in the eyes
of others, as long as they convince those others that the apology is real. I don
't understand how they see things that they cannot understand how contemptible t
hey look when they refuse to apologize. It's a bit psychotic, a bit out of touch
with reality, and it ALWAYS fails them.
I'll be praying for you, Julie, and for your children. I will try very hard to b
e more Christlike and pray for the Notorious Six as well, but I'll be gritting m
y teeth as I do so. I'd much rather pray for them to learn their lessons painful
ly, but I'm doing the best I can.
Chris Hill, keep up the good work. I'll be praying for your strength to keep fig
hting what is the really good fight indeed!
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Moimeme September 20, 2014 at 4:51 pm
Oh, and David, in answer to your original question at the top of the page, I fir
mly believe it is the thug that creates or adapts the theology. Christ said simp
ly that the two things we have to worry about are loving God with all of our bei
ng, and loving our neighbor as ourselves. He said clearly that one could recogni
ze His followers by their love for others. There is nothing remotely resembling
any of that in Mark Driscoll's theology, not the least hint. He wrote his theolo
gy to enable his thugery. That, to me, is very plain.
Likes(8)Dislikes(2)
Out of the fullness of the heart the mouth speaks. To me that means theology is
a product of the human mind and heart.
@Lydia
Thanks for your response..interesting and very helpful! The part about getting e
verything in writing makes total sense.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Nope. Went back and checked. Those emails Julie wrote of
y. Not my imagination after all.
they are real. Sorr

There are people... leaders... who privately contact me to either manage, contro
l, or stop this conversation. Nakedpastor has never censored comments. I mean, I
have interjected now and then to try to inject my point of view as another part
icipant in the conversation. But never to shut it down. Well... I did shut down
a couple people who were either extremely misogynistic or Islamophobic or someth
ing. But in this case, these are the comments of people who are telling their st
ories. And my take is that it is mostly challenging a movement and its leaders o
r representatives. I find it interesting... don't you?... that the voiceless are
speaking here on this post while the "leaders" use back channels. This says som
ething to me.
Mike Morrell September 20, 2014 at 6:56 pm
Hi Julie (and all) - even though I thought this was private between me and the o
nes I offended, I now see that my comments (part of them, anyway) are public. I
responded to you privately earlier today, Julie, but I'm hearing that it's impor
tant to you that I bring it up publicly to help bring resolution:
I'm so sorry that I called you "batshit crazy" in that private correspondence fo
ur years ago, Julie. That was my expression, and I own it. It's doubly-regrettab
le given my own mental health struggles - a sad turn of phrase that speaks to th
en-unresolved self-loathing, I think.
Please know that I went on no such "campaign." I was responding to one blogger w
ho, in my judgement, was being bombastic and self-righteous - a self-appointed V
ictim Watchdog whose tone back then was very different than David's, now. I was
triggered, and in the heat of that moment, had an email exchange with him. Thing
s escalated; we both said regrettable things; we both apologized.
I never apologized to you, though. Looking back, I suppose it's because I though
t that a conversation between the two of us stayed between the two of us; he'd e
ven assured me of such. Apparently, he lied. But none of this detracts from the
wrong-ness of the way I expressed myself. I'm so sorry.
@Lost, @Rose, others:
Julie is right about talking about it, telling the story. "There is no greater a
gony than bearing an untold story inside you." (Maya Angelou). I would add that
when it's a story of personal destruction, or devastation, telling the story is
the path to healing. You're finding people now who have been through it as well.
.. keep talking.
@Julie, @Bill,
By my recollection, Mike Morrell encouraged me to back off on anything confronti
ng Tony about the situation outlined in this thread. This was back in late 2009,
around the time Tony's book on The Didache came out. I reviewed that book and s
aid good things about it, but with the knowledge of what was going on behind the
scenes in EV. At that point I hadn't had as much evidence presented to me, and
although I tended to believe the story already, I decided to split the public th
eology from the private behavior when I reviewed The Didache. I sanitized some o
f the private material when I commented publicly disapproving of Tony's new marr
iage theology in early 2010 http://subversiveinfluence.com/2010/01/well-2010-isunorthodox-so-far/ It wasn't long into 2010 when my steam ran out for blogging o
n the emerging/missional church altogether, but I had already issued a predictio
n for what the next ten years would bring http://subversiveinfluence.com/2010/01
/the-decade-ahead-for-the-emerging-church/ and in looking up some of the back-st
ory links just now, I found that Emergent Village doesn't even seem to have both
ered to keep the .com domain name anymore. (For the record, my intention is to l
eave my dormant site online for archival purposes so that I won't contribute to
anyone else's link rot and so that anything I said then can stand as it was writ
ten in the day. I've got nothing to be ashamed of, and there are things I wrote
that people still find helpful.)
As I remember the times in late 2009 and early 2010, EV had book tours going on
for Everything Must Change and the Church Basement Tour thing. Back in April 200
9, EV was already broadening some of its discussion about the future of EV with
some leaders who weren't part of the original EV founders or current board membe
rs or coordinating group members or whatever. They gathered a bunch of people up
for meetings one weekend to chat. The new group was made up of people like Juli
e Clawson, Tim Snyder, Makeesha Fisher, Sarah Notton, Amy Moffitt, Mike Stavlund
, Troy Bronsink, Michael Toy, Brittian Bullock, Kelly Bean, Eliacin Rosario-Cruz
, Anthony Smith, and others... something like 20-25 people which I believe inclu
de Brian Mclaren as well as Tony and Doug. I'm fairly confident that some of tho
se people were later used to spread the "Julie is crazy" rhetoric, but I don't k
now or can't say who or when or in what fashion. This is the kind of tactic that
Todd Hiestand brilliantly apologized for above, and for which Mike Morrell is b
eing called out above. I honestly don't think that most people at that level of
EV leadership at the time knew the whole story, or knew that they were being use
d to shutdown calls for accountability. As I saw/see it, they had the wool pulle
d over their eyes too, like so many of us have had in one way or another. (For c
larity, I'm not saying that about all the people mentioned here, nor intending t
o accuse any of them... just pointing out that they were a pool of people to dra
w from in repeating a message later on in 2009 and 2010.)
wrt NPD-afflicted persons (I just couldn't call them victims or sufferers like f
or a normal disease, because they're the inflictors of those adjectives.), I hav
e some comment to make. NPD or Narcissistic Personality Disorder is a form of ps
chopathy for which the standard test is called the DSM-IV. More is coming to pub
lic light about these types of people now and much is being written, but I do re
commend Snakes in Suits by Ron Hare and... somebody with a "B" name, and thank B
ill Kinnon for first recommending the book several years ago. There are a lot mo
re resources now to help recognize when you've fallen prey to someone like this.
Not all psychopaths go around killing people.... some get jobs as CEOs or megac
hurch pastors. After my own experiences with people of this type and after my re
ading on the subject, my position is that even if such people are repentant and
wish to change, they should not be placed in ministry positions again. Never. No
t. Ever. And no, there are no what-if's, and no exceptions. While I fully believ
e that God can heal and can change people, I believe quite strongly that any suc
h person who had changed enough would deeply and sincerely eschew any type of po
sition that would give them that kind of power or authority again. If they don't
fear it, they haven't changed. So no. NPD and other pschopathic ailments are fo
und in the fundamental makeup of the brain and are not simply cured by starting
to give them some kind of nonexistent empathy drug. For these reasons, my positi
on is that those who exhibit these tendencies or have shown them clinically in t
he past should not be in ministry. Period. And those who still are should be rem
oved, for the safety of all those they lead. And as far as I'm concerned, the cu
lpably-knowldegable defence network around them should step down as well, becaus
e they knew the good they ought to have done to protect others, and chose to ign
ore it.
I'm convinced we'll find there are many others who were used for this purpose an
d didn't know it: it was unwitting, not wilful. For the most part, those are the
ones who won't have any difficulty with issuing an apology.
Mike, thanks for apologizing - that and a few other comments slipped in while I
was getting long-winded.
I think the issue here is that although the conversation(s) was/were private, th
eir impact went beyond that private scope... they had a public effect, and they
had an effect on people who were not privy to the private exchange. Just bringin
g it all out into the open is a wise move for all concerned, so thanks for that.
ps. I wanted to click "Like" on your apology, but I didn't like what you said ab
out my friend Bill. Generally I only call him bombastic privately ;-) and at lea
st partly in jest. But I do really appreciate your addressing Julie here.
Dear Mike Morrell,
THANK YOU! I forgive you completely and I am happy to move forward with you and
the TLS community. God is good. That means a great deal!!!
Sincerely,
Your friend Julie
Julie, I apologize that my "bombastic and self-righteous" "Victim Watchblog" "tr
iggered" someone to say nasty and untrue things about you. I'll do my best to no
t let that happen in the future.
Now, Bill - if you want to join the apology train, I'd appreciate an apology for
forwarding private conversation to a third party, then lying about it...but, y'
know. Only if you feel led. If you don't think the ends justify the means.
You are truly hilarious, Mike.
How long does the pain last? It can go on forever. Depends on the level of abuse
, I suppose.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Brad Cecil, Mark Scandrette, Doug Pagitt, Mike King, Danielle Shroyer, and Brian
McLaren were just sent a copy of the original discernment letter to refresh mem
ories. In their defense they were maybe pawns, but I don't think so! And definit
ely not Doug! I am asking now for a 5th time for a public apology. Bad form to "
discern" about someone while only consulting with the person with the NPD and wi
thout me present, or without consulting me. Then when I sent proof of things I w
as silenced. Apologize! Thank you, Julie
This evening, I spent some time skimming through the first 40-50 comments, and t
hinking about the original topic of the post. The one about theology/pathology b
efore ... well, I wouldn't say the thread went "off-topic," but more like went "
on-exploration-and-application." Anyway, it occurred to me that there are at lea
st three possibilities for the theology/pathology chicken/egg question.
The first is more along the lines of Lord Acton's maxim about power:
All powe
r tends to corrupt; absolutely power corrupts absolutely.
You may start out w
ith well reasoned and good-intentioned theology, but once in a position of power
, the system goes to closure and the creative power goes to inertia, which bring
s corruption and corrosion to the system. Theological ascendency when in a posit
ion of authority leads to pathology.
The second is more along the lines of author Frank Herbert, who explored in his
Byzantine *Dune* saga just about every major system of power dynamics from relig
ious/mystical to technological to political to tribal to financial to ecological
to physical. According to interviews with Herbert,
Power is a magnet that dr
aws the corruptible.
Power draws pathological theologians and practitioners.
The third is one of my own device that I'm still experimenting with on how to pr
esent. It is a riff on the problems I've seen in people in leadership roles that
I have no other way to interpret but as them demonstrating sociopathological be
haviors - no apparent conscience touched by issues of right/wrong, no apparent c
ompassion and empathy for others who are suffering or how their own abusive acti
ons induce suffering. At this point, my quotable is: "Corrupt people desire powe
r and find a path for their pathology, sometimes in a theology."
So, FWIW, I m wondering if really this is a triangulation of three items inste
ad of a duel between two: position/role of authority, system of theology, and pe
rsonal pathology. Seems it could start with any of the three elements, depending
on the person and his/her situation, and go in any direction from there to pick
up other elements in different permutations. Maybe there's a chicken, an egg, a
nd a road to cross?
Meanwhile, I m still musing my way through whether there are
inherently abu
sive fault lines
in *every* theology that we need to be aware of and beware o
f overemphasizing them. For instance, I noted these on a Twitter conversation ab
out this thread:
* Complementarianism overcranked automatically embodies misogyny.
*
Flat structure
to promote peer dialog can get hijacked by celebrities.
* Missional experts can travel so much for teaching that they lose the local gro
unding that gives them their authority.
Look for the points of irony, and that may be our indicators of fault lines in o
ur theology
kate willette September 21, 2014 at 2:20 am
Look for the points of irony? Tell me what is NOT ironic about the Christian chu
rch as it exists today. It's ALL ironic! There are a few people around who seem
to be living out the love-your-neighbor, whatever-you-do-to-the-least-of-these k
ind of principles. I know a couple of them. Neither is associated with any churc
h . . . why would they be? To me the most ironic of all are the ones who think G
od wanted a human blood sacrifice, and the only possible way to get on God's goo
d side is to acknowledge that. Seriously, what? So you make that acknowledgement
, then you sign up to be a member of an institution that owns property and has b
ank accounts. You get together and try to make sense of the Christian bible, as
if it were a guidebook for living instead of a motley collection of old myths, p
olitical writing, poetry, and history. It's all ironic.
Cronut September 21, 2014 at 11:11 am
@brad "Not all psychopaths go around killing people.... some get jobs as CEOs or
megachurch pastors."
One reason among many I gave up on religion a long time ago. Thanks DH for hosti
ng a safe place to talk.
you're welcome cronut!
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Syl September 21, 2014 at 12:22 pm
Yes, what Kate said
When I jumped (and I do mean jumped, a ready or not here I come, head-first dive
) from the Sunday-mainstream-church-going-because-it s-what-you-do nominal/cul
tural Christianity that I was raised with into
serious
Christianity (to us
e the vernacular: born again, spirit filled, Bible believing, charismatic, etc.)
and became what was at the time called a
Jesus freak
(it was 1972) I expe
cted something from the church which was very different than what I found. Yes,
I was idealistic and naive (goes with the territory when you re 15). But I exp
ected to find in those who took their faith seriously (especially those in leade
rship) the type of character my Dad lived out, every day. I expected to find peo
ple who took seriously the things that Jesus said. Not the literalist, angels on
the head of a pin nit-picking and I m-right-you re-wrong-you re-damned
seriously
that I ran smack dab into. No, I mean the down-to-earth basics.
Love your neighbor as yourself ? Check.
Do unto others as you d have the
m do unto you ? Check.
Blessed are the peacemakers ? Check.
You cannot
serve God and mammon ? Check.
Go, sell what you have, give to the poor and
follow me ? Check.
Of course, what I found was very different. None of those basics seemed to even
register.
If they ever floated into view, unless chapter and verse were also quoted in a v
ery circumscribed context, they were dismissed as
liberal ,
socialist
,
unrealistic ,
under the law ,
wimpy do-good social gospel
- yo
u get the drift.
Oh, sure, I expected theology to be debated - I grew up with that, too. Dad was
an elder in the Presbyterian church and his closest friend was our minister. Sin
gle at the time, our minister s Sunday afternoons were spent visiting parishio
ners and he was a regular at our table. After-dinner discussion and thoughtful d
ebate ranged from politics to theology to philosophy to Cardinals baseball.
When I was 15, I
gave my life to Christ
- not in a church, but alone, in m
y room, after months of reading and thinking and looking for purpose and meaning
and direction and something bigger than the depressing and lonely life I seemed
to be stuck with - and I expected to find those things. Shortly after that, I f
ound what seemed to an outlet for and door into the
something bigger
- an
energetic, exciting, dynamic Charismatic youth group at what was quickly becomin
g one of the first mega-churches in the US. Purpose, meaning, drive - and a bunc
h of other young idealists. We were going to change the world, bringing people t
o Christ and living out the gospel.
Yeah, right.
True believers
like me were sucked into the vortex. Down the
rabbit hole I went. After all, the pastors and elders and teachers were sent to
us by God, weren t they? There were lots of verses to support that supposition
. There were so many others who d been at this whole born-again-spirit-filledChristian thing a lot longer than me, so they must understand something I just c
ouldn t see. I read, and studied, and underlined, and memorized, and filled re
ams of notebooks - and absorbed the doctrine, swallowed the party line. Even tho
ugh so much of it seemed, down inside, not quite right. But there was always a s
pin, an explanation, an excuse, another take on another verse, a clever rational
ization despite a glaring contradiction. And, of course, shame and emotional man
ipulation. The problem isn t the answer (or lack of a reasonable one) - the pr
oblem is the question. Not what the question is, but that there is a question at
all. Because these are God s men. And bears eat children who question God s
men (and question = derision = mocking God = you deserve to die, or whatever ba
d things might happen - and outside of your
covering
all bets are off, don
tcha know.) Keep quiet in church, you rebellious woman who has the temerity t
o think she has a usable non-deceived brain. You are only fooling yourself. List
en, obey, raise children, serve your husband - and be thin, beautiful, and tradi
tionally feminine while you re at it - but don t dare to step outside the ve
ry small box which has been constructed for your safety, or else
because out
side your
covering , all bets are off
What a load of horse shit.
The patriarchal, macho, controlling, manipulative, shaming, money-grubbing, name
-it-and-claim-it, fear-mongering, other-despising, fiefdom-making, using and abu
sing, excuse for narcissistic and plain old selfish and power-addled appalling b
ehavior that is commonly called
church
and
church leadership
has not
hing whatsoever to do with anything the person or character or compilation or co
ncept called
Jesus
ever reportedly or theoretically said, did, or conveyed
. And if it does, shame on that Jesus - the good Jesus deserves better.
It took me years - decades - to leave that crap behind. And decades after leavin
g, I am only recently able to say this stuff out loud - there was too much at ri
sk, with family and community. My departure from the church and departure, some
time later, from the faith were not cause-and-effect (although there was some ov
erlap). Today I d say I m agnostic - generally of the atheist opinion but so
metimes wishful deist - socially Christian with a strong affinity for Buddhist p
hilosophy. And that is so much healthier than anything any so-called
church
of that ilk has to offer.
Syl, I agree! Buddhism is what I am now gravitating most towards in my post evan
gelical christian cult trauma. I have a hybrid belief now. Be nice and loving to
everyone, and do no harm. God? Yes, I think so! The rest? I don't really know a
nymore. Holy Spirit? Yes, I believe.
The most real, spirit-filled, loving and authentic people I know have nothing to
do with organized religion or church. The Minneapolis yoga community is filled
with the most genuine people striving to be good, decent and peaceful on this ea
rth. It's hard to be a power grubbing narcissist and have peaceful yoga flow.
I so appreciate the apologies and attempts at making things right. When we prior
itize the person over the program, good things happen. I must say I'm happy to s
ee this happening here.
Update: by the grace of God and what can only be the work of the Holy Spirit usi
ng David Hayward's space...Brian McLaren reached out to me tonight. No, they (Br
ad Cecil, Danielle Shroyer, Mike King, Brian McLaren) did not know the whole sto
ry but only through the self interested lens of Doug Pagitt and the diagnosed na
rcissist. I have been asked to wait until Wednesday for a public and maybe a gro
up apology here. I hope that will come. Steve Knight that's you too. As professi
ng Christians aren't we able to apologize to one another, make peace and move fo
rward? I hope so. Thank you, Brian for responding to my email. I really apprecia
te it. Mars Hill leaders...take note.
I sent to to Phyllis Tickle a few years ago to which she emailed "the group" to
"stear clear" of me. This was just confirmed in an email she sent to another inf
luential person when this issues were raised to silence me, Christlike? I think
not. I called upon her for help. We were not getting any support and as a stay a
t home mom for 12 years, it was frightening.
Phyllis,
I am struggling as to why no one in his sphere of influence has not challenged h
im on his adulterous affair with Courtney Perry and his refusal to pay court ord
ered child support.
I am dumbfounded as to why the Christian community in which he moves would let t
his go unchecked?
Now owes $17,000 in unpaid child support payments and yet apparently wines and d
ines with you and the woman who broke up our home. Tanner (10), Lily (9), and Ai
dan(6) bear the sin of their father heavy on their hearts.
No one has challenged this...no one.
Julie McMahon
Phyllis,
It has been brought t my attention in a forwarded emailed penned by you that you
told people to "stear clear" of me and I called you a few times. Once is not as
few and to proliferate Tony's propaganda about my mental health which was prove
n through an exhaustive $4000 court ordered psychological evaluation that the pe
rson you were protecting from emotional, physical and mental abuse was the one w
ith a very serious personality disorder.
I would like a public apology here.
hug-or-the-theology/
That was hurtful, irresponsible and unkind.
You abused your position of power and that IS spiritual abuse. Even defending it
as it must be gospel because Danielle Shroyer whom I met ONCE said so.
Sincerely,
Julie McMahon
I drew a cartoon and wrote a post on anger today that I'm sure many people will
find offensive. Actually, the post was inspired by the comments here. I drew the
cartoon last year and it has taken me this long to find an appropriate place to
use it: READ IT HERE!
What came first, the chicken or the egg? I don't know, and neither do you. What
came first, the thug (behavior of a human being) or theology (one's thoughts on
what it ultimately means to be human, in our case, that is)? I don't know, and n
either do you. All we have are our best guesses, and there are a LOT of them out
there. Mystery abounds. The Human Mystery may be as big as The Mystery of All T
hat Is, and What Brought It All into Being. Can an intelligent Mystery even comp
rehend Ultimate Mystery? It certainly may try, and even if it hits on the truth
of the matter, since the human is a Mystery unto Itself (and set within the cont
ext of Ultimate Mystery), are we not left with a great many perspectives on the
matter, which might indicate that a more tentative approach may be the best way
to go regarding the question of the OP, so as to make room for those who are jus
t as caught up in the Mystery as we ourselves are?
Likes(1)Dislikes(7)
@Chris Hill,
I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. The closest I can come is "I
don't know and I don't think I'll ever know so don't ask."
This made me laugh out loud. If I had the correct appendage, I would definitely
relieve myself on the emergent brand.
Jon M. Sweeney September 22, 2014 at 12:04 pm
I was pointed to this discussion by a well-meaning friend. I'm honestly sad to h
ave read much of it -- not because I know what's true and what's false, but beca
use it makes it seem that the Christian community is willing to take a reality T
V show approach to truth discovery. Everyone needs to be quiet, go about your ow
n business, and stop "calling people out." When in doubt, don't comment. And if
you aren't in doubt, perhaps you should be.
what's not true?
Rob Grayson September 22, 2014 at 12:08 pm
John M. Sweeney: judgemental much?
As far as I can see, no one has been "called out". Julie McMahon has communicate
d some actual facts (you know, the type that can be backed up by court records a
nd such) and people have expressed their opinion on the basis of those facts. Pe
rhaps you should take your own advice and butt out.
Ya Jon, denial works. Actually, messy truth discovery is better than silent conc
ealment. Keep reading. Good fruit is coming from this.
Maybe the naysayers are right. Maybe we should step back and consider Tony, Doug
and the others that Julie is demanding an apology from.
How hard and exhausting in must be for them to keep up the facade, to obfuscate
and demand, to litigate and denigrate. Have we stopped to consider how hard it i
s for the abuser? Man, they probably have heartburn from maintaining the web of
lies, deceit and character assassination they have to keep perpetrating against
Julie.
And don't even mention the sheer labor that comes with behind the scenes machina
tions, of attempts to silence and shut down.
It's hard out here for a narcissist.
@tru -- Yes, you got the gist of what I was wanting to say, except that I attemp
ted to explain as best I could what you summarized in the first two points, but
as for the "don't ask" part, I still think this is a very important question. Fr
om an existential point of view, I see us as beings entering into a world wherei
n we are going to be influenced and affected by a great deal of people and exper
iences and, thus, be formed by them. While I believe we have significantly freewill, I believe it's limited to some extent. Because we are caught up in the mid
dle of such a mystery as participants of it, I believe that it will be very diff
icult if not impossible to answer the metaphorical chicken vs. the egg question.
And, that's just me. I believe that Mystery reigns supreme, and I say this as a
realist, though a unique one at that, I am sure. Cheers.
Likes(0)Dislikes(5)
Jon,
Your Twitter feed, @jonmsweeney, suggests you are a fan/follower of those being
called out here. Mentioning that would help people understand your response. And
that might be the honest thing to do. Yes?
And held the position as editor and chief at Paraclete Press a publishing house
that published emergent authors books, no? I'm sure you are not a stakeholder in
this quietly going away? Just a concerned Christian stopping by.
http://www.paracletepress.com/phyllis-tickle-evangelist-of-the-future.html
Paraclete having published a lot of Tony Jones material, oddly enough.
"Everyone needs to be quiet, go about your own business, and stop 'calling peopl
e out.' When in doubt, don't comment. And if you aren't in doubt, perhaps you sh
ould be."
I'll give you this much, Jon. When you set out to silence and dismiss, you come
straight to the point. What I find strange, however, is the fact that you seem p
erfectly willing to intercede on behalf of your colleague's interests (as well a
s your own), yet fail to disclose those interests. It would perhaps be more accu
rate to call them conflicts of interest, since you fail to be honest about the f
act that you have skin in this game.
I think it would be safe to say the Jon M. Sweeney is simply a representative of

what my late friend, Michael Spencer called the Christian Industrial Complex.
I think it would be safe to say that Jon M. Sweeney is a member of what my fathe
r used to call the Bullshit Brigade.
Oh look, a Christian Man
telling people to shut up so his "community" doesn't
get sullied by the truth. How convincing.
Nice, Jon and Scott. That's exactly what Driscoll's henchmen did to protect his
bad behavior.
Women would be better off living with wild bears than with men like these in lea
dership. There are always people who will defend them.
John M Sweeney tl;dr- What is truth? John 18:38
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Looks like Scott Jones deleted his latest pro-Tony comment. I was directing my c
omment at Scott Jones and not Scott Freeman.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
John Musick September 22, 2014 at 2:52 pm
It's great that people have a place to come and commensurate about their experie
nces. It's vital for one's healing and growth beyond the harm that's come to the
m. It's good to see that there are people who are willing to listen and offer co
mfort to those who are hurting.
However, regardless of how you personally feel about Tony, the blood lust and vo
yeuristic glee that is being demonstrated here in response to Julie's unaccounta
ble torrent is deeply troubling. It's clear from her tone and the frequency of h
er posting that she is hurting and has yet to reconcile the events of her life.
And this is fine. Some of us may never find closure and healing is a process, no
t a destination.
Does it serve her, this community or the subjects of her claims to promote such
an outworking of animus in such a public forum?
Because it's obvious that one must be very clear of their intentions when disagr
eeing on here; I'm not trying to shut anyone down. But come on, really? The onesided angry ex-wife diatribe? This is healthy? Are we so cynical and angry that
we're salivating at the alleged details of a religious leader's divorce? Are we
so driven by our revulsion toward that which caused us so much pain that we're w
illing to accept and applaud such emotional venting without even offering the mo
st elemental grace to the accused? It's obvious that Julie needs people to talk
to. But it's also obvious that she desires to rally people against Tony and atte
mpt to damage his reputation as much as she can. It is also apparent that the de
sire for titillation has overridden any actual desire to see Julie come to grips
with where her life is.
It seems to me that you have a great opportunity to help some people here. But t
his level of mudslinging will help no one.
As much as we may hate to admit it, there are two sides to every story. And as a
personal witness, both are not being represented here.
Let the personal attacks on me begin.

John Musick: well played. You've got all the bases covered. Make it sound as rea
sonable as you can, and make sure anyone who disagrees with you is painted as an
aggressive hater. Good job.
ISTM that, among other things, at least two things are being achieved here:
1. Truths that have previously been buried or suppressed are being aired and hea
rd.
2. Actual reconciliation is happening, viz. forgiveness being offered and receiv
ed.
Regarding Julie McMahon's comments, I don't know her in any way, but it strikes
me that your comment "it's obvious that she desires people to rally against Tony
and attempt to damage his reputation as much as she can" is, to put it mildly,
judgemental bullshit.
josh September 22, 2014 at 3:03 pm
John Music, there are indeed two sides to every story. Tony has told his quite p
ublicly. So why isn't Julie allowed to tell hers?
This is the opposite of a reality tv show approach. Reality tv is heavily script
ed and edited for the vicarious pleasure of viewers. Participants are chosen for
their ability to create controversy while looking attractive. What's happening
here is without script or editing, and Julie is not trying to create controversy
- she's trying to resolve it, and is apparently having some success at that. Pe
ople who call themselves Christians ought to be celebrating, not feeling sad.
Austin September 22, 2014 at 3:09 pm
Years ago, I had a large, sweet, oaf of a dog, who was terrorized by the neighbo
r's cat. The cat would dart out of a hole in the plank fence and swat my dog acr
oss the face, and then stand there, dominant, while my dog cowered.
This went on for some time, whenever I would walk my dog past that house at nigh
t.
Until the fateful night. We didn't know it, but earlier that week the neighbors
had taken the cat to be declawed. The cat darted out and swatted my dog on the f
ace...but nothing happened. In the space of less than a second, the cat looked a
t his paw, looked at my dog, and looked over at me. I swear, SWEAR, I heard the
cat say "OH SHIT" before it tore off for the hole in the fence with my dog on hi
s heels, unafraid. From then on, the cat hastened straightaway for the fence whe
n he saw my dog sauntering along.
So many years later, that encounter brings me joy, as does this whole exchange.
Still Cynical September 22, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Having endured my share of non-apology and half-apology apologies, in my honest
opinion, Mike Morrell has enough qualifications, passive aggressive cattiness, s
elf-pity, and rock-throwing in his apology to terminally taint it.
I'm glad you got something of an apology, Julie, it's better than nothing (and f
rankly you're owed one heck of a lot more than an apology) but it is clear to me
that the guy simply DOES NOT GET IT even at this point and while previously the
re was this thought eating away at the edges of my consciousness that you might
actually be to blame here (and I was being duped by a lunatic yet again), I can
now say with mathematical certitude that you are completely in the right and tru
ly were the one being abused by severely disturbed and toxic people.
So thank you, Mike, for tipping your hand a bit, even in an apology, and showing
me that Julie truly is the innocent one here. So there's some good even in that
.
The thing that Jon and John are just hating, seething and raging against is that
they cannot control this. Unlike in the cultic churches, where people who step
out of line with the leader's vision and dare to tell the truth are destroyed--o
r "thrown under the bus in driscollspeak--here, they are impotent, they try to s
hame, impugn, backhandedly discredit, all while appearing above it all, and yet,
they are paper dragons. They have no power whatsoever.
Jesus told the truth and spoke of things whispered in inner rooms being shouted
from rooftops (truly the social media of His day). What do you say of someone wh
o hates the truth? Are they Christ-like?
Gahh.
"It's great that people have a place to come and commensurate about their experi
ences." Not exactly a promising opening to what I'm guessing you think is a gene
rous and thoughtful post.
(The word you're after is "commiserate.") It's the wrong word, even if you'd got
ten it right! Commiserating would reduce this conversation to the level of a bit
ch-fest . . . and that would be a pretty strange reading of what's actually goin
g on.
Someone was the victim of a smear campaign. Some of the smear-ers weren't even a
ware that they were spreading vicious, harmful lies. The smear-ee has, until now
, had no public venue in which to confront them. She's chosen to use this one. S
ome of them are re-thinking their behavior with respect to her. Why does it have
to be a public venue? Because her private communications with them were met wit
h dismissal or worse.
I find it refreshing to witness the grace and ease with which she forgives those
who see that they were part of perpetrating an injustice. If that looks like gl
ee, okay with me.
Personal Attack on John Musick #1: "It's great that people have a place to come
and commensurate (sic) about their experiences."
Except, it would seem, said greatness depends on whether or not the commiseratio
ns (which, one would assume, is the word you meant to use when you typed "commen
surate") take place in the manner and location you deem fit. Your subsequent sta
tements would indicate as much.
Personal Attack on John Musick #2: "However, regardless of how you personally fe
el about Tony, the blood lust and voyeuristic glee that is being demonstrated he
re in response to Julie's unaccountable torrent is deeply troubling."

Seeing as how Julie has not only maintained the claim throughout this comment th
read that she possesses documentation which she has offered to all for their per
sonal perusal, it's difficult to see how one could reasonably represent her stat
ements here as unaccountable. Offering evidence is actually the opposite of unac
countability. Julie has, in fact, invited you to hold her accountable, and you'r
e doing nothing less than dismissing her entirely.
Personal Attack on John Musick #3: "It's clear from her tone and the frequency o
f her posting that she is hurting and has yet to reconcile the events of her lif
e. And this is fine. Some of us may never find closure and healing is a process,
not a destination."
How is this statement any different from those who "discerned" Julie's supposed
mental illness from a distance? Are you a therapist, John? More importantly, are
you Julie's therapist? Her Father Confessor, perhaps? How exactly does one who
represents himself to be supremely dedicated to accountability, such as yourself
, manage to make these sorts of pronouncements without providing supporting evid
ence?
Additionally, you're participating in a repeat of the process by which Julie's m
ental health was first misrepresented, and she slandered, as a result. You claim
she is still hurting and has failed to reconcile the events she describes, but
she has made the direct statement that she is actually doing quite well. She app
ears to me to be taking responsible and reasonable steps to manage her interacti
ons with a notoriously difficult ex-husband. Perhaps you'd be willing to provide
some support for you claim that this is not, in fact, the case.
Finally, at least regarding this personal attack, what you represent as blood lu
st and voyeuristic glee strikes me as something more akin to a mass catharsis re
garding not just Tony Jones, but also several other leading figures in the Emerg
ent movement. By all accounts except, of course, the accounts of the leading f
igures themselves, and their devotees such a catharsis and calling to account
has been a long time coming. Feel free to disagree, but you'll need to support y
our disagreement with more than your word.
Personal Attack on John Musick #4: "Does it serve her, this community or the sub
jects of her claims to promote such an outworking of animus in such a public for
um?"
For all but the latter group, yes. As for the latter group, it would be hard to
imagine a venue or forum in which any of them would consider any such outworking
of animus to be a desirable thing. Unless you want to come straight out and cal
l Julie a liar (as opposed to simply implying same), she has already attempted t
o deal with these matters directly without success. In fact, it would appear tha
t the more she attempted to see these matters addressed privately, the more she
was slandered publicly. That's a real problem. Wouldn't you agree, John? Further
more, the painfully loud echo of Driscoll's criticism of those who went outside
the system he set up to ensure no one could ever challenge him is abundantly cle
ar to all present. Except, perhaps, for those issuing that call.
Personal Attack on John Musick #5: "Because it's obvious that one must be very c
lear of their intentions when disagreeing on here; I'm not trying to shut anyone
down. But come on, really? The one-sided angry ex-wife diatribe? This is health
y? Are we so cynical and angry that we're salivating at the alleged details of a
religious leader's divorce? Are we so driven by our revulsion toward that which
caused us so much pain that we're willing to accept and applaud such emotional
venting without even offering the most elemental grace to the accused?"
As tends to be the case, you claim not to be attempting to shut down anyone, but
then you proceed to tell us why we need to shut this thing down. One is left wo
ndering what else to call such a maneuver if not attempting to shut down the dis
cussion. Perhaps you can offer a suitable term?
It's also notable that the people who continually pull this discussion back to t
he topic of the divorce itself are the same people who support Tony Jones. Julie
has said a number of times that this is not about the divorce. This is, in poin
t of fact, about holding people who directly and personally wronged her to publi
c account because, as previously mentioned, they have refused to address matte
rs in private. Several others in this thread have also done their best to demons
trate how this about something other than the divorce. You can dismiss those cla
ims if you choose, but you'll need to justify why you've chosen to do so. You ca
nnot simply wave them away and expect to be taken as anything more than an apolo
gist for the misconduct Julie has been calling out here among the leadership of
the Emergent Movement.
As for extending elemental grace (personally, I'm uncertain what "elemental grac
e" actually is, but I suspect it's something like fundamental grace), one is for
ced to wonder why you insist on grace for Tony Jones yet extend none to Julie. Y
es, I'm well aware that you've made noises to that effect, but the condescension
and gaslighting you're engaging in just now give the lie to your expressions of
concern for Julie. How often have you chided Tony Jones for failing to extend g
race to others with whom he profoundly disagrees or finds himself in conflict wi
th? Your call for grace in this instance bears a striking resemblance to Doug Pa
gitt's call for generosity, and both smack of disingenuous concern for the great
er good meant to disguise your attempts to cover your friend's ass.
Personal Attack on John Musick #6: "It's obvious that Julie needs people to talk
to. But it's also obvious that she desires to rally people against Tony and att
empt to damage his reputation as much as she can. It is also apparent that the d
esire for titillation has overridden any actual desire to see Julie come to grip
s with where her life is."
Yet more gaslighting. Also, no small measure of what I can only assume is intent
ional misreading, and most definitely misrepresentation, of Julie, her openly st
ated intentions, and the current state of her personal life. While what Julie ha
s been sharing is very likely to be damaging to Tony's reputation, it's also cle
ar that she's offering evidence in support of the claims she's making. That bein
g the case, and provided her evidence bears scrutiny, then any damage to Tony's
reputation has been wholly self-inflicted. At this point, it would seem most lik
ely that Tony is the greatest danger to his reputation.
Personal Attack on John Musick #7: "It seems to me that you have a great opportu
nity to help some people here. But this level of mudslinging will help no one."
One person's mudslinging is another's truth-telling. Evidence will determine whi
ch characterization is accurate. Which brings us to...
Personal Attack on John Musick #8: "As much as we may hate to admit it, there ar
e two sides to every story. And as a personal witness, both are not being repres
ented here."
As a personal witness, you possess the ability to correct any misrepresentations
you believe to be taking place in this thread. Simply proclaiming yourself to b
e in possession of exculpatory information regarding Tony Jones means nothing. Y
ou've already taken it upon yourself to speak in Tony's defense, albeit with a l
arge dose of condescension toward Julie, but half-measures will not do in cases
such as these.
I strongly suspect you're here, along with Jon Sweeney, as a result of either di
rect or indirect appeals from Tony Jones. That being the case, I would encourage
you either to carry through with your defense by providing verifiable evidence
of your claims which would serve to disprove Julie's evidence or to stop carryin
g water for a man who's unworthy of the effort.
End onslaught of personal attacks.
This is a really long "thought chunk," but I hope it's helpful for processing wh
at seems to be happening on this thread, and why.
SOME POINTS OF BACKGROUND/DISCLOSURE: I have been a student of political sociolo
gy, dynamics of dissent and social change, and organizational development since
the mid-1970s. Since January of 2009, I have been writing a book for non-profits
about dealing with leadership and organizational systems where abuse of power i
s involved. I had already been tracking many potentially relevant situations in
the larger evangelical community for a long time prior to that, including goings
on around Emergent Village and many other
streams
that came out of the
emerging ministry movement
of the mid-1990s to early 2000s.
On June 8, 2014, I published a blog post entitled,
Thoughts on Redemption in
the Wake of Abuse: Agents of Damage versus Agents of Healing.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/thoughts-on-redemption-in-the-wake-o
f-abuse-agents-of-damage-versus-agents-of-healing/
(The comment below will make more sense if you read the Agents of Damage/Healing
post.) There is a section in that post where I introduced an original framework
I developed over the past five years on
10 Pairs of Roles in Systems of Dama
ge versus Healing.
This is the same set of 10 roles that I ve been using to
talk about a
Pyramid of Responsibility
and what level of direct culpabili
ty or indirect complicity people have in toxic systems.
What follows here is an until-now-unpublished companion piece on
Commenders
that I produced around that same time as I published the Agents of Damage/Heal
ing piece (June 2014). I present it here (and will post it on my own blog shortl
y) **without any editorial changes** except that I have removed the Fotolia imag
es that I planned to use. (I note that in part because I used the term "theologi
cal thugs.") I didn t write about Commenders with this current situation in mi
nd, but because I have generally been seeing an increased level of push-back aga
inst them from the spiritual abuse survivor community over the past five years.
I suspect we will see much more to come
Anyway, maybe this material will help readers in expanding their context (or at
least in understanding my opinion) on why the calling out of those who may be co
nsidered Commenders could help bring light and resolution to questions about Eme
rgent Village system toxicity. Many of these questions were raised in blogs at l
east in December 2009 through early 2010. Understandably, the series of comments
here has brought out a lot of heat along with light. However, for what it's wor
th, please consider that because of these questions/comments being deleted, defl
ected, or otherwise unanswered in 2009-2010, the heat now perhaps could ve bee
n prevented by open responses then. But instead, apparently both behind-the-scen
es and on-the-blogs attempts to resolve issues were blocked. So now, it is what
it is.
Okay, and now, here this is. Commenders ...
* * * * * * * * * * * *
Commenders Who Prop Up and Perpetuate an Authoritarian System:

Focusing in on
Commenders
and
Defenders
Within the Perpetrator/Perpetuator system is a super group

COMMENDERS. (They
are the counterfeit opposite of DEFENDERS in the Survivor/Supporter system.) Co
mmender members in this special category invest their own resources and reputati
on to promote the Dictators and to demote, defuse, deter any who would challenge
the presumed rights and reputation of their Dictator colleagues.
Many Commenders have positions in their own agencies or businesses that are part
of an interlocking directory (i.e., professional network) with that of the Dict
ators. So, they are able to offer opportunities (like speaking engagements, publ
ishing contracts, event participation) with positive payoffs in terms of exposur
e, publicity, and finances. This means that, in defending the Dictators, they ar
e also banking their own influence as loyalists to elevate the entire network of
individual and organizations in this negative support system, and not just the
Dictators.
They also shield Dictators from scrutiny, negative publicity, and any other form
of challenge. They use every other tactic in the Perpetrator-Perpetuator system
to reinforce what the Dictators deem as
right
and extinguish all other th
oughts, speech, actions, and identities as
wrong.
They also enable a
fa
lse positive
profile of the Dictators
system by lauding and applauding the
m/it publicly and avoiding the identification or acknowledgement of anything wro
ng.
However, they are not pawns in this. Commenders should know better because of th
eir own position of responsibility and authority. But for whatever combination o
f personal and/or professional reasons, they continue to promote and protect tho
se who perpetrate evil. They twist the truth and act like
theological thugs.
So, when the truth about the Dictators comes out, shouldn t their Commenders d
eserve the same fate as their Dictator friends? After all, they helped perpetuat
e the Dictators
reigns. But as the prophet Isaiah states in the Bible:
Doom to those who call evil good and good evil,
who present darkness as light and light as darkness,
who make bitterness sweet and sweetness bitter.
(Isaiah 5:20, Common English Bible)
The Bible also states:
The sins of some are obvious, reaching the place of judgment ahead of them; the
sins of others trail behind them. In the same way, good deeds are obvious, and e
ven those that are not obvious cannot remain hidden forever. (1 Timothy 5:24-25,
New International Version)
The Dutch philosopher-theologian Erasmus said,
He who allows oppression share
s the crime.
So
if/when the Dictators
deeds become evident that they h
ave engaged in evil and inflicted harm on others
what constitutes appropriat
e consequences for their special Commenders? What options should be considered,
based on the types and degrees of support they gave, and the level of damage tha
t resulted among the victims of their Dictator friends/colleagues?
Public exposure documenting their participation in corruption, and calls
for censure?
Disqualification from public leadership and removal from their position?
Calls for a transparent, public process of accountability through apolog

izing and restitution?
Dissolution and dissembling of their organization?
Whether these Commenders have supported their Dictator friends through their own
blind spots or through blind loyalty, they have given us ample reason to questi
on their critical thinking, discernment, and decision-making skills. They have n
ot proven themselves trustworthy. [ DEFENDERS
SECTION TO BE ADDED]
if Julie's sole purpose is to harm Tony's reputation, is there a blog out there
that she's been hosting for all of these years to continually pump this informat
ion out to the general public? If so, I'd like the link. ;)
In my previous comment, I used the term *interlocking directory* for a professio
nal network involving
Commenders
whose recommendations and actions prop up
others who may be spiritually abusive. So, I thought I d add some more descri
ption about the term and what exactly that network is.
Below is part of a comment I put on a post April 2014 about what could be called
the
Patriarchy Oligarchy,
a cluster of close relationships that supports
the patriarchy movement. At the end of it, I mention the patriarchy movement pot
entially experiencing a melt-down (which I think we've continued to see happenin
g). I hadn't read this comment in a while, but when i did today, it brought to m
ind Acts 5, and what the teacher Gamaliel said concerning the earliest Christian
movement, "Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone!
Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail.
But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only fin
d yourselves fighting against God.
(Acts 5:38-39, NIV, Biblegateway). Not jus
tifying any potentially bad behavior, but just think that Gamaliel's sentiment i
s relevant on this thread. The presence of anger doesn't mean it's automatically
unjust or unrighteous ... and if people go over the line with their anger, they
're responsible for that but it doesn't mean it's all irresponsible.
Anyway, here's the excerpt from that comment.
http://thewartburgwatch.com/2014/04/30/the-duggars-promote-bill-gothard-and-thepearls/#comment-141736
Over 40 years ago, an investigative reporter in my then home town did an amazing
piece of work on the power brokers of our little area of the world. She researc
h[ed] and verified how a very small number of families created an
interlockin
g directory
of relationships through owning major businesses, holding signifi
cant or controlling interests in multiple forms of media (both print and broadca
st), serving on major philanthropical foundations and/or non-profit boards, and
involving themselves in the shaping of local politics. In effect, this group for
med an oligarchy
a gridlock of elites who wielded their clout throughout the
region.
When the report was released through an independent media source, it created qui
te the stir. Those named did what they could to minimize the appearance of their
influence or the depth of their interconnections, but the documentation said wh
at it said nevertheless. And if you simply sketched out a mind-map showing the v
arious realms of influence and the relationships among the people most intimatel
y involved, the clusters that appeared in this connect-the-dots exercise would b
e hard to deny.
And all these years later, I ve not forgotten that tenacious and courageous re
porter s term of
interlock[ing] directory.
I believe that is what we are
uncovering as we see the inner workings of this
authoritarian christian indu
strial complex
of key individuals, families, churches, ministries, agencies,
publishers, conferences, seminaries, denominations, movements. The press (includ
ing
citizen journalists
and survivor blog writers) have been pulling at th
e loose threads here and there, and it looks like the entire muffler may unravel
as different people and organizations attempt to deny the interconnections, or
minimize underlying doctrines that have given shape to their whole gridlock of p
ower. (Such as,
We believe in different gender roles for men and women, but w
e aren t *that* kind of patriarchy! )
It now seems a rather large bunch of loose threads are sticking out, having prim
ed themselves for counter-authoritarian picking and pulling. Mark Driscoll and h
is elders. Sovereign Grace Ministries. Bill Gothard and IBLP. Doug Phillips; Vis
ion Forum, Inc.; and Vision Forum Ministries. And with them, out pop those knitt
ed-in key representatives of this interlocking authoritarian directory of patria
rchy, quiverfull and homeschool movement, etc.
[
Perhaps the
Patriarchy Oligarchy
will experience a much warranted melt-dow
n as it gets more exposed to the light
Hi John Musick:
Thanks for visiting my blog and specifically this post and making a comment.
Rather than take you on point by point, I decided I'd rather address the thrust
of your comment.
Is it really mudslinging if the accusations are true? As Anne Lamott has written
,
You own everything that happened to you. Tell your stories. If people wante
d you to write warmly about them, they should have behaved better.
We've all heard the authorized side. Now we're hearing the unauthorized side. On
the one hand it looks like the silenced are finally finding a safe place to pro
tect their dignity, while on the other hand it appears there are some who are st
ill trying to find a place to protect their reputations.
I understand how messy this is. Uncomfortable. Chaotic. Angry. Conflicting. But
I'm convinced through experience and observation that this can be creative.
If you take some time to read through the comments, you will actually read apolo
gies and forgiveness. And it won't end here. I expect more to come.
Isn't this the good fruit that rises out of the mud you wish we would conceal?
john my susick September 22, 2014 at 6:58 pm
Ironically, it seems like you've created your own culture here where motives are
cynically questioned, honest questioning is dismissed and anything that is cont
rarily spoken against the actions and behavior of the group is mercilessly met w
ith derision.
Congratulations, you've become the very thing you rally against.
Truly, hurt people, hurt people.

I take it you don't take criticism well, John.
What's the question? I'll answer anything openly and honestly? Go....
Would I be out of line here to suggest that the structures of belief each one of
us has assimilated into our very beings play a significant role in how we inter
pret all that is going on here? I'm not attempting in the least to diminish all
that has gone on in this thread in the least, but each of us speaks (and feels)
strongly from a certain perspective which each of us has assimilated over time f
or multitudinous reasons. I realize there is more than this going on, but I beli
eve this to be relevant to the situation at hand and the OP, no less.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
I'm sure John Musick just stopped by of his own accord....
john musick
Radio Personality at Doug Pagitt Radio Show
Did what I just said come across as superfluous? Just curious. Practically every
time I bring up anything having to do with psychological and sociological devel
opment, I get blown off. Also, I'm aware that my communication skills over the i
nternet aren't always the best, too. Can anyone relate with what I'm getting at
here?
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
The irony, I would suggest, is in the fact that after denigrating Julie's accoun
t as being unsupported and specious, John Musick (My Susick?), you have failed t
o offer any support for your own claims. Furthermore, while not technically iron
ic, it is rather amusing to me, whenever one such as yourself decides to indulge
a bit of gaslighting and ends up getting called on it, how quickly you assume a
n aggrieved posture. I mean, all you wanted to do was come in, offer several ter
ribly unflattering insinuations about everyone who has been commenting negativel
y regarding Tony Jones (most especially Julie), disguise them as high-minded con
cern for truth and justice, and get out no worse for wear. What about that do we
not understand, am I right? We're such terrible people for not acquiescing to y
our superior knowledge, wisdom, and judgement without issuing a demand for evide
nce in support of your claims. How dare we be incredulous toward you?
Seriously, John, I don't know what you're accustomed to encountering when you st
ep into a conversation and tell people who have no reason to trust you that they
're all wrong, but they'll just have to take your word on it. What's abundantly
clear is that you did not receive the response you believe you are owed. Your in
dignation, in my view at least, is a bonus. I don't go through life trying never
to upset people. I go through life trying always to upset the right people. So
far, you're looking suspiciously as though you belong in the latter group.
I'll see if I can state things plainly enough to get through your thick shell of
smugness: Evidence, please.
Lost September 22, 2014 at 7:43 pm
@Scott Jones
Why would anyone want to put their personal contact info out? I, for one, do not
want my abusers to find me and harass me. I have had enough of that. I moved, c
hanged my phone, changed jobs, changed schools for my kids. More peaceful now. M
y only torment now is the by-product of my own thinking.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
I hope you don't feel brushed off here Chris Hill. I think it IS important to re
member we are all approaching this and expressing ourselves from our own perspec
tives. What is refreshing about this conversation is that the voiceless are spea
king loud and clear, and it seems to be upsetting to those who've had the microp
hone up to now.
Chris you make sense. John Musick is divorced so maybe his "angry wife diatribe"
was projection? Yes we all bring our own stuff to the conversation, absolutely.
I bring my wiring for justice and for wrongs to be righted especially if we cla
im to be representatives of God. This has NOTHING to do with divorce and everyth
ing to do with the original topic of the post. Thugs and theology....I offered I
think it's "Pathology before Theology." I experienced first hand spiritual abus
e cleverly orchestrated by a diagnosed narcissist. I asked for a public apology
for my name and mental health being tarnished. John Musick also works at Doug Pa
gitt Radio, so it makes perfect sense he would try and discredit me. I am VERY u
sed to this carbon copy campaign.
Completely agree, David. It's just that there is usually more to than what meets
the eye is all, and seldom are that many people interested in what I'm getting
at (it's more abstract and less to the point), especially in the "heat of the mo
ment." :)
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
The irony that Musick can't face it.
Doesn't want to face it.
Doug won't face it.
I'd have so many crude words to say for the coward but I think he'd just think A
LL of them as personal attacks and he'd act as if he's being martyred.
Can a hyperfanatical Christian be diagnosed with NPD?
Chris, I honestly kept thinking you were trying to distract from the very real h
ealing and conversation that was happening here by throwing in your theoretical
and abstract musings.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
I am also struck, catching up on the comments, on how similar all the arguments
of the supporters of Tony are on this thread:
1. They keep reducing this discussion to being about a 'divorce' (thereby a priv
ate matter that should be discussed privately)
2. They keep insisting there are two sides of the story, and we must be sure to
hold judgement until we hear both sides (but refuse to offer the other side)
3. They shame the participants of this discussion by likening them to rubberneck

ing motorists (my analogy)
4. They refuse to engage with Julie directly, and instead speak to the group as
a whole (attempting to quietly push her back into the dark corner they have bull
ied her into for years)
5. They use Reasonable Language and the Calm Tone of what I would guess a self-i
mportant psychologist might use when imparting his/her Wisdom on the poor mental
ly imbalanced patient
6. They ask us to all go away and be quiet please because our discussion here is
Hurting a Man of God (barf)
Since that's what you think, Danica, and three others seem to agree with you, I'
ll leave the conversation. I'll remove my comments as well, including the one wh
ere stupid me risked being vulnerable myself. I hope all works out for you Julie
. <3
@Chris Hill ... I re-read your comment about belief structures and think I get w
hat you're saying. One of the things I do in my research writing is to analyze w
hat to me seems even deeper than just the beliefs to the underlying epistemologi
es that support very specific ways that individuals (and sometimes, entire cultu
res) process *all* incoming information. It's sort of the glue we use that puts
everything together. (Part of my formal training is in linguistics, and i focuse
d on cross-cultural communications. So, it's intriguing to me how Christians, fo
r instance, from different first language groups can *seem* to have the same bel
ief structures, but still end up with lots of different cultural conflicts. How
can that happen if we have the same beliefs? Something else must be going on.
And i write about paradigm analysis, and gestalt of context, and how transformat
ion is a process of fill in gaps and filing off excesses, and about patterns and
possibilities, and other stuff that is sooo abstract that it doesn't always con
nect with a lot of people. Seems too ethereal for many. However, that doesn't me
an it doesn't exist or isn't important. It's just that it's hard to communicate
some of these notions in language that's understandable. So, as it turns out, mu
ch of what I end up doing is using metaphors, analogies, word pictures -- like c
omparing "epistemology" (who even knows what that is besides philosophers?) (and
actually, do all of them get it?) oops. went all random for a moment. Like comp
aring "epistemology" to glue that holds info-bits into pictures we can understan
d. Metaphors and the like put abstract concepts together with concrete objects o
r images, so that often seems to help bridge the gap between people with opposit
e learning styles and communication styles. There's usually something in a metap
hor that people from any info processing style background can find at least some
common ground with.
Anyway, there's that, for what it's worth. Hope you won't feel chased off for sh
aring your thoughts, Chris. People may not realize that for those who process in
formation abstractly (and research shows that we all do to some degree), sharing
the abstract stuff we think about truly is an aspect of our being vulnerable. A
nd there are all kinds of abstractions that influence us every day. Emotions are
abstract. So are thoughts, and strategies, and patterns in data sets, and conce
ptual mathematics, and ... yadda-yadda. Can't see them, touch them, hold them. B
ut there they are anyway, known by their outworkings. So, sharing our experience
s of what we're abstracting thinking show where our passion in life is, and it's
just as much a part of how we were uniquely designed by God as is the ways peop
le who aren't like us process info how they're "wired" to.
But at any rate, hope what i said made sense, and if i reeeally didn't get it th
ough I thought I did, you'll let me know.
Brad
Tim September 23, 2014 at 7:32 am
David, thanks for providing an independent space where honesty is genuinely welc
ome. (Whatever the impact on those in power.)
What we all need now is a way to scroll to the latest comments quickly!
haha. it is long. and thanks. (fastest for me when i put my cursor on the blue b
utton on the side and pull it down. takes 2 secs.)
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Ah, I have an iPad - no scroll bars!
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
wish i had an ipad :(
Likes(6)Dislikes(2)
Jenell Paris September 23, 2014 at 8:58 am
I come in peace. I am a former member of Solomon s Porch (I moved out of state
in 2007). I am an anthropology professor, wife, and mother. I was raised in a c
hurch pastored by a pedophile (Al Magnuson, Redeemer Covenant Church, Brooklyn P
ark, MN. I have experienced spiritual abuse.
Solomon s Porch was a haven, a rescue, and a healing balm during difficult yea
rs. The dreams of the church continue to be my dreams, and my friends there, inc
luding Doug, are still my friends. I spoke on Doug s radio show, promoted my b
ook by speaking at Christianity 21, and so on. I am not an emergent figure, but
I benefited by association.
I have met Julie only briefly (in person), and have never interacted with her ch
ildren. I have interacted with Tony several times, but not socially or extensive
ly. I was not present for any of the incidents described by her or anyone else,
but I did follow things on-line.
This comment thread makes me sob. No voyeuristic glee; only heart-rending pain a
t my repeated role of by-stander, and at times victim, in religiously abusive si
tuations. I am speaking up to satisfy my conscience.
I saw Julie s reputation smeared, and her attempts to speak silenced. At Chris
tianity 21, an emergent insider told me that the evening was very difficult for
Tony and Courtney, because they were coming out as a couple, and the expectation
was that people be kind to them. When I questioned,
What happened to Tony an
d Julie? , the answer was that regardless of the
official
divorce, their
marriage had ended long ago, so Tony was free to be with Courtney. The marriage
ended, so I heard, because Julie was destructive and mentally ill. It didn t
add up
why is the crazy person doing all the child care? You try caring for
three little kids even just for the duration of a C21 conference if Julie real
ly was that crazy, people should have been intervening on behalf of the children
at that very moment, not standing around drinking wine and talking shit about h
er.
(Side note: so what if she, or anyone else, is, in fact, mentally ill? I interac
t regularly with people who have autism, OCD, bipolar, anxiety, depression, and
so on. Every single one takes responsibility for their behavior, and is capable
of accurately describing abuse. Even a psychotic person in a psych ward can spea
k up and say they are being abused, and their claims will be investigated. Ameri
can law doesn t allow us to write off someone s testimony because of their m
ental health.)
I wrote a single sentence on Tony s blog several years ago, something like,
People are asking all over the Internet about your divorce and family s wellbeing. I think you should answer these questions.
He removed my post within minutes, and emailed me vitrol, calling me a gossip an
d saying I was the only person in the world who questioned the beauty of his new
marriage (I hadn t done that). If memory serves, I believe he also called me
bulimic. He wondered about my excessive and negative interest in his personal li
fe, and I pointed out that reports of his bad behavior keeps showing up in my em
ail inbox. I do not go looking for it
it is so public that it comes to me. H
is tone escalated and I decided to stop interacting with him altogether, which I
have. I deleted the posts because they were emanating such bad chi, so I am rec
onstructing this from memory. He is welcome to post those emails and my blog com
ment.
This situation calls for investigation by a group of mature believers. Try a cle
rgy abuse organization
that s what they do. Try the Evangelical Covenant C
hurch
they helped start Solomon s Porch. Try asking the United Methodist C
hurch or other denominations that have structures in place for this kind of thin
g. I will help do this.
I was once falsely accused, in public, with great potential consequence to my li
fe and livelihood. It was awful. The matter was taken before a group of qualifie
d, mature people who reviewed the evidence and exonerated me. It is possible to
investigate the past, and the truth of events, in a responsible way.
If anyone sends me bullshit in an email, I will post it here with their name. If
anyone replies or asks me questions here, it will take me some time to reply
please be gracious about my slowness. If you email me something sincere, I wil
l reply, but not quickly. I have a full-time off-line life, including teaching a
ll day today...starting now.
@Brad, thanks for your input, I much appreciate it. I've had this problem my who
le life (saying the wrong thing at the wrong time and in the wrong way). I reall
y struggle with how people assume they know my intent for commenting the way I d
o. I do much better with people face to face rather than on-line. I had noticed
that a couple of people had commented earlier regarding the OP, so that's what I
did, as well as posting something personal having to do with the change of topi
c to participate in the conversation and, hopefully, help with the healing going
on here in some way. It hurts for people to assume otherwise when I know that i
n my own heart I care deeply about this situation. It's the same basic reason (t
hough public in my hometown only) that I ultimately left church, and Christianit
y altogether (people assuming the worst about me). I'm hesitant even to post thi
s right now for fear that others will think I'm somehow making this about me, ag
ain (which was not my intent in the first place). It's very difficult for me to
navigate this kind of terrain. Anyways, thanks again.
Chris.
Jenell,
Thank you for the strength and courage to write this.
@Chris ... My thinking processes are so far out of the norm (just really differe
nt - not better, not worse) that there have been points where connecting seems r
eally hard. Easier to do in person, much harder to do in writing. There's a maxi
m that when the meaning of our words themselves are ambiguous, only 40% of the m
eaning comes from the words, and the other 60% of understanding is conveyed by t
one of voice, facial expressions, and overall body language. Which makes online
writing incredibly difficult on some topics to try to make ourselves understood
because it's hard to figure out how to compensate for tone and all that other st
uff.
But it's these very differences in how God designed us that can actually give us
something unique to contribute to help us work better as teams. Our dominant mo
des of perceptions fill in what others have blind spots to, and vice versa. Too
bad that we so often end up in conflict over the differences and let them drive
us apart, when seems like they were meant for bridge-building toward community.
What seem at the moment to be nothing but random interruptions in the conversati
on could turn out to be the key to dealing with some problem - if we'd only take
time to ask (and then listen) to why that came to mind, what stream of thinking
points came together to connect the conversation to that point. And then maybe
the secret for those of us who are more abstract is in those specific details th
at were our stepping stones to the point we were trying to make. Could turn out
to be a real eye-opener, when too often we get eye rolls instead ...
Anyway, there are a couple of articles I wrote about this in case you're interes
ted. The first one's on learning styles, and the second is on how we can build t
ransformational teams based on our differences which are also our strengths:
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/tutorial-11/
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/tutorial-12/
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Hi Chris. Thanks for coming back and explaining yourself. I honestly had assumed
what I wrote before, and since you had asked how your comments were being perce
ived, I just wanted to give you my honest opinion (I wouldn't have commented oth
erwise). Can we start over? Hi, I'm Danica.
And Jenell - I think your comment has to be one of my favorite in the entire (no
w 400 +) thread. I love it because of your honesty, and I love it because I thin
k it echoes what a lot of people experience in churches when they suspect abuse,
but don't say anything -the ignoring of the intuitions, the pull of 'belonging'
to the greater group, the shame associated with telling, the pain when they *do
* tell and then are immediately ostracized (so painful, when I'm guessing you th
ought you 'belonged' at the table, and were only participating as you thought yo
u had right to? This too has happened to me.)
All the love to you.
I also want to say how encouraged I am by the healing going on here. It is proof
against every detractor of the post, who have all said that this is NOT doing a
nything good for the Kingdom, and it is only causing harm so shut up already ...
actually ... scratch that. It is proof against EVERY detractor of EVERY convers
ation revealing abuse and hurt and pain. This conversation we can look to next t
ime we are tempted to be silent in the face of abuse (because sadly it'll happen
again)
Jenell Paris,
Thank you for being a person of integrity who calls things out when they don't s
eem right. Isn't that what we are supposed to do? That's the only spirituality o
r faith I want to be associated with. Thank you and I know your voice represents
countless others who won't speak up for fear of the thugolgy backlash, lost Chr
istianity 21 speaking engagement, lost book deal. You described instantaneous de
leting of comments...when you did call things into question. You spoke up anyway
! Thank you. I really appreciate you validating my true and accurate and verifia
ble account of my experience with spiritual abuse caused by the Emergent leaders
and their followers.
It's all coming to light, as it should have been all those years ago.
Sincerely,
Julie
Thank you, Jenell and others, for the many constructive comments about destigmat
izing people who contend with mental illness. This has been such a taboo subject
in the Church ... and hopefully a time is coming when it won't be about "puttin
g up with" people, but rather "persevering with" people on our journeys, regardl
ess of where any of us start from or hardships we face along the way.
Chris September 23, 2014 at 10:59 am
@Danica
Hi, I'm Chris. :)
Brother Maynard September 23, 2014 at 11:26 am
@Jenelle Standing. Applause.
Wow. Thank you.
Sonja Andrews September 23, 2014 at 12:02 pm
@Jenelle ... thank you for that honest and heart-wrenching account. I also want
to thank you for the disclaimer about people with mental illness (I have struggl
ed with depression and panic disorder for years). Whether or not someone struggl
es with mental illness does not necessarily make their testimony false. We now k
now that Julie is not crazy, but gaslighting her using that strategy was damagin
g and abusive in and of itself.
Dan Brennan September 23, 2014 at 12:04 pm
Wow. Still following the comments. It's like everyday there is a new comment(s)
that blows me away. Now I'm blown away by Jenell's comment.
@Julie: "thugology" wins the internet for the day. Here's a working definition f
or this useful new word.
thugology (n) a world view grounded in the personality of a bully, especially on
e that pretends to be concerned with matters of theology
Kate, I cannot take credit for coining the new and so, so appropriate word, "thu
gology" but I will be sure to use it! Next to your perfect definition, I have tw
o head shots that would work accurately as prime examples. I did not make "thugo
logy" up, it was one of the other 435 caring, intelligent, aware, loving and una
fraid people of this Holy thread. I guess we had something to say?! (Understatem
ent). And, David Hayward courageously refusing to back down when the back channe
ls flooded him with private emails to STOP!!!! DELETE. DELETE. The truth is gett
ing out and we can not contain it!!! So, lawyers were contacted...but the truth
keeps coming. Yes, this is the work of the Holy Spirit. She will have her way. W
here did Doug go? Tony? John Musick? Jon Sweeney? Crickets? Ya got nothin'? Noth
ing at all you would like to add here? I think an apology would be appropriate r
ight about now. That is if you are capable. Some people simply can not, and that
is kinda pathetic and sad.
@David Hayward- really? Floods of private emails? Have you been threatened with
legal if you don't delete? Gross. And cowardly.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Tim September 23, 2014 at 2:02 pm
Jenell, I love these two sentences:
"American law doesn t allow us to write off someone s testimony because of t
heir mental health."
"If anyone sends me bullshit in an email, I will post it here with their name."
There is far too little of this attitude in the world - and far too much suppres
sed. Thank you for speaking out.
Annie, we're fortunate that nakedpastor isn't part of an overarching organisatio
n, syndicate, or network.
That would just be another level to push to delete content.
David, Re: scrolling on my iPad - I ended up signing up for email notification o
f new comments. Works like a charm in my inbox!
(Or I could save a link to one of the later posts and use that - for those whose
fingers are getting tired, the links are in the post date/time.)
Dan Bremnan September 23, 2014 at 2:04 pm
I continue to be astonished by the progressive nature of the
sorry for what you've had to experience. I've had more than
th progressive women who are sad but glad this is coming out
I was profoundly moved today by Jenell's comment. The hunger
comments. Julie, so
one conversation wi
into the light.
for relational trut
h and justice is so powerful.

Andrew Jones September 23, 2014 at 4:06 pm
Julie, you were very gracious to forgive me a few months ago. As you know,I was
told you were crazy, vindictive and lawsuit-happy. I believed it initially but a
s I observed your behaviour over the years I came to the conclusion that I had b
een misinformed and misled, along with many others like me, with tragic conseque
nces. I am glad your story is finding a place to finally land and be heard. I ha
ve asked Tony for his story but am still waiting.
Susan J September 23, 2014 at 4:42 pm
I am thankful for this comment thread. I started reading here daily about two we
eks ago. There has been much to ponder, reflect on, pray about. and to remember.
I have been noticing good changes with me as I go about my daily life. There ar
e other sources of encouragement and challenge in my life, but I know that what
I have gained here has been substantial. In God's providence, I am noticing a me
asure of hope and of joy in my life. These are not rooted in conforming to man's
expectations. I am asking more questions out loud and am more apt to speak trut
h when I notice burdens being placed upon people - in the name of "serving God".
Yes Annie, many of the "leaders" connected with emergent at some time or another
have corresponded with me privately to express their distressed over this post
and its comments, advising me to step in, manage, censor, edit, block, remove, e
tc...
David, I think your management of this comment thread has been exemplary and out
standing. Too bad the emergent folks don't agree with me.
Well, Julie (& David), it would appear that this post has hit a nerve. People do
n't try and suppress something, and hide the fact that they're trying, unless it
's serious
and shameful. (And it doesn't work - anyone ever heard of the Stre
isand effect?)
All this attempted "image management" shows a pretty comprehensive awareness of
the issues raised here. (And, giving full credit to the experiences of the victi
m, consciousness of guilt for past actions.)
I can't imagine how anyone reading this thread could miss Julie's requests for a
n apology. Even if they've only read parts of the thread, it's been repeated sev
eral times.
It's a simple, genuine request, from someone who could demand a lot more. Some w
ho were involved have come and apologised in response.
Many of those who have demanded control the conversation in the past, can't stop
attempting to do the same here. Power and control can be quite seductive, and v
ery difficult to give up. But now, despite their efforts, the story is public.
I wonder if there will be a public ("official"?) response.
I genuinely hope it's an apology. Even if it is costly, it's the least anyone co
uld do to make things right.
I was a grunt in the Christian machine that supported this behaviour. I read the
books and blogs, and didn't ask enough critical questions. And when those aroun
d me did ask questions, I ignored them.
I feel awful for supporting systems that allow people to be victimised in silenc
e. I hate that my money, time, and energy went to support the power of the oppre
ssors. It's just not right.
I am honoured to be able to see this particular situation put right by Julie sha
ring the truth publicly. I'm hopeful that she will continue to receive apologies
. As someone once said: "the truth will set you free".
Mike Scolare September 23, 2014 at 6:41 pm
@David Hayward, is there any chance you could post some of those emails, message
s, etc., so we can be educated in how this works behind the scenes. I'm not inte
rested in names, I'm curious as to methodology. Is it all legal threats? Is it g
ood ol' boy network back scratching? I'm accustomed to whispering campaigns in c
hurch among people who know each other, not out in the worldwide webs attempting
to manipulate someone else' publishing. #naive #IKR
Chris September 23, 2014 at 6:42 pm
Way to go, David... staying true to yourself! If you would have caved (and I nev
er thought you were going to do so), I still would still have accepted you as yo
u are, always holding out for what you would still become. Lol, the story of my
own life, as one who spends a lot of time in self-examination. Nothing' but love
here for you, and this thread, and for Julie.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
For those who are interested, this post is now #5 when I search for "Tony Jones"
(your ranking may vary)
https://www.google.com.au/?q=tony+jones
Mike, you can read some of the background and tone in Tony's original post at ht
tp://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2014/09/04/some-thoughts-about-mark-driscol
l/ (Tony's blog entry prompted David's cartoon at the top of this post):
"Probably what was most disconcerting to those Baby Boomer pastors was that many
of my peers, Mark included, were the heirs apparent to their megachurch kingdom
s. But most of them have spurned that. Brian McLaren, Doug Pagitt, Chris Seay, D
anielle Shroyer, Brad Cecil
each of them pastored or pastors a small or midsized church. Of the original emergent group, only Mark went on to megachurch su
perstardom."
[I'm sure I've seen some of those names in this thread - no wonder they want to
control their image as pastors.]
"Sure, Mark had personality traits that all of us saw even in 1998 that would le
ad him eventually to a very reified and right wing theology. He was also brillia
nt, hilarious, and an egomaniac. He loved the spotlight and hogged the mic. But
he wasn t evil. He was passionate. We all were.
But somewhere it spun out of control."
Indeed.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Meg N September 23, 2014 at 6:59 pm
Wow I used to read a little of TJ's blog after being away from anything related
to the church for a long time. I remember him having a little rant about his ex,
sharing his side of the story. I am glad Julie you have had a safe place to tel
l yours. This has been amazing to read. If the mother of his children was indeed
so troubled, surely the man of Gods response is to help her. The men of God' s
response would be to surround her in love. The spiritual wife stuff ....makes me
want to throw up. I bought a book of TJ s in the forward is a glowing tribute t
o Julie. I wonder if the onset of the "mental illness" coincided with the new re
lationship with the spiritual wife. Anyway this triggered so many feelings and m
emories for me. Julie I can't imagine how painfull this has been for you. Thank
you David for providing a safe place for the less "powerful"
I will not give names. But essentially it's the same script:
1. Is a blog as the best forum for the publication of such information?
2. The leaders being challenged, even though they may have faults, are great peo
ple.
3. There are two sides to every story.
4. This is too nasty.
5. What about the children?
6. Cautioning me with suggestions of legal action.
7. Questioning my ability to moderate.
My
1.
2.
s?
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
to
response is pretty consistently the same:

The silenced will use any means that makes itself available to them.
Are we more interested in the truth or in ministries, character or reputation
True, but only one side has been heard so far.
Confessions and disclosures are messy.
Julie apparently has custody and she's okay with this.
I have said nothing to defame anyone.
I've never censored comments. My passion is providing safe spaces for people
exercise their voices.
The truth is, I consider myself in relationship with everyone. Including those w
ho have written me personally. I would still consider them my brothers and siste
rs. I am not taking sides of any person, but I am hopefully taking the side of t
he enlightening of truth. I've simply provided a space. It's not that I'm wiping
my hands clean of responsibility. It's that I would not prohibit anyone from co
mmenting here in their own way. I love the good fruit that is coming out of this
, and I'm confident we'll see more.
Naum September 23, 2014 at 8:15 pm
@David, /applause for offering up the online space for this, truly, the *power o
f the blog*. I used to run a semi-popular forum back in the early pioneer days s
o I kind of know the pressure being exerted on you to delete, moderate, etc.
I must say, there are always at least 3 sides to a story, but I must confess, I
find Tony Jones (and Doug Pagitt and others that "circled the wagons") behavior
to be very non-just, cowardly and a model of un-Jesus-dojo. I don't think Julie
is asking much, for an apology, but I think Tony needs to come clean -- his deed
s in this are reprehensible. And ducking behind private emails and lawyers and "
view the public court record" is bunk.
I (and family) entertained some interest in C21 conference, coming to AZ in a fe

w months, but after reading this, I don't believe we'll be heading to that event
. Divorce can be messy, but the stunts that Tony and his inner circle pulled go
beyond that brokenness. I'd have much more respect for him if he just said "I di
d wrong. I'm sorry. I failed at this." But I don't get that -- I just see him ea
gerly just snuffing out any information or just sweeping it under the rug. I kno
w it sucks to have dirty laundry aired, but this looks like more that airing of
dirty laundry -- if Julie is correct (and I realize I'm hearing her side in this
thread), denigrating your partner to give you an out, and maintain your state o
f paragon exemplar in ministry strikes me as a sinister act.
Sarah Cunningham who ran to defend early on in this thread just happens to be sp
eaking at the upcoming Christianity 21 conference, but I am sure her defense is
unrelated. http://c21.thejopagroup.com/speaker-lineup/40/ Sad to see Glennon Mel
ton author of Carry On, Warrior and Momastary blog speaking there...she has NO i
dea!
@David,
Thanks for summarizing the back-channel campaign against the thread. It's always
the same... your summary now is very much like what some of us experienced in 2
009-10 and this was all so fresh.
1. Calling a website a blog is not a derogatory term. A blog with a community of
discussion like this is an excellent place to bring this out since it's easy fo
r many voices to weigh in, rather than just those specially chosen to give their
view. The suggested alternative is ignoring it altogether, which is unjust.
2. If they're such great people, they'll be fine with a little critique, and be
open to learn from it even when it's difficult to hear. That's what great people
do.
3. There are at least 2 sides to every story. Tony dropped by and commented alre
ady, and is fully welcome to tell his side right here alongside Julie's. His dec
ision not to do that does not provide justification to silence Julie when she's
decided to tell her side. In fact, a refusal to put his side into the same conte
xts leads one to believe it won't stand up to scrutiny.
4. The private vitriol I received was worse than anything that's been said here
publicly. Saying it privately doesn't mean it's not nasty. (Not sure if you rece
ived the same level, but I know others who have.)
5. What about the children, indeed? Tony's actions seem to show more disregard t
han anything here.
6. Legal action keeps being threatened, but I've yet to receive my summons. As l
itigious as American society has become, a decent lawyer can still spot a case w
ith no merit and advise a client accordingly.
7. Moderation is not the same as censorship. The back-channel campaign is saying
"moderation" but demanding censorship.
The main thing in this context is for those who have wronged Julie by supporting
/enabling Tony's crazy-campaign to apologize for those actions, removing that su
pport... even in retrospect, it's something. The child support issue really both
ers me though. That more than anything, I think, says something about Tony's cha
racter. And here he's apparently got funds to spend on lawyers to go around suin
g bloggers but can't offer anything to support his kids? Don't malign him or he
won't be able to support the kids? Sounds more like the issue is with his wilful
attempts to control of the situation by withholding finances. What about the ch
ildren, indeed?
----------
Oh, and by the way... we were talking way back in this thread about the spiritua
l wife horsesh!t, and I finally grasped what that means.
When you go to Doug Pagitt and tell him "Hey, my marriage really sucks and I fee
l like it's been over for a while now but it's really not my fault because I'm a
good guy but what can I do because I have this person attached to me as my lega
l wife but I think she's crazy and it'll never be like we're really married but
you know, that's not so bad because there's this other person who I feel like sh
ould be my wife but can't be because I have this other legal wife and she's also
married to someone else, but never mind that, I just feel like I should have a
different, I don't know, a spiritual wife like God would want rather than this c
razy legal wife like I have, so there should be two kind of wife I think." And t
hen Doug says, "Gee, that sucks. I think you're right, you should have the happi
ness of a different kind of marriage, a... a spiritual marriage to a spiritual w
ife. Because of course you should be happy. And I think this whole legal/spiritu
al wife thing is such a good idea I want you to keep on being the theologian-inresidence at my church, and I'll help you convince other people that your legal
wife is crazy so you should have a spiritual wife instead."
So that's how you get two kinds of wives, and that's how we understand that "spi
ritual wife" = "on second thought, the wife you'd rather have".
Holly Roach September 23, 2014 at 9:31 pm
David I love what you do and appreciate the space that you have created for woun
ds to be aired. It's sad to see the space co-opted for the continuation of perso
nal vendettas though. When I see people airing the same wounds repeatedly for ye
ars, it makes me wonder if they really want healing? When I write critically abo
ut the emerging church, the same folks jump on board to make a case for their wo
undedness. At some point one has to do the work to heal and move on. I don't thi
nk the founders of Emergent claim us anymore. So why do we claim them? Maybe we
can take some collective ownership of this thing and be a movement full of leade
rs rather than a few leaders with a bunch of victims. I understand people are hu
rt, but let's heal and evolve, transcend and include.
For those who enjoy a little back-story, you can read Tony Jones on Two Marriage
s at http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/tag/two-marriages/.
And you can ever get Tony's eBook for $0.99: There Are Two Marriages: A Manifest
o on Marriage (stripped of affiliate tags from his site, of course).
But the free Amazon preview gives a pretty good summary:
"
having gone through a divorce, I can tell you that extricating oneself from
the legal contract that is marriage in our society is no mean feat."
"Were we to separate legal and sacramental marriage, it would solve all sorts of
problems, not the least of which is the growing discomfort that many of us have
that legal marriage is available only to some responsible adults who are in mon
ogamous relationships."
At this point, I wonder about Tony's dual motivations in writing this: not just
for the LGBT community, but also in his own situation of having both a spiritual
and legal wife at one stage. I'd hate there to be any risk of the perception th
at the LGBT community was being used as a front for a religious adulterous strai
ght person's agenda. That would be truly offensive.
Holly, you are on a leadership board with Steve Knight who busily and at the dir
ective of Doug Pagitt cleaned up the Emergent Village website and deleted commen
ts and the board bio page where Courtney Perry's bio detailed her married to ano
ther man. I wish this space took attachments...it would really cut to the chase.
So, I am sorry but your "concern trolling" is in question here. As well as some
other Emergentesque people. http://www.transformnetwork.org/about/leadership
Holly, I won't presume to speak for Julie, as she has shown herself to be a far
better communicator than I. She is also quite good at finding the public power c
onnections between those who drop in on this discussion. (Privilege warning!)
But as far as I understand from reading the whole thread:
1. Previous attempts to have an open and honest discussion have been shut down u
sing scare tactics against various bloggers. Despite this desire to end discussi
on, one side of the story has been presented by Tony Jones, Doug Pagitt, Daniell
e Shroyer, Mike King, Brian McLaren, Brad Cecil and perhaps others. (Many of who
m are pastors with positions of power, livelihoods, and income to protect. Privi
lege warning!)
2. Julie appreciates having a space to be heard. (Is this the first time you've
felt heard, Julie?)
3. Julie has simply and repeatedly asked for an apology.
4. Some people involved have offered an apology.
5. This is an ongoing process.
In this context, please don't push anyone to move on. It's premature, and you ri
sk looking like those in point 1 who act to suppress discussion. And I note from
Julie's latest post that you also have a strong board, ministry and community a
ssociation to those involved in the whitewash.
Do you feel a strong need to protect position, income, or reputation? Of yoursel
f or close associates?
How sad. And how privileged.
@Tim It bears repeating - in even the most sex positive communities, the notion
of a spiritual and a legal wife is bogus. Rather, one has loving partners based
on mutual respect and consent. Otherwise, it's considered cheating. (And yes, on
e can cheat in an open relationship by not being truthful in one's actions.) As
I'm an LGBT ally, I will leave it up to those in the LGBT community to offer the
ir perceptions of how Tony has used the community over the years to advance his
own agenda.
@David what you describe is a similar pattern that I've observed for how both Ma
rs Hill and US emergent leaders deal with criticism. Dismiss any negative commen
tary in public by proclaiming "let's all be Christlike" or the "We're being pers
ecuted for being pioneers" card while going gonzo behind the scenes. As long as
their respective fan bases buy into their missional buzz, they only see the char
ismatic Mr. Hyde. Hence, they cannot believe there is also the narcissistic coun
terpart Mr. Hyde lurking behind the scene.
@Andrew thank you for your public apology to Julie. I know it's difficult for an
yone connected to Mars Hill and US emergent as you are to take such a stance. So
my heart goes out to you here. My hope is others will follow suit. And I get wh
y you would think those demonized by the US emergent boys might be "batshit" bec
ause the natural response of someone who has been subjected prolonged gaslightin
g by a skilled person with NPD and signs of sociopathic tendencies is to go ball
istic and behave in manners that can make one scratch their head. However, once
they are in a healthier space, they can begin to heal though unfortunately by th
at point, too many within the abusive circle still regard them as "batshit." (In
fact, one of my major objections to these boys calling their critics "mentally
ill" is that it demonizes those who truly have a mental illness by dismissing th
em as "batshit" instead of seeing them as having an issue that like say diabetes
that can be controlled with proper treatment.)
@Julie raises an excellent point re Sarah and Holly. Check out the affiliations
and funding streams of all who defend US emergent and TJ in particular and you'l
l find they are connected to Sparkhouse, JoPa, Homebrewed Xnity, the movement la
unched by Brian titled Cana Initiative where Tony bragged via his blog he was on
e of the early players (http://www.canainitiative.org/initiators.html), Outlaw P
reachers, Steve Knight's Transform Network and so on.
Getting the truth out at Mars Hill and the US emergents has been next to impossi
ble in large part due to the pull of the Christian industrial complex. For years
, people knew if they spoke out against Driscoll, the Acts29 Network would work
into overdrive to ensure they were persona non grata at any church or conference
in this network - same dynamic was in place with the EV network. Those of us wh
o critiqued MHC and EV circa 2006-2007 found ourselves ostracized and gaslighted
with our professional reputations and personal characters dragged through the m
issional mud. People knew the consequences of speaking out and so they stayed si
lent and the ungodly gaslighting continued unabashed.
But as the spirit continued to work behind the scenes (she's a sneaky little suc
ker) and within a few years, both brands seemed to have lost their original lust
er and spaces began to emerge where more people began speaking out - e.g., see t
he fury over Driscoll's Real Marriage (2012) and Phyllis Tickle's Great Emergenc
e Memphis speech [birthed @emergentdudebro meme] (2013). Still in both cases, th
ere was enough missional muscle to eventually squelch dissent - for example, spe
ak out and you can forget about promoting your book via the Acts 29 or JoPa even
ts.
We've now hit the tipping point in both cases where both the MHC and Emergent br
and have the integrity of say Enron and AIG - no matter how you try to put the l
ipstick on the pig, it still stinks and squeals. No one wants to play their rein
deer games anymore - game over. People realize they can now go public and speak
without the repercussions that were not present when some of us went public in y
ears past. Furthermore, one finds the rise of communities such as the ex-Mars Hi
ll Facebook groups and the Naked Pastor blog that shine with hope.
Keep preaching the truth - it's working.
For those who want the free version of the Amazon eBook, there's a later version
at HuffPost and an earlier one on Tony's blog.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
@David Hayward, Thanks! That's kind of what I thought was going on. I also would
n't have been surprised if some email was coming from burner accounts to make it
look like multiple folks were offended. This is a common tactic in political st
uff. And I am really grateful you didn't post names. I'm interested only in the
methods used.
What struck me was how similar this is to the way the complaints against CJ Maha
ney were shut down by TGC and others around him. Silence publicly, but furious e
mails asking not to re-open wounds from people's childhood, this needs to go fac
e-to-face, let's wait for the evidence/dispositions/trial/verdict/sentencing/wha
tever, and on and on. It's like right out of a playbook or something.
The other thing that has struck me is how thoroughly the so-called post-modern m
indset has been played. "It's not true until I say it's true," seems to be the m
antra here. Nevermind testimony, documentation, and outside experts. At some lev
el, there is an adherence to deconstruction of texts, statements, blogs, events,
etc., that has failed to create the freedom that the EV folks seem to desire. T
hat alone has been very revealing to me. There is a set of core events and state
ments that cannot be deconstructed and still remain in reality.
Thank you for asking....anytime I have previously tried to call out this most un
Godly bullshit, I have had my neck figuratively stomped on so I could not speak.
My Pastor at Solomon's Porch Doug Pagitt tried to have me put in a mental insti
tution to shore up the crazy campaign and justify an affair and divorce. I have
been threatened, "I will tear your head off." Physical threats. Litigiously, "I
will litigate to the fullest extend of the law...and I will not be able to provi
de for the children." And spun as crazy to discredit my name and character. So,
YES I am speaking. And freely. I absolutely KNOW and believe the LGBT community
were used to provide a platform! In 15 years not word one of concern for that co
mmunity. Why that cause? Why not plastic bags? Pedophile priest? The Pacific Gar
bage Vortex? NO! THIS was the hottest topic in church and culture, so it would b
e the best move. An NPD using everything and everyone to position themselves in
the best possible light. He became the suffering spouse of a crazy woman...only,
he was the one with the verified mental illness and I through a thorough psycho
logical assessment had nothing but "acute distress" from years of enduring gas l
ighting and physical and psychological abuse.
@Jenelle Forgot to thank you for your truth telling. I know all too well the pre
ssure put on authors by publishers to "play nice" so we can keep playing the gam
e and promote our products. It takes guts to be willing to risk one's place of p
ride to speak the truth. I hope your bravery encouraes others to do come forth a
nd do likewise - I've heard of other victims and pray they too can someday get j
ustice.
As an aside: someone called Tonyjones has been editing his own page on Wikipedia
, which is strongly discouraged as a conflict of interest. He's also been editin
g the pages of others he's associated with, such as Phyllis Tickle.
It appears the machine has been keeping these articles clean and free of critici
sm...
@Julie McMahon, you rock! It's taken me literally days to wade through this in m
y free time, and I am so grateful for your boldness, graciousness, and adherence
to facts, despite all the temptations to sling mud, innuendo, and worse.
You and the others who have spoken of their abusive spiritual leaders have been
in my prayers all day as I went about my business at church. After 25 years in v
arious forms of ministry, both church and para-church, I have seen too much. I h
ave often wondered why God punished Israel so harshly in the Old Testament, and
allows the church to carry on in similar ways. Maybe your testimonies are the be
ginning of the church's humiliation and hopefully repentance, in our time.
best quote of the day!
No matter how you try to put the lipstick on the pig, it still stinks and squeal
s
-Becky Garrison
It's kinda humorous how these stakeholders with financial ties pop in and then d
isappear. Then I Google them and they are in bed with the abusers? People! There
is this fancy new fangled machine called the internet.
I'm not attempting to shut Julie or anyone else down. It's not within my power,
nor would I feel entitled to do so. I just think it's interesting that the peopl
e who tear down emergent aren't really around to see what's happening now. All t
his critique is old news. There's lots of new stuff to either lift up or tear do
wn. And if you don't care enough to show up and see what's current then why do y
ou care enough to keep trashing the old incarnation? As for funding, Transform i
sn't actually funded beyond the partners listed on our website once a year for o
ur gathering. No one gets paid to work on it and it's not fiscally associated wi
th any of the orgs listed above. We do it b/c we love the community and love the
work. And Steve Knight didn't scrub the Emergent Village website. There was mor
e than one admin back in those days. I'm not defending anyone accused in this th
read other than Steve b/c he's my partner co-conspirator and I hate to see him t
rashed for something he didn't do. Plus he's too humble to defend himself. :)
Holly? Is it possible Steve Knight is not telling you the truth? Were you there
that night when Doug Pagitt contacted him a Saturday in Sept 2008? If Doug is so
loving and transcending and wants only goodness to flow as he posted here 450 p
osts ago, than he should start with clearing of his good buddy Steve Knight's na
me because right now the story goes that he scrubbed it at Doug's directive.
While we're on the topic of narcissistic behaviour (or perhaps just wounded prid
e):
Tony Jones and Rod Dreher agreed on a Same-Sex Marriage Blogalogue (and yes, the
irony of two cisgender straight married men discussing Same Sex Marriage was ac
knowledged).
Tony put in a lot of effort, writing about 15 posts. Rod wrote less, and finally
chose to discuss the issue with Andrew Sullivan.
Tony's response demonstrates a tendency towards pride/narcissism and psychologic
al analysis/gaslighting:
The headline and lead:
"Breaking News: Rod Will Debate Same Sex Marriage
It just turns out that he won t debate it with me."
...
"We started earnestly but quickly petered out. I wrote, Rod didn
t respond."
...
"Well, Rod has jumped back into the fray. But not with me. With Andrew Sullivan.
Now, listen, I don t begrudge Rod his right to blogalogue with Andrew instead
of me. All of us in the blogosphere know that an inbound link from Sullivan is,
Gold, Jerry, gold!
So I ll just take this opportunity to continue the blogalogue in my little (ti
ny) corner of the Interwebs by reflecting on their posts."
"I think that Rod s conversion to Orthodoxy plays a bigger role than his inter
locuters realize. Rod converted to Catholicism in his 20s, after a hedonistic yo
uth. In other words, it was a pretty radical conversion. Then, after reporting o
n the pedophilia scandals of the Catholic church, and almost losing his faith ov
er it, he converted to Orthodoxy.
So what? Well, I had a talk with Frederica Mathewes-Green a couple years ago tha
t shed light on this for me. She, too, converted to Orthodoxy after years as a p
retty radical feminist. ... One had to embrace Orthodoxy in toto, she told me, t
o really appreciate the Jesus Prayer. To emphasize her point, she said this mean
t the whole Orthodox enchilada, including a 3rd century hermeneutic and cosmolog
y!
You mean demons and a flat Earth?
I asked.
Not a flat Earth,
she sai
d.
I don t want to over-psychologize Rod or Frederica, but I have known a number
of people who ve converted to Orthodoxy, and it does seem to attract a certain
type of person who, at some deep level, is looking for an enclosed system of be
lief
the most-bounded of bounded sets. And systems like these have an answer
for virtually every exigency. Further, they often tend to revel in taking posit
ions that cut against the grain of contemporary society and are even doomed to f
ailure (as Rod has said his opposition of SSM is)."
"But for my part, this is neither an intellectually nor spiritually compelling m

ove, because it mitigates against the ongoing work and revelation of the Holy Sp
irit. In fact, methinks, instead of maintaining an openness to the Spirit, it te
nds to enshrine the opinions of men
particularly dead, white ones.
The Orthodox don t call their current seminary professors
theologians.
T
he theologians of the Orthodox church are a bounded set, and they lived in the p
atristic period.
That tells you something, doesn
t it?"
I am now dying from the irony of Tony et al.'s ongoing attempts to enshrine the
opinions of living white men.
bentham nash September 23, 2014 at 10:44 pm
Julie,
Your story is encouraging. I wish that there was a way for this entire thread to
continue indefinitely. I'm worried that it's not going to be easy for that to h
appen given that the comments section of blogs don't scale up, in my experience,
beyond a certain point before it becomes just plain difficult to keep up. But s
o far, that hasn't happened, and I'm really glad.
There's a couple of books I wanted to suggest to you. I just got them in the mai
l, but I am suggesting them nonetheless. They are both by Randi Krieger, the coa
uthor of STOP WALKING ON EGGSHELLS, which is a book about living with a signific
ant other who has borderline personality disorder. You referenced several times
NPD, and I don't want to conflate the two, but I think the experiences of the sp
ouse in both scenarios is similar enough that I'll suggest the books to you anyw
ay.
The first book is entitled SPLITTING: PROTECTING YOURSELF WHILE DIVORCING SOMEON
E WITH BORDERLINE OR NARCISSISTIC PERSONALITY DISORDER by Bill Eddy and Randi Kr
eger. So actually this one is for NPD and BPD. So good call on my part. Anywhere
click here for the amazon link. Amazon sent me two copies of it and the next bo
ok for some reason, so if you want I can just send you my extra copies free of c
harge.
The second book is called THE ESSENTIAL FAMILY GUIDE TO BORDERLINE PERSONALITY D
ISORDER: NEW TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES TO STOP WALKING ON EGGSHELLS by Randi Kreger.
That link is also here.
The divorce book strikes me as one you would really find incredibly valuable, if
you don't already have it or have something like it. But, from the sound of thi
ngs, it sounds like such a book would be coming to you at 75% of the way through
this awful mess. But I'm partly just throwing these two out there to just say h
ey, and that I think you're a survivor, and an inspiration, and I am really sorr
y that you had to go through the ringer like this for so long, and that your kid
s had to too. I bet it's difficult to even rank the worst parts of what this has
been like for you since it's like choosing between which is worse, getting run
over or getting scalded with hot water -- they both are so extreme and horrific
it's not even worth ranking. But one of the things that I wanted to express comp
assion towards you over is with regards to the gas lighting and the social alien
ation that you no doubt experienced. I suspect that there for a long period of t
ime, maybe? , you basically were standing in front of everyone and asking for he
lp and for whatever reason at best no one really could or would help, and at wor
st, people actually threw you under the bus. I bet you must've nearly lost it. I
want to say "I can't imagine it", but honestly, I can imagine it. And I just wa
nted to say to you I can imagine it, it's difficult to imagine, and I am wishing
you a sound sleep tonight and tomorrow, and a smile on your face when you awake
each morning.
Have you ever read this poem by Stevie Smith entitled "Not Waving but Drowning"?
You should read it aloud in a quiet room, just yourself in your peaceful quiet,
and listen to it. I bet, like me, you hear your past in it. I hope for your sak
e, and my sake, that it is the past. Thank you for your refusal to die or regres
s. The decision to live in the midst of great suffering and misunderstanding is
an act of source bold faith that we are all blessed to hear tales about it. Juli
e McMahon - she refused to die, refused to lie, and refused to throw away this l
ife she had been given. If you can do that, we all can do that. I wish you the b
est next part of your life. It will end and when it does, the glory of the thing
s that come next will make the trashiness of what happened with your husband be
insignificant by comparison. Stay strong and hang in there girl.
ben
cute little side note to the Rod Dreher video with a very still legally married
Tony...his mistress filmed it and giggles throughout...kinda cute. Cue cackle at

5 min 40 secs http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rod+dreher+anf+toy+jones+vide
o&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=C0EA42AA93069E33CD36C0EA42AA93069E33CD36
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Another snippet from Tony's blog:
"When I m asked
ld answer:
as I often am
why the EC is so white, I have a threefo
1. Five years ago everyone was saying that we were too male, but people aren t
saying that anymore because women are now leading the movement. So be patient.
2. There s probably a lot more racial diversity in the movement than you think
; you d better look beyond the skin color of the best-selling authors to make
your assessment.
3. The EC is not an evangelistic movement. I don t mean that in reference to t
he gospel, but to the movement itself. The EC is not about growing the EC. It
s about catalyzing an ecclesial and theological conversation and about building
a network of friendship in which these conversations can safely take place."
I wouldn't feel safe in a network with conversations like those described in the
se comments.
I wouldn't feel safe in a network where male leaders were so dismissive of women
(see earlier posts).
And it's not sufficient to point away from the leaders and best-sellers - they *
are* the ones with the social and financial power. (And what about LGBT people i
n the network?)
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Holly, I know it's slightly impolite, but how do you make your money?
How do you hope to make your money?
Film Consulting?
Workshops?
Book sales?
Paid ministry?
How many of these depend on the success and reputation of those around you?
Can you see the privilege and power and connections?
@Holly To Steve's credit, he is the only US emergent figure who apologized to me
for spreading rumors I'm batshit via the Emergent Village network. However, he
has yet to speak publicly even though these very public rumors were spread onlin
e during the time he was the webmaster of the EV network. As these battles were
public and not private, I issued a public apology via the Sojourners God's Polit
ics blog in 2010 (can't find the link as they revamped the site) and in my book
Jesus Died For This? (Also I tried to meet with a few folks privately in person
when they came to NYC with no success.)
I've lost track of the
id words to the effect
." Now that I'm not in
what any professional
# of people I've met in professional settings who have sa

or "You're not crazy like the emergent boys said you were
the Xn industrial complex world, I don't give a rat's ass
Christian thinks. But just because the gaslighting pushed
me out of the toxic cesspool that's become Xn publishing and into some really k
ick ass work doesn't justify how these boys behave - and again, this isn't about
me -- there's a host of others but it's up to them to do what Julie is doing an
d tell their stories. Preach it sisters (and a few brothers who got slammed as w
ell) ... :)
In a similar vein, I've heard countless times that Doug directed Steve to scrub
the website of any mention of Courtney Perry (and have seen screen grabs that pr
ove said scrubbing) post-Christianity 21. If Steve did not do this, then it woul
d behove him to come clean because Doug is accusing him of something pretty seri
ous here. If he did do this, then fess up and explain what was really going on b
ehind the scenes. Julie has the right to know what was done to discredit her and
how the truth was obfuscated for years.
Sorry but Steve was a major player here ...
@Tim I appreciate your questions around privilege. Most of my work in emergent h
as been around challenging unseen white privilege, power, critiquing leadership
and advocating for transparency, action and multiculturalism. @Julie, Im really
sorry you were hurt. I hope this space serves you in your healing.
Likes(8)Dislikes(2)
I can see your passion for diverse movements, Holly, and I wish to acknowledge y
our public advocacy in this area:
"The invite-only nature of this [emergence Christianity 2012/2013] meeting not o
nly excludes people and hurts feelings, but is also an expression of hierarchica
l organizing. As a movement that exults and develops practitioners of flat struc
tures, the exclusive nature of this summit was completely out of line with who w
e are. It also violates the principle of the invitation inherit to successful so
cial movements. Essentially two white men invited their friends and had a secret
, exclusive strategy meeting on the state of the movement and most of us were no
t invited."
And also quote from your follow-up discussion:
"I still want to discourage folks from invitation-only organizing. It creates a
hierarchy based on accessibility, which in this community seem to be based on, w
ell, friendships. I m not knocking friendships, just wondering about the limit
ations of friendship based organizing.
One of the things I have noticed as an outsider coming into this conversation in
the past two years is the dynamic between
outsiders
encountering the code
of
insiders
in the movement. (Sorry for the dualistic language here
I
agree it can be problematic.) A way I see this showing up is in this idea of
friendships.
There is a code among many of the of the veterans of this movem
ent that is about letting the work evolve out of authentic, organic friendships.
That s actually pretty lovely, and part of what attracted me to the emergence
church is its relational focus. The problem with organizing based on friendship
s, is when you aren t friends with the movers and shakers who are organizing."
Thank you for encouraging openness and transparency. It is a rare and precious t
hing in social movements.
Hi Holly: Thanks for commenting. Here's the thing: It might be "old news" to you
, but it isn't to many. I thought I've been "in the loop" for years. But I haven
't heard the other side of the story, really, until it started to be posted here
. This is the illusion that being on the inside creates. You think that everybod
y knows and believes what you know and believe. I've really only heard one offic
ial and authorized side of the story. Now I'm hearing the unofficial and unautho
rized of the story, and suddenly things don't seem as clear.
It makes me wonder how important this story is. Is it just nonsense? If so, it w
ould probably be ignored. Is it significant? If so, then it would explain why th
ere are so many voices joining the public conversation and so many voices trying
to silence it privately.
Ken Archer September 23, 2014 at 11:11 pm
I haven't really commented on EC topics since I bowed out 6-7 years ago, but my
sadness over what was lost when that community withered is all coming back to me
having read this thread. Writing this was somewhat cathartic.
The thug and his theology are one and the same, neither really comes first. Your
actions reflect what you believe, and your actions form your character. Central
to your character is your ability to reason well. So, it all kind of happens at
once, at least according to the traditional Christian theology of the person, w
ith which I agree.
This is related to why this idea of two marriages is wrong. Alisdair MacIntyre,
who is a fairly transparent inspiration for this idea, suggested we retreat from
modern institutions into small monastery-like communities in order to rebuild t
he moral foundation of character
an integrated set of beliefs and morality that modernity has undermined. You don t get to pick and choose the instituti
on you want to retreat from, and even if you did, legal marriage is not a modern
institution. Challenging pastors to retreat from legal marriage obligations see
ms like a pretty bourgeois protest. Why would we do anything to further undermin
e one of the few pre-modern institutions that still survives on life support, an
d that is central to forming men and women of good character?
I agree with Tony that Driscoll s theology and character are bound up together
I think that s true for everyone. I'm concerned about Tony's theology, wh
ose philosophical foundations I criticized pretty consistently while I was invol
ved in EC in 2004-7 before bowing out because Tony seemed more into pushing with
some arrogance a pomo philosophy he never really studied in school than he was
into fostering dialogue (I went back to just reading the wonderful books of Bria
n McLaren which is how I got involved in the first place). And it's Tony's theol
ogy that makes me inclined to think Julie should be heard - not in order to agre
e with her or to judge Tony, but because that s simply how character works. Ch
aracter isn t some private thing you get to hide inside of you. It s out the
re, reflected to greater or lesser degrees in your actions, your written and spo
ken words, and the testimonies of those closest to you.
Same notice as given above by others
be posted here.
any ad hominems in private emails will
Steve K. September 23, 2014 at 11:25 pm
@Julie - I am sorry. We handled that poorly. It was wrong and for that I am sorr
y.
@Becky - From my recollection, Tony asked me to remove Courtney's name from the
EV website, but then Tony made those changes himself. Doug had nothing to do wit
h it, so I'm not sure why you've heard he has allegedly claimed such. Doug had v
ery little involvement (if any) in the EV website during the short time I was in
volved (2006-2009).
Meg N September 23, 2014 at 11:35 pm
Holly .... you have to be heard before you can heal.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Steve K. September 23, 2014 at 11:38 pm
@Becky - I just want to add that the rumor about your mental health was spread b
y Jeff Kursonis, who I (and the rest of us in Emergent at the time) later learne
d was not someone who was trustworthy. (That's a whole other story that is being
conflated here, I'm afraid, with the accusations of mental illness by Tony towa
rds his ex, Julie. Two different situations entirely.)
Anyway, it was a hard lesson learned, and I apologized directly to you for my co
mplicity in spreading that rumor -- and I made every effort to correct that and
connect you with the board of Emergent Village at the time so they could offer a
n "official" apology directly to you as well, but you refused to speak with them
.
Thank you, Ben. Yes, my family law attorney handed me two books after we got bac
k the court ordered psych evals. STOP WALKING ON EGGSHELLS and SPLITTING: PROTEC
TING YOURSELF WHILE DIVORCING SOMEONE WITH BORDERLINE OR NARCISSISTIC PERSONALIT
Y DISORDER I am very familiar with with both books. The legal system AND the chu
rch have not a clue how to handle NPD's. Anyone can file a motion....and they DO
! They absolutely love it and cannot get enough. It's titillating! He was often
Pro Se and represented himself I think in part to hear himself speak. I stopped
counting after 15 motions. Alternating between trying to get support wiped out,
and then when that would be denied, then another run at custody. I had only a 6
month reprieve from litigation since 2008. It was and is legal harassment. Doug
Pagitt would come along and try and intimidate me by sitting in the courtroom. I
think it was a fun day for the both of them. Last hearing he brought Courtney i
nto the courtroom, and when asked, "Why are you here?" She said to my attorney,
"Because you asked me here." He said, "I never asked you here today?! So, let me
be clear....you actually were not present for any of the accusations that are c
laimed here today, and yet you are THE witness?" It was as the tweens say, "awko
taco."
@Meg N, I agree and am listening. I hope we can hear each other without causing
more wounds.
Likes(4)Dislikes(3)
Steve Knight. I accept with my whole "bat shit" crazy heart your apology. Thank
you very much. You my friend were thrown under the bus by the JoPa brothers for
that one. I am glad you spoke up! Thank you.
Becky Garriso September 23, 2014 at 11:54 pm
@Steve - apology accepted. However, you didn't try to connect me to the board an
d I refused to speak to them. Rather two people Danielle Shroyer and Mel Bray we
re sent out to "manage me" - I shot them several emails to see if we could conne
ct but they didn't really respond. So, after not hearing back a few times, I mov
ed on. Please it's critical that we get the facts straight. I did my damndest to
meet with folks to clear my name only to be told that one doesn't reconcile wit
h Hitler, I'm a wingnut, troll, hack, liar, posionious source, etc.
I
w
o
e
bring up my "mental illness" and Julie's as this was a common tactic that I sa
employed in other instances as well. Again, I need to let those people chose t
speak up as they feel called to do so. This was a common tactic employed by th
EV network during this time to silence any dissent.
Sorry to learn that you were thrown under the bus - I was told by numerous sourc
es that Doug instructed you to scrub the website. I'm glad you didn't do that an
d saddened that they used you as a scapegoat.
Julie, I am not a lawyer, and your lawyer probably knows about this already, but
Courts can place conditions upon people who continually raise similar lawsuits,
and are seen to be wasting the court's time. However, unfortunately, the applica
nt usually needs to go to extreme lengths before these remedies are activated:
Appellate Court Agrees that Written Request to "Kiss My Ass" is Contempt of Cour
t
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Tim,
I'm wondering whether what Julie has been experiencing from her ex-husband would
be considered Lawfare. and I'm not a lawyer, either. :)
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Bill,
There are certainly elements of SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public particip
ation)-like behaviour from Tony Jones on blogs other communication media, but al
so two-party vexatious civil litigation surrounding the divorce and children. Th
ere must be some terribly tolerant judges out there...
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Tim, thank you for adding such dimension to this important discussion! Quit your
day job you have a knack for finding things on the web. Unfortunately, "frivolo
us lawsuits" are almost impossible to prove. Anytime someone files a motion you
have to respond...it's a broken system for sure...but yes, it has been discussed
. This entire mess with JoPa group, EV leadership AND Mars Hill and the reason t
hey look like THIS, is because of very real and yet denied mental illnesses. I s
ay this as gently and lovingly as I can...there is help for NPD's but they have
to first accept the diagnosis. If those EV JoPa and MH friends love and care abo
ut their leaders, then take care of them and get them the help they need, so the
y can have healthy relationships and not abuse their positions of power. That wo
uld be the true miracle in all of this, if those people Mark Driscoll and the Jo
Pa brothers got therapy to keep them in check.
Meg N September 24, 2014 at 12:11 am
Holly, sometimes the process of telling the truth can hurt before there is heali
ng. I think you are being a little bit premature but I understand what you are s
aying.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Julie, I bow to your talent for finding the undeclared connections of many parti
cipants in this discussion!

It does depend whether your jurisdiction has a "no prospect of success" or an "i
mproper motive"-style vexatious litigant code. It's much harder to prove an impr
oper motive.
And yes, the number of declared vexation litigants in any jurisdiction can typic
ally be counted on two hands. Very difficult. I can't even imagine the stress. I
never ever want to be involved in anything legal or administrative in my life!
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
FWIW, here is an excerpt from Minnesota anti-SLAPP law, via the Public Participa
tion Project website:
MINN. STAT. 554.04(2)(b) provides for a SLAPPBack cause of action. It provides
that a court shall award actual damages, and may award punitive damages, if a S
LAPP defendant shows that the SLAPP was brought to harass, inhibit the defendant
s public participation or exercise of constitutional rights, or otherwise wro
ngfully injure the defendant.
http://www.anti-slapp.org/your-states-free-speech-protection/
I'm not a lawyer, but have had to do some research on SLAPP/anti-SLAPP because t
hreats of defamation lawsuits against those who speak out seem to arise regularl
y in situations that involve alleged spiritual abuse. State laws vary, but if th
ere is an apparently frivolous lawsuit to harass someone, an anti-SLAPP countersuit freezes the discovery process and often gets expedited treatment in the jud
icial system.
It's less usual for these suits to happen in religious contexts, but it happened
to a friend of mine, Julie Anne Smith, who along with four others were sued by
their former pastor for defamation of character for $500,000. He lost. This docu
ment from her court case gives a great overview on SLAPP/anti-SLAPP, for those w
ho are interested in more detail.
http://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2012-04-26-Smith%20Memo%20in%20S
upport%20of%20Special%20Motions%20to%20Strike.pdf
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Lisa Miller's September 2011 critical response to Tony Jones' two kinds of marri
age post/series makes some interesting points:
'On closer inspection, the Jones protest is muddled and retrograde. It s bad f
or the financially vulnerable partner (historically the woman) and for children.
Marriage law has come a long way since 16th century Europe, when men controlled
all the property in a marriage and held the legal right to make all the decisio
ns.'
'By refusing to sign marriage certificates, Jones
penalizes heterosexual coup
les who are coming to the church without actually winning anything for same-sex
couples,
[Stephanie] Coontz says.'
'Everybody needs these protections; a promise to God will not make a deadbeat pa
rent pay child support.'
[Dare I even ask whether Tony Jones pays child support, Julie? I know it's an in
trusive question, so feel free to decline.]
'Finally, there s the question of motivation. Jones has griped publicly about
the lasting trauma of his own 2009 divorce.
I got married in the state of Min
nesota by the stroke of a pen,
he said.
To extricate myself took 14 months
and thousands of dollars, and here the pastor has no authority. '
'His first wife, still irate from the divorce, suspects that Jones s position
reflects not a higher principle but a wish to avoid legal entanglements the seco
nd time around, which Jones vehemently denies.
It is a total cop-out to have
just a sacramental marriage,
Julie McMahon wrote in an e-mail.
I am old sc
hool and I think that loving someone wholly is to share in legal property and as
sets as well.
It would be hard to find a gay-marriage advocate who believes otherwise.'
Wow. Just wow.
He voluntarily pays not one red penny. The county has to nab it. Being self empl
oyed it is very difficult to get a real account of income and revenue streams. H
e also hired literally the slimiest lawyer he could find (people hire lawyers li
ke themselves) who got it reduced to a tiny monthly fraction of what was origina
lly agreed upon in 2008 based on his income which he himself provided. Then he s
aid times are tough, and I can no longer pay support. We live below the line of
poverty while he brags about sipping 50 year old scotch on twitter and wining an
d dining his way through Hawaii and European vacations. BUT honestly, we are doi
ng great!! I got a new job as a children's therapist intern and finishing up gra
duate school so that I am hopeful I will be able to pull us out of poverty withi
n the next year or two, and into a livable range. My kids are on government scho
ol lunches and we get heating assistance and at one point he owed me over $50,00
0 in unpaid support while draining me with legal fees....it was sadistic! But as
I said, he hired someone who is honestly (and this is not just me speaking but
the entire professional family law community chiming in)....an utter disgrace to
the family law profession and she is harmful to children. So NOW I actually pay
him a month because she got is retroactively reduced back to November 2009. Thi
s is kind of funny....a group of family law professionals in Minneapolis actuall
y sent her a retirement card as a joke congratulating her on leaving law practic
e. I thought that was kind of funny!
Sorry for the Garriso - iPad went wonky.
@Steve Upon a bit of reflection re timelines there's a discrepancy here Steve I
hope you can help me clear up. After you apologized to me privately, I asked you
for a public apology and heard nadda. I don't recall any invitation from you fo
r me to connect with anyone on the EV Board.
A while later as the Tony/Courtney news was hitting the blogosphere, I was conta
cted seemingly out of the bue by Danielle Shroyer (who was also Courtney Perry's
pastor BTW) who wanted to "chat with me." Given her connection to Courtney coup
led with some private correspondence I had with a US emergent voice defending Da
nielle and dismissing Julie, I was very reluctant to meet with her. But after ch
atting with a few trusted voices, I decided to give it a go but my guard was ver
y understandably up. Guard up or down, it didn't matter as after a few emails, n
othing ever materialized. I chalked his up to the overall mishahndling of Julie
and moved on - hadn't thought about this really until the Mars Hill mess happene
d and then the parrallel patterns between EV and MHC really crystalized for me.
To date your public apology (and thank you very much for that) is the only sign
I have seen from anyone connected with US emergent - Jeff may have started the r
umors but they spread far and wide, and continue to be spread by a few voices ev
en today. I'm just over being gaslight and now play in circles where these guys
have NO influence - so I can ignore them without losing sleep anymore.
But trust me, this story is far from over ... like MHC, the damage done by both
MHC and EV author/speaker/leaders runs wide and deep.
Lost Voice September 24, 2014 at 1:20 am
JulieI am one of the people Becky refers to I too have a name in the emergent world w
here I have been trashed. I am now known as "bipolar" and "out to destroy any fr
iend and their church."
I have moved on. I used to fight it and call it out. A book came out by an Outla
w Preacher that abused me at one of their conferences. I screamed as loud as I c
ould, but was never heard. I have since walked away. It is hard at times. I have
left friends behind because I cannot in anyway be around emergent stuff. Friend
s want me to go to Wild Goose. I consider it, physically vomit, and then do what
I always do....use humor and some created story why I cannot attend. It hurts.
I miss the time of going to those and loving my friends. It is no longer safe.
I share only a glimpse into my pain to tell you, you are speaking for many lost
voices. Thank you.
Lost Voice no more...we hear you loud and clear! Keep talking. You are heard her
e. Thank you so much for speaking your truth! This is very important. This is an
open message to every woman speaking at the upcoming Christianity 21 event by J
oPa in Phoenix, AZ. Are you really going to put your name behind abusive men? Ar
e you honestly going to turn a blind eye to how they have abused their position
of power and influence to harm people?! Women?!? I sure as hell wouldn't. My abu
ser who had an inside as police chaplain for my city told police I had "split pe
rsonality and would slip into other voices." A-maz-ing shameless lengths to disc
redit! Oh, I recognize what you are describing all too well.
dave bazan September 24, 2014 at 3:10 am
as i've been reading through all these harrowing posts i can't seem to get this
song out of my head:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4OS17lqHiE
cheers to you julie
Rick Meigs September 24, 2014 at 7:57 am
Julie, thank you so much for sharing your story here. It is so important that th
ey be heard. And your last post (9-24) is so revealing of Tony's character.
Lost Voice, your voice is lost no more. Thanks for the courage and willingness t
o share. It is as you and others do that the true depths and nature of this abus
e and frankly, cancer, is revealed.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Henry M Imler September 24, 2014 at 9:22 am
This thread has been amazing. Other than opening my eyes as a lurking TJ theolog
y fan wanting to express my thanks for bringing all of this into the light.
@Julie. You are amazing. I'm sorry for what you've had to go through. While my s
ituations have been vastly different than yours, gaslighting and such *sucks*.
My hope and feeble prayer is that the "discernment group" will not take a page o
ut of the Mars Hill PR strategy and try to minimize the damage done to Julie by
offering a "for how we might have hurt you we apologize" apology. Closure is wha
t's needed.
The "cancer" Rick speaks of above will never be healed unless the full, cleansin
g, healing light of Truth is brought to bear on this "disease".
lost voice (now found!) I did I little googling and observed in the comment thre
ad how you were run off Tripp Fuller's blog for asking important questions and w
ere asked to "message me through Facebook if you want to keep talking." Those si
lencing strategies are OVER. Please keep telling your story. It was wrong and ab
usive and those involved need to be called out.
Bill Kinnon, I hope so too, but if Doug Pagitt is involved I have very low expec
tations of any sort of authentic apology. I am 100% confident that the Jo in the
Pa, is incapable. I expect a half ass'd placated version of a sorry seeing as B
rian McLaren is on the Christianity 21 Phoenix, AZ roster put on by JoPa. I woul
d like to be pleasantly surprised, but not holding my breath.
Andrew Jones....you and your nomadic, global missional family have always had my
utmost admiration. You are, and have always been the 'real deal' so thank you f
or hearing my story and receiving it as a follower of God. Thank you for being a
n advocate and for being authentic. http://tallskinnykiwi.com/2014/09/next-seaso
n/
I was asked to post what some people have been emailing me who basically disappr
ove of what's happening here. I did this in this comment:
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-123573
So now I've been asked to post what private emails I'm receiving from people who
do approve of what's happening here.
Essentially, it's all the same points, but from another perspective. The same re
asons some want to see this managed or shut down are the same reason some want t
o see this continue.
Here's what encouraging people are saying:
1. Some say thanks for providing a safe space where people can speak their truth
without fear of being censored or edited or corrected or blocked.
2. Some people are writing to me personally because they are still afraid of bei
ng targeted, blackballed, or suffer negative consequences or backlash.
3. Some are absolutely amazed at how messy but fruitful this conversation is bec
ause apologies and forgivenesses are being expressed.
4. I'm being encouraged for being a good moderator, mainly by allowing this to j
ust happen naturally with the occasional interjection.
So thank you! I'm personally very grateful that this happened. I still predict m
ore good fruit will appear.

Andrew Jones-the Tall Skinny Kiwi http://tallskinnykiwi.com/2014/09/next-season/
Thank you for being the 'real deal.' You made me laugh when you said all those
years ago, "You actually don't seem as "bat shit" crazy as I was told. You and y
our nomadic, global missional family traveling the world with a truck...restore
my faith.
http://tallskinnykiwi.com/2014/09/next-season/ is the 'real deal.'
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Thank you Lost Voice - your story and Julie's googling illustrates how this patt
ern of behavior spread well beyond those connected with the Emergent Village bra
nd. Like Mars Hill, there was a large interconnected network that supported the
"emergent brand" at all costs.
Thank you for anyone who has the courage to apologize - the one thing I'd ask mo
ving forward is that you don't qualify your apology by citing what the survivor
of emergent abuse (I like this term better than victim) did or did not do - as w
e've noted before, when someone is in the throes of prolonged abuse and trauma,
they will do/say things in response that will seem somewhat "batshit crazy." In
fact, the more intense the abuse, the more likely they are to exhibit signs of e
xtreme trauma and abuse.
Also, it is critical for those apologizing to put their words into action - what
will you do to end the cycle of abuse? Too often abusers will issue face saving
apologies that upon reflection seem more designed to save their own careers but
the structures remain in place that allow the abuse to continue. (This is exact
ly what you're seeing at Mars Hill - even the resignation of the #2 bully and Dr
iscoll's leave of absence hasn't changed the culture that allowed this bad boy b
ehavior to continue.) Even if one hasn't been guilty of abuse themselves and wer
e unaware of the Emergent crew's on and offline bullying (and it's hard for me t
o truly believe this given some blog battles), please reflect on how your partic
ipation in purchasing emergent products, attending events and the like contribut
es to the problem. If you stop the flow of money into this machine, it will brea
k down (see Mars Hill).
Becky brings up a good point. NPD's gaslight their victims then stand back and s
ay, "Look. see! she's crazy!" My abuser is obsessed with number and is stuck on
thinking and proliferating the meme that I sent x amount of emails crying out fo
r help, so that means I am nuts....actually, it means I am being "stonewalled" a
nd am having to shout into the hurricane to try and be heard.....while they appe
ar calm, cool and collected...it's pretty down right sadistic if you think about
it.
On the Christianity 21 facebook page, they say that, "Most churches could do a l
ot more to support people who live with mental illnesses. Many Christian teachin
gs link health, wealth and faith in ways that can make anyone having a bad day f
eel like God has abandoned them. This feels all the more injurious to someone li
ving with a mental-health challenge."
The sheer and utter hypocrisy of this is mind boggling to me, after seeing how t
hey treated Julie, Becky, and LostVoice.
https://www.facebook.com/events/1461065130809150/permalink/1474499692799027/
I posted a link to this important conversation here, hoping others would share t
heir thoughts and experiences.
https://www.facebook.com/christianity21
It has already been deleted.
Brian McLaren September 24, 2014 at 11:19 am
Last Friday, I received an email from Julie McMahon requesting that an apology t
o her be posted on this thread. I was one of several people who had been asked b
y both Tony and Julie in 2008 to help them in a time of marital crisis. We tried
our best to help, but the marriage didn t survive.
I read through all the postings on this thread and checked back as the list grew
. I saw significant discrepancies between the version of the story that was bein
g told on this thread and my experience and understanding of what actually happe
ned.
However, I was at a distance and was only peripherally involved because I extric
ated myself from the situation early on. Because I take accusations of spiritual
abuse seriously (as, I m sure, do all the people named in Julie s email), i
n recent days I ve gone back in my email archives and reread the many emails J
ulie sent or forwarded to me during and since 2008.
I have come to see a few things that could have been done differently, especiall
y with the benefit of hindsight. I also see areas where, if the counsel given to
Julie and Tony had been followed more fully, outcomes could have been better. B
ut I have never witnessed or observed anything even close to abuse by any of the
people named; in fact, I have only witnessed sincere and solid pastoral care in
a tragic and volatile situation, right up to this moment.
I think that someone on this thread made a good suggestion. She shared that she
was once accused of something. A group of qualified and mature people reviewed t
he evidence in a responsible way. She suggested taking what has been shared on t
his thread, along with information that can t in good conscience be shared in
public, for private professional review, making use of structures developed by d
enominations over many years of dealing with situations like these.
I think that is a good idea, and I will do my best to see it is done. Because I
have some idea of the legal dimensions of situations like this, I do not believe
it is wise or appropriate to say anything else at this time.
Julie, I posted a link to this conversation on the post I linked to above, and i
t's still there.
Likes(5)Dislikes(1)
http://c21.thejopagroup.com/speaker-lineup/brian-mclaren/ That was really a nonapology. As expected.
@Danica - as David Hayward notes in the listing of positive responses he's recei
ved, many feel they cannot come forward.
In light of the deletion of Julie's comment referenced above, I join Bill and Ju
lie in not holding my breath for any genuine apology from the remaining names sh
e's mentioned. At this point, I feel any comment will be designed to safe face a
nd ensure that Xnity21, the Cana Intitative and other US emergent sponsored prod
ucts continue.
Again, if you want to help end the abuse, the first step is to walk away. Even i
f someone is your "friend," don't buy their book, pay to hear them speak and the
like until they publicly renounce their involvement with the US emergent brand.
This is especially true for those who once had original voices but when they hi
t the stage, preserving their spot took center stage over speaking the truth and
they morphed into that Christian religious rock star that they once had the cou
rage to critique. One can hope - but not holding my breath.
Julie, I think that might perhaps an example of what we in the UK call "arse-cov
ering"
Chuck September 24, 2014 at 11:40 am
I have one comment.
Being familiar with the situation, I can honestly say that the only person close
to telling the whole truth in the Julie M vs. Tony J situation is Julie. The em
ergent cult, which she was headfirst deep in from the beginning, turned on her a
nd excommunicated her in unceremonious ways while covering up sin in their own l
ives. I was there when, at the original 'Christianity' 21, Doug Pagitt threatene
d to have her removed physically by the Edina Police if she would not leave.
Pagitt, Jones, McLaren, and all their cover-up cronies are all a bunch of mysogy
nist hypocrites. They love themselves and they hate women.
Thank you to Dan Kimball. https://www.facebook.com/DanKimball For being a person
of integrity and faith. For knowing when to back away from rotten fruit and for
responding to my call for help all those years ago when I was shunned and stone
walled....your words of kindness and compassion stayed with me. Mark Ostreicher
too! So, interesting how the ones tied in financially can't. speak. the. truth.
EVEN when it is in their face with verifiable evidence.
JulieI had honestly forgotten about that. Because I wanted to push that issue and man
y other issues I put a large target on my back. I was shocked where how low lead
ers got. They even offered for Pete Rollins to mediate the situation (he was ask
ed and agreed) and I turned it down. Pete is a close friend of the leader who we
nt around Transform saying I was bipolar, among other things. There was no way i
n hell I was going to enter any discussion with any of them. At that time there
were not many who were truly standing beside me. (I do not hold anger with those
who did not stand at that time. It was complicated and I get it)
I realize my pic is up on here but I wish for my real name not to be used. I can
not put my family through any more hurt. I just wanted Julie to know how many of
us who have been torn apart are here. I realize many may want to find the convo
s and history I am bringing up, but my family is still healing from the bombs em
ergent put in our lives. I just cannot allow them to get bombed again.
Re McLare's non-apology - Xnity21 2015 and Cana Initative 1, Justice for Julie 0
FYI - unlike actual denominations, there is no actual functioning governance str
ucture in either Mars Hill or US emergent set up to deal with abuses committed b
y those connecterd to either entity. In the case of Mars Hill, Driscoll sits on
their Board of Advisors and Accountability, thus rendeirng them his personal paw
ns. The US emergent leaders are even more loosely structures as they've have alw
ays insisted there is no leadership in place - though they promote themselves as
leaders in selling their products.
I respect that. Your anonymity is safe. My own father, a person of the highest m
oral character and integrity was accused of being shady by my abuser because he
tried to find us alternative housing when my abuser (although court ordered to p
ay the mortgage) willfully and vindictively drove it into foreclosure and the ki
ds and I homeless, while he went off and bought he and his spiritual wife a new
home. There is no depth to which these people will stoop to destroy your name an
d reputation.
Wow.
Though sadly I'm not surprised by BMcL's response. It sounds like what one might
expect from Mars Hill's PR firm.
The sad thing in all of this is that, if I out myself as an atheist to my parish
and having been atheist since 2011, as well as being queer, the Catholic Church
will still try to find a way to trash me. Julie's situation, though unique, has
aspects that most certainly are not.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
And yes, McLaren's response is very much a non-apology. It's a long-winded "we a
dmit no fault but this is a wise path to take."
Stephanie Drury September 24, 2014 at 12:45 pm
Here's what Brian McLaren just did: http://s.mlkshk.com/r/10OTY
To be fair, I don't think BMcL just *intentionally* spat in Julie's face or gave
her the finger. I think he tried to find a way to appear to do the right thing
while protecting his and his buddies' interests. This doesn't in any way excuse
him: what he should have done is made a full and unreserved apology. But paintin
g him (or anyone else) as blacker than satan isn't really helpful.
(BTW, I have absolutely no dog in this fight, and am absolutely on the side of t
he victim(s).)

Here's how I read Brian's apology:
" I was one of several people who had been asked by both Tony and Julie in 2008
to help them in a time of marital crisis. We tried our best to help, but the mar
riage didn t survive."
--- Brian states his good intentions here. And also subtly throws Tony under the
bus (Tony and Julie ASKED him for his help ... but even though Brian tried his
best to help, Tony and Julie weren't able to hold it together)
"I read through all the postings on this thread and checked back as the list gre
w. I saw significant discrepancies between the version of the story that was bei
ng told on this thread and my experience and understanding of what actually happ
ened. "
--- Brian here calls Julie a liar, and implies that his understanding of the sit
uation is better than hers (gaslighting again)
"However, I was at a distance and was only peripherally involved because I extri
cated myself from the situation early on. Because I take accusations of spiritua
l abuse seriously (as, I m sure, do all the people named in Julie s email),
in recent days I ve gone back in my email archives and reread the many emails
Julie sent or forwarded to me during and since 2008."
--- Several things here. One, he contradicts himself from the previous paragraph
where he implies his experiences and understanding are superior. This is classi
c manipulation, because by stating superior knowledge, then saying, 'of course I
could be wrong', you effectively close off argument that you are wrong. Two, th
e 'many emails' Julie sent him paints her as a needy, unstable woman ...after al
l, he was just trying to help Tony and Julie keep their marriage together, but o
bviously she (and he) didn't take his advice. Third, he implies here again that
he knows more of the situation than everyone else here, having been involved sin
ce 2008, which makes all of our opinions irrelevant.
"I have come to see a few things that could have been done differently, especial
ly with the benefit of hindsight. I also see areas where, if the counsel given t
o Julie and Tony had been followed more fully, outcomes could have been better"
--- Here he more overtly throws Tony under the bus. If Tony (and Julie) had only
followed what he said, their marriage would have survived. He mentions 'a few t
hings that could have been done differently', but does not say what they are, th
ereby effectively refusing to take any personal responsibility. It's all Tony's
and Julie's fault. Brian has been a good friend and only tried to help.
"But I have never witnessed or observed anything even close to abuse by any of t
he people named; in fact, I have only witnessed sincere and solid pastoral care
in a tragic and volatile situation, right up to this moment. "
--- Again, he's saying here that Julie is lying. No abuse happened, by Tony and
CERTAINLY not by Brian himself (who was only trying to give sincere and solid pa
storal care in a tragic and volatile situation). The word 'volatile' insinuates
that Julie is mentally unstable, more gaslighting.
"I think that someone on this thread made a good suggestion. She shared that she
was once accused of something. A group of qualified and mature people reviewed
the evidence in a responsible way. She suggested taking what has been shared on
this thread, along with information that can t in good conscience be shared in
public, for private professional review, making use of structures developed by
denominations over many years of dealing with situations like these."
---Several things. First, by referencing the person 'accused of something', Bria
n again implies that this is just a mere accusation, a nontruth, a lie, and that
he himself, as well as Tony and everyone else mentioned by Julie, are innocent.
Second, 'a group of qualified and mature people' to review the evidence - Brian
is saying here that everyone participating in the conversation here are neither
qualified (despite the many who say they are survivors of experiences just like
this one, not to mention Julie herself), nor mature (this follows the party lin
e that people here are mere internet rubberneckers taking voyeuristic pleasure i
n watching the train wreck of a marriage). Third, he hints that there is informa
tion that he and others are holding back because they can't 'in good conscience'
share it - what could this be other than more dirty and nasty and crazy things
Julie has done, from which Brian and Tony et al are graciously protecting her by
letting it not be known. Again gaslighting Julie, while elevating Brian to the
level of benevolent would be protector. Fourth, it's highly ironic that Brian ap
peals to higher denominational authority to review the 'evidence', when he himse
lf is unwilling to submit to any leadership, being an independent pastor (correc
t me if I'm wrong here please)
"I think that is a good idea, and I will do my best to see it is done. Because I
have some idea of the legal dimensions of situations like this, I do not believ
e it is wise or appropriate to say anything else at this time."
--- Brian hints a vague legal threat (see I can do this too: liability! slander!
legal! tort! these words hold a lot of weight when they really shouldn't). Then
he uses 'legal dimensions' as an excuse to not come back here and face any peop
le who would ask him questions. This shows he is not interested in dialogue.
In summary:
Brian is just being a good friend and providing solid pastoral help in a tragic
situation in which his trusted friend Tony was sadly married to a mentally unbal
anced woman. Despite Brian's efforts to help, the marriage fell apart (it perhap
s would not have if Tony and Julie had taken Brian's advice instead of sending a
n avalanche of needy, emotional emails). Brian has no responsibility to claim he
re, since Julie is lying about all the physical, spiritual and emotional abuse.
Tony has some responsibility because he didn't take Brian's advice. Julie has th
e most responsibility because she is a liar and a vindictive, unbalanced woman.
Brian would like to talk further about this, but sadly commenting on Internet fo
rums is inviting lawsuits, so everybody should be quiet now so that they don't g
et sued.
The End.
Stephanie Drury September 24, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Appearing to do the right thing while protecting your buddies' interests is what
the Catholic church did in covering up their sex abuse scandal and it's what So
vereign Grace ministries did in covering up their scandal, etc. etc. I am not ca
lling anyone blacker than Satan. But doesn't Satan disguise himself as an angel
of light?
@Stephanie Drury: fair points all.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
In my experience, Brian McLaren is the one emergent co-founder who has been will
ing to bare witness to the wounding present in this community. During tough time
s he stayed in dialogue with me even when it was hard and we disagreed. I don't
believe he deserves this beating and I wish folks would give him the benefit of
the doubt. I would venture to say that anything you are reading into his respons
e says more about you than it does about him. I imagine just about anyone who ha
s spent any time with him can recognize the loving kindness practice that he mos
t certainly practices as he is, at the end of the day, a loving and compassionat
e man. I'm not going to argue this point further and I'm not gonna make anyone w
rong for disagreeing with me, but I need to say how much I hate to see Brian dem
onized in this thread. Again I grieve for the pain that people in this community
have experienced.
@Brian,
So what I hear you saying is, "Mistakes were made. You should all have listened
to me in 2008 and this wouldn't have happened. But I'll make sure that my group
of 'qualified mature people' reviews the evidence, and [legal-shield-no-comment]
."
I'll grant that this thread has enough in it that it can easily take 2 days or l
onger to read through and consider what's here, but after doing that, this is th
e best you can come up with? Thanks for nothing. I should point out that you are
not in a genuine position to spearhead making sure that some "qualified mature
people" reviews the evidence, both because you are a named accused and because y
ou are have a financial interest in seeing Tony and Doug exonerated. Even after
acknowledging that in hindsight, things could have been done differently, you st
ill can't apologize... istm that if all you've seen is "sincere and solid pastor
al care in a tragic and volatile situation, right up to this moment", you must h
ave been squinting pretty hard all this time.
@All,
I'm still appalled by the fact that the courtesy of an apology still isn't forth
coming. Not even, "Gee, I guess we really shouldn't have tried to have you commi
tted, especially now that we know you're certifiably not crazy. Sorry about that
."
Note carefully that Julie isn't even asking for justice in this thread. Don't ev
er equate apologies with justice. Nobody has said anything about restitution...
an apology is an extremely low bar to meet, and here it's tripping up some prett
y major "leaders" in the utmost sense possible.
Holly, he's not even apologizing for one single thing. Not even for trying to ha
ve Julie committed. How should he be given the 'benefit of the doubt' when he wo
n't even take responsibility for what he's done wrong?
Having read BMcL's comment a couple more times and thought about it some more, I
'd like to retract my previous comment (time stamp 12:49 pm). Brother Maynard is
right: making an apology is a pretty low bar to meet, and what we actually see
here appears to be so much posturing.
Kimberly September 24, 2014 at 2:12 pm
First, context & full disclosure, this is me: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/emerg
entvillage/2013/06/i-am-emergent-village/
Thank you all for sharing this space & having this conversation. I have read eve
ry comment. I can not speak to the facts of any of it, aside from two things. 1.
Having experienced Doug's attempts to silence & shutdown internal critique on t
he EV facebook page. And 2. The silencing, shaming, abuse & lies experienced by
Lost Voice.
Change doesn't come from us all being polite decorum & waiting out turn to speak
. Change and healing are most often messy and require that all the shit be broug
ht to the surface and sorted through. I was reminded of this recently in worksho
ps with both Chris Crass (Collective Liberation) and Pete Rollins (yes, THAT guy
).
I've been rather disconnected from the EV world the past 6 months or so, but I k
now that there are those working to challenge oppression, misogyny & white supre
macy. This is good work. However, it does not preclude the damage that has been
done over the years in the name of EV. We have to own our histories - the system
ic evils that have been committed.
I have personally experienced narcissim & spiritual abuse in another context, an
d I understand the manipulation & isolation involved.
I confess, I was struggling with my decision to attend a local church conference
I attend every year, this weekend. As in years past, there will be people there
who initiated & participated in the behavior that harmed Lost Voice. That's alw
ays been a source of tension for me, yet in my privilege I chose to attend anywa
y. This year Brian McLaren is one of the speakers, and given this current discus
sion I can not in good conscience sit and listen. I have always tried to walk th
at fine line of peacekeeper, but I no longer know which way is up. I would rathe
r spend the time in Examen of my own complicitness and complacency than to keep
sweet and take good notes.
All we can do is what is within our control. Speak truth. Listen. And cultivate
practices that liberate rather than dominate.
Mother Turista September 24, 2014 at 2:41 pm
Brian would have been better served by just saying nothing. It's like every time
someone with an EC financial / power / tribal interest comments here, they just
further confirm the history of control and obfuscation and corruption and abuse
s that have remained hidden, but are now coming to light.
If anyone else wants to come here and "apologize" please don't embarrass yoursel
f, or insult the emotional intelligence of the very bright and empathic people h
ere, many who have faced real abuse at the hands of religious leaders. If you ca
n't simply apologize without pathetic caveats and legal-religious-psychological
babble-weaseling, then just don't say anything.
I don't believe I could possibly improve upon Danica's stellar explication of Mc
Laren's non-apology apology. However, seeing as there are clearly people in this
discussion thread who are disinclined to lend equal weight and credibility to t
he words of a woman when there's a perfectly good white man about I will endeavo
r to break down one particularly telling statement (to me, at least) in McLaren'
s non-apology apology so that, perhaps, something might pierce the fog McLaren i
s attempting to deploy as a defensive shroud.
In the first paragraph of his comment, Brian McLaren wrote, "I was one of severa
l people who had been asked by both Tony and Julie in 2008 to help them in a tim
e of marital crisis. We tried our best to help, but the marriage didn't survive.
"
I don't know Brian McLaren personally so I'm left to discern what sort of person
he is based upon his conduct a practice I strongly recommend in any and all c
ases regardless of how well one knows another person, to be quite honest. Upon r
eading the above-quoted statement, my first thought was, "Oh, he's that guy." Th
ere have been a breathtaking number of "that guys" in this comment thread, but M
cLaren managed to distinguish himself as a real oner in that category merely by
having the audacity to offer that statement in a public forum. You've heard of a
man's man, I'm sure. McLaren has now shown himself to be a "that guy's that guy
."
McLaren first offers a not-terribly-subtle claim of authority by which to establ
ish his bona fides, and to stave off any challenges to his account, one would as
sume. But the thing which leaps out at me in the statement above is the second s
entence. My training, academically speaking, is in logic and rhetoric, and havin
g taught first year college students I tend to read everything as though I'm gra
ding. It's a habit I have been unable to quit despite not having stood before a
classroom in more than a decade.
Having offered that caveat, what I would ask everyone kindly to take note of is
the shifting of responsibility between the first clause and the second clause of
that second sentence. In clause one, McLaren states that he, along with the oth
er Emergent leaders Julie has named, tried their very best. However, in clause t
wo he doesn't continue by saying that those leaders failed in their task. No, it
was the marriage which failed. While most people wouldn't notice it, this is a
crucial shift, and it was deftly done.
It seems to me that McLaren has tipped his hand rather significantly. His shift
from active to passive voice is difficult to detect unless one obsessively notic
es such things, but its effect on the reader is no less powerful for that fact.
Just as a book cannot write itself, a marriage cannot fail of its own volition.
The individuals who have entered a marriage make choices which directly influenc
e whether or not they are able to maintain that relationship, so it's the actors
within the relationship who succeed or fail. Likewise, those who attempt to int
ercede to save a marriage can either succeed or fail in that endeavor.
By dint of subtle phrasing, McLaren has not only moved to absolve Tony Jones of
any responsibility for the end of his marriage. He has also attempted to relieve
his colleagues of any responsibility in failing to save it. Of course, that was
the point of his entire comment. Had McLaren even implied that there was fault
to be assigned then he would necessarily have left himself open to being questio
ned as to who was at fault and how. Assuming he offered clarification (doubtful)
, he would then have to defend both his judgement regarding who was at fault and
the nature of that fault, and that leaves him entirely vulnerable to Julie's co
unterpoints. The real peril for McLaren comes from Julie's claims that he and th
e other Emergent leaders in question did not, in fact, attempt to save her marri
age, but instead took an active role in ending it in favor of a pairing they fou
nd more suitable for their friend and colleague. For McLaren, that is a slippery
slope he most certainly does not wish to find himself on since answering one qu
estion would inevitably lead to him having to answer more, and with each success
ive answer the slope beneath him would become steeper and slipperier. Most impor
tantly, though, is the fact that his shift in the second sentence betrays a know
ledge on his part that there is some amount of damaging information which is ris
ing dangerously close to the surface, hence his refusal to offer details despite
taking the trouble to appear on this thread.
Seeing that Julie has made it clear in multiple comments here that she is entire
ly willing to open the books for anyone who cares to challenge her version of ev
ents, we're left with only one conclusion. Despite McLaren's posture of showing
reasonable and responsible judgement, allowing full disclosure is very likely to
lead to not insignificant damage to Tony Jones. That McLaren is now publicly ci
rcling the wagons would also seem to indicate that there is substantial risk of
damage for the others Julie has named as being accessories to the wrongs committ
ed against her. The potential for damage must go well beyond dings to reputation
.
Austin Thomas September 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm

I know a couple people who know Brian personally, and they all say he's one of t
he nicest, most thoughtful people they've ever met. His writings have had a huge
influence on my faith, and I wouldn't be where I am today if I hadn't read a Ge
nerous Orthodoxy.
Unfortunately, none of that lines up with what has been said about Brian in this
thread, and what has been revealed about his character through his bullshit apo
logy.
How hard is it to apologize for something you did? I mean, really? Be an adult.
Be a decent human being. Jesus christ.
I guess that would require a type of honesty and self-reflection that these guys
are incapable of.
Someone said somewhere that you will know a tree by its fruit. A thorn bush can
protest all day long that it is an apple tree, and write amazing books about how
it is an apple tree, and have others confirm that it is really a nice apple tre
e once you get to know it, and speak at conferences about producing apples on yo
ur branches ... but if it, once tested, produces thorns ... where do you go from
there?
Danica, I think Jesus said something along the lines of "fertilise it and give i
t a chance next year, then cut it down".
But that was for an unproductive tree, not a thorn bush.
While I wouldn't want to judge on the basis of one incident, Jesus clearly impli
es a time limit for waiting for fruit to change before taking radical action.
I also wonder if there is a "How many thorns does it take?"-style question that'
s appropriate. But I wouldn't want to be seen to excuse bad behaviour.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@Kimberly,
Great post that you linked... important perspective that I wish more EV leaders
would take up. Thanks for sharing it.
Nobody is saying that everything that happened in the wider EV / ECM was all bad
... but it's important to own up to the mistakes. Especially the really grievous
ones, rather than keep adding coverup to the list of faults.
The most disheartening thing to me is that this all feels so, wearily, familiar.
I could have written a script for how Brian, Tony, et al, have responded to thi
s situation. Because we've seen it in Mars Hill, the Catholic church, SGM, Bill
effing Gothard ... no matter the denomination the story remains the same. Even t
hough the emergent church touted itself as something new, something different, a
place where all can come to the table and freely participate and have their voi
ces heard ... believe me, as a woman, this was something that excited me and was
something I wanted to be a part of ... and then to have THIS come out of it?? T
o see that instead of being advocates and allies they are again the same old Boy
s Club members that we see across Christendom??? Honestly? It really pisses me o
ff. There really is nothing new under the sun.

@ Danica at 3:08pm: Whatever, hippie.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@Hubanks, 3:27pm = shaddupa yourface
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
I said it before and I'll say it again. Frederick Douglass was damn right: "Powe
r concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out ju
st what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measu
re of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will contin
ue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits o
f tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
I'm happy for Julie and others who have said they've had enough. I stand with th
em, and I believe them.
Still Cyncial September 24, 2014 at 4:20 pm
Brian McLaren comes off as a Gutless Wonder. Just the sort of thing Jesus never
ever was. Go ahead, Brian, carefully craft it, baby, your kingdom isn't worth tw
o cents and what's left of it will fall.
Stephen Miller September 24, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Hahahahahahahaha that's the worst "apology" I've ever heard. What a joke. Way to
spit in the face of the abused in the name of protecting ones financial and pow
er holdings. Way to be different Brian.
Boy, am I ever slow.
Just went to see what the hell JoPa is . . . for other outsiders, it's Tony JOne
s + Doug PAgitt. JOPA!
Yikes. Are these guys seriously still out there asking people to pay them for th
eir deep spiritual guidance?
Mind, boggled.
Stephen Miller September 24, 2014 at 4:55 pm
Btw Julie, keep it up. You've got support from us here and if you need anything
there's lots of us living in your the twin cities too. s_paul7@mac.com if for so
me reason you ever need any help or just a cup of coffee k?
Danica and John, very well said. Julie, you continue to be awesome. Back to Dani
ca with regard to thorn bushes--I will say that once in a while they can be used
to great effect. But knowing how and when to plant them is invaluable, after ha
ving cleared several out this year that were not well-planted by a previous home
owner. What is true in real life is also true in metaphor and sometimes getting
rid of them and planting something else in their place is the only way.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
So I would just like to interject again.
There are all kinds of apologies, from clear ones, to qualified ones, to pretend
ones. We've seen all of them here.
My hope is, as this conversation continues to richly unfold, that the qualifiers
and pretenders will come back with an amended version of their comments.
I believe that light illumines truth until it is impossible to deny it. Keep shi
ning your light! Eventually everything will become plain. I'm confident of this.
I also want to express my deepest respect and admiration for those who have foun
d their courage to speak. Your intellectual, spiritual, social and emotional int
elligence is profound. It has increased my assurance that people can accomplish
the impossible with words.
I'm changed.
I wonder whether Brian McLaren feels he still has enough influence and gravitas
to shut down the conversation here. His comment makes little sense to me, otherw
ise.
If so, it may be past time for a reality check as he's operating like just anoth
er Old Kind of (White Male) Christian.
John G September 24, 2014 at 5:35 pm
Even though I have been an atheist for several years, I am still somewhat drawn
to keeping an eye on the goings-on in the faith was a part of for many years. Th
e stories of manipulation and ass-covering are things which I witnessed myself,
far too many times in the churches I was involved with. Kudos to David Hayward f
or his incisive cartoons and the truth they deliver, and for providing a haven f
or the wounded. Julie, it has been inspiring to see your courage, and that you a
re being vindicated here. Even if only a few of those who have caused you harm a
nd treated you unjustly, have stepped up to own some of their complicity, that h
as to be very meaningful. More power to you, and those around you who care about
righting wrongs. It is shocking and disheartening how Christian leaders have co
nspired to protect Mr. NPD. Oh, and even though I owe a bit of credit to Brian M
cLaren's writings for helping me let go of my Christian beliefs, his weasel-word
ed non-apology turned my stomach. Anyway, to this outsider's eyes, there is impo
rtant healing work being accomplished here, for the wounded. I'm glad that David
and Julie have refused to be cowed into silence.
Brian, I do not believe that anyone, including Julie, blames you for the failure
of the marriage. As has been stated repeatedly, the divorce is not the issue be
ing addressed.
A few questions to consider, since you won
To what do you attribute the
derstood
actually happened
Because you
t be saying anything else:
significant discrepancies
between what you un
and the stories shared in this comment thread?
take accusations of spiritual abuse seriously
, in your review
of prior emails, did you not reconsider the attempt by the discernment team to h
ave Julie committed to a mental institution to be potentially abusive?
Realistically, how could a group of people with professional and collegial alleg
iance to Tony pastorally care for Julie in the midst of this
tragic and volat
ile situation ?
If Julie did not experience the involvement of this team of spiritual leaders as
sincere and solid pastoral care,
do you believe it is appropriate to simp
ly dismiss her claim that what she experienced was spiritually abusive?
Brian, if only you felt free to speak!
It's unfortunate that the fear of lawsuits (a form of the fear of people) is hol
ding you back.
I also wonder whether your association with those named holds you back as well.
(And if so, fair enough - friendships are powerful ties.)
But it would be terrible to have to decide between career, income, and reputatio
n; and finding the truth. And even more terrible to be unconscious of the influe
nce of these ties.
Might I suggest that you're not the best person to initiate a private investigat
ion?
Given your existing involvement in the situation, any committee you convene woul
d inevitably be accused of bias, particularly if it had members among the accuse
d, and/or closely dependent on them.
Here's a thought: rather than disempower Julie by creating a secret process over
which she has little visibility or control, why not ask her what she wants done
?
I think she's made it very clear that she wants an apology from all involved. Pe
rhaps that will come, in time.
May I suggest one further piece of pastoral advice for Tony Jones?
(I've not asked Julie about this, by the way - it is simply my impression.)
"Settle with your adversary on your way to court ", that is, stop with the law
suits. (These should be publicly verifiable.)
Julie, do you mind if I post links to the summary of events and costs relating t
o the court cases?
(I was surprised when reading them - they last from 2008 to 2014 - how exhaustin
g for you both!)
JulieMcMahon September 24, 2014 at 6:28 pm
Tim I have absolutely nothing to hide. It is gut wrenching to know my late fathe
r spent over $500,000 having to fight off endless custody battles and endless mo
tions to reduce and eliminate support. Only n NPD could produce such litigious s
corched earth.
@Linda,
Excellent questions. Love the observation about having someone committed not bei
ng potentially abusive. It's weird how leaders don't seem to get it that having
people who feel abused come and submit themselves to their counsel (in council?)
again and again only exacerbates the feelings of -- if not the actual -- abuse
itself.
Seems clear to me now that one's orthodoxy can be far more generous than one's o
rthopraxy.
JulieMcMahon September 24, 2014 at 6:40 pm
Brian McLaren. I am sad. Sad you are not the man of God I had believed you to be
. You have been sent irrefutable evidence and heard here my truthful and accurat
e account of varying abuses by the two people you will speak for at their Christ
isnity 21 event in Phoenix, AZ. The abuses and smear campaign have been verified
on this very thread and by witnesses. You disappoint me greatly. I am saddened
to know that after all these years, your response to scandal is the same. Self p
reservation. I am sickened and sad.
How did Jesus treat His associates? With love, of course, which included calling
one his closest ones "Satan" when appropriate.
How did He treat the power brokers of the day? With love, of course, which inclu
ded taking up whips and chasing them from from temples courts, calling them snak
es and sons of snakes, whitewashed tombs, sons of hell, etc.
How did He treat the abused? With love, of course, which, interestingly, never s
eemed to include anything but compassion and always seemed to include standing u
p to the power brokers in the face of stern opposition and great personal risk.
How did Jesus treat Himself and His own interests? It would seem with utter indi
fference; e.g., He went into Jerusalem to face certain death; even though he had
the ability to summon up a megachurch-sized crowd in a moment that Brian McLare
n could only dream of, He would drive them away just as quickly. In fact, it see
med that the only time He served His own interests was in the service of others,
namely those on the bottom.
How does Brian McLaren do things? See a difference?
It honestly disturbs me that McLaren is issuing a THREAT.
Coupla things:
*****
JoPa - isn't that what they called the disgraced Penn State football coach that
provided safe haven for a child molester? I so love tone-deafness.
****
Is there a asterisk on emergent marriage vows "In sickness and in health" that s
tates "mental illness isn't sickness so I don't have to keep my vows."? I'm not
stipulating that Julie is mentally ill, but if she had been, wasn't the NPD thin
g supposed to stay by her and help her through her supposed sickness?
*****
Is there another opt out clause that says "From this day forward - unless I find
someone who gives me a spiritual boner..."?

Allow me to clarify - it reads like a very subtle, but back-able threat. He obvi
ously wants to take action for the fact that he is being actively connected to s
ome extraordinarily dark matters. Sorry, but when preachers make it right out ob
vious that they're focused more on purity of their movement and cleansing it of
undesirables, you know you have a really, truly shitty preacher on your hands.
Brian McLaren sounds like someone who either quietly permits or himself actively
perpetuates thugology. Jesus had better ideas than thugology in mind when he wa
s on this planet. And thugology got him crucified.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
BTW - if Doug and the rest who feel that they can attack a woman with subtle rem
arks want to meet me halfway, click the URL that is embedded in my name. You can
find me on facebook with this name. You can bring it. I've heard it before from
the Catholics, you don't fucking scare me anymore.
Whew! What a week it s been in the comments here. I ve stayed out of it sinc
e my apology for calling Julie names several years ago; several things that have
unfolded since have prompted me to comment again.
First, replies to a couple of specific individuals, and then a more general refl
ection:
@Still Cynical: You know what makes ME cynical? People taking pot shots at other
s while hiding behind pseudonyms. Care to reveal yourself?
In any event referring to this comment, I see where you re coming from with
the
qualifications, passive aggressive cattiness
quip. Thing is, that was
all directed at Bill K., not Julie. He and I are handling our differences offlin
e
where I prefer to handle volatile matters if at all possible
and we
re making some slow-but-steady progress.
So in the interests of making sure my apology to Julie as clean as I meant it, h
ere it is with the Bill K. snark edited out:
@Julie:
Hi Julie - even though I thought this was private between the two of
us, I now see that my comments (part of them, anyway) are public. I responded to
you privately, but I'm hearing that it's important to you that I bring it up pu
blicly to help bring resolution:
I'm so sorry that I called you "batshit crazy" in that private correspondence fo
ur years ago, Julie. That was my expression, and I own it. It's doubly-regrettab
le given my own mental health struggles - a sad turn of phrase that speaks to th
en-unresolved self-loathing, I think.
Please know that I went on no "campaign" to discredit you. I was responding to a
single blogger in private correspondence when I believed him to be taking an ir
responsibly one-sided tone in a public forum. What I didn t realize at the tim
e was that I was opposing him in an equally vehement tone, while myself only hea
ring one perspective in this story. I never apologized to you, for my unconsciab
le name-calling. I'm so sorry.
Here is my apology
un-qualified and as I mean it. Thank you for forgiving me
.
@Becky Garrison: Re
To Steve's credit, he is the only US emergent figure who
apologized to me for spreading rumors I'm batshit via the Emergent Village netwo
rk,
I take this to mean that either you don t feel I ve apologized, you r
ecognize (correctly) that I spread to rumors to
the Emergent Village network,
or that you don t consider me a US emergent figure.
In any case, since I was name-checked several times in this thread regarding you
, I want to make public what I hope you ve heard from me privately since my re
grettable remark in that email thread 3-4 years ago, of which you were a part:
I apologize for calling you
batshit crazy
too, Becky. I had beef with you,
but it was a poor and counter-productive way to express it. It set back our wor
king relationship, effectively ended our friendship, and utterly obscured the ve
ry issues I was seeking to address. I m so sorry.
(The reader might at this point be wondering:
Does Mike always refer to women
he s experiencing difficulty with as
batshit crazy ? This is a great que
stion, and one I asked myself! A search through my Inbox reveals that these were
the only two instances
but still, two is enough to give me pause. I ve no
ticed that I ve also had extreme difficulties with three men in my adult life;
the strong names these have evoked are
Thug, bully, and asshole.
All very
interesting.)
* * *
Okay, those are my shout-outs. Now to more general reflections:
As I ve continued watching this thread unfold, I ve felt both elated and sad
dened.
Elated, because those who have felt marginalized are finally getting to tell the
ir stories. In some cases, reconciliation is happening. Truths are being told. O
ld wounds are healing. I could say more about what s elating, but so many here
have expressed this better than I could.
Saddened, because friends of mine on here
women and men alike
are being
unfairly maligned with broad brushes, in my judgment. Some bordering on characte
r-assassination.
First of all, can we quite the with
gotcha
guilt-by-association tactics, w
here a commenter as
outed
as someone who
goodness me
has friendshi
p or professional ties with the accused? Heresy-hunters do this all the time; I
ve been personally tied with antichrist forces and UN One World Government for
ces based on who my friends are. It s a tired tactic; it s spiritual McCarth
yism. And, it s not even a particularly accurate indicator of where someone is
coming from.
For instance: Someone could rightly cite my
ties
with Becky Garrison. She
and her publisher have been clients of mine; years ago, I worked to promote her
book New Atheist Crusaders and Their Unholy Grail: Their Misguided Quest to Dest
roy Your Faith. I still wear its black t-shirt with the grail on it sometimes. I
t looks cool.
Knowing about this tie, someone on this thread who s been, say, taking Tony
s perspective could conclude that I m in cahoots with Becky s every syllable
. But this isn t accurate; in truth, I ve heartily
Amen d
some of Be
cky s input on this thread while wincing at other bits.
Similarly, speaking at a common event does not make you in cahoots. As a sometim
es-event organizer for the past fifteen years, I can guarantee you that those sh
aring a stage or tent do not necessarily the Get-along Gang behind the scenes!
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myNe1GJDxZM&w=640&h=480]
If only!
Finally, in the
sadness
category, I am disheartened that there s an almo
st universal disparaging in this thread of those who happen to be published auth
ors and/or speakers, as though this by default makes us The Man and incapable of
basic human compassion. As someone who s worked with 100+ authors in the past
decade, I can assure you

they re just as beautiful and f-ed up as any of
you, and most of them are as poor as you
some possibly more, because they hav
e this crazy notion that they can make their living (or at least part of it) by
their words. Our gracious host, David Hayward, is one such spiritually creative
entrepreneur, and
full disclosure!
a book containing his illustrations h
as been one of my publicity projects.
So there you have it: Speaking for myself, I have friends and professional relat
ionships and acquaintances (and I m sure, enemies) on all sides of this. Not n
eutral like the Swiss
more like complicit from every angle. As a result, I w
ant to build bridges. Perhaps even more importantly, I want to learn.
* * *
What I
m learning
David started this post to ask

ogy?
Which came first
the thug or the theol
And I think the

wisdom of crowds
has been very much in play to respond:
Thuggery can flow either direction.
To me, this is a wake-up call to all of
us
be we Emergent or Calvinist or Nones or Post-theist
to be aware of th
e very real potential for abuse in our midst. Not just in our movements, but our
selves/i>. So I ve been first and foremost putting the mirror to me: Why the n
ame-calling? What do I have to defend? When am I defending out of noble motives
versus ignoble ones? How can I discern the difference?
What I m about to say is my exercise in just this kind of discernment. I do so
with fear and trembling, because I have a feeling what I m about to say could
easily be mis-read and misunderstood by any
side
that s taken the time
to weigh in here.
If I could sum it up in a sentence, it would be:
ive everyone the benefit of the doubt?
What if it
s possible to g
Julie, Brian; David, Holly. Even Tony J.

And,
What would it take to have everyone feel comfortable
even safe
t
o do so?
Because I think that
Innocent until proven guilty
is not only a great lega
l principle
it s important for me to hold socially, too. I ve heard some
absolutely heart-breaking stories in this thread about alleged abuse; if even 1
0% of what s been alleged is true, there should be disciplinary
possibly e
ven criminal
repercussions. Certainly, offending parties should be removed f
rom leadership
perhaps indefinitely
certainly for a good, long time whil
e everything is examined and true restoration and reconciliation happen.
But I don t know that abuse has happened. This isn t me calling Julie
or
anyone else
a liar. I have my strong biases and opinions and righteous indi
gnations, and I m not tellin
you where they lie. But if I was on a jury, as
of this moment, I could not pronounce a verdict.
And I
d like to offer that, neither can you.
We have insufficient evidence. There are only two participants in this thread wh
o know what has transpired, and they are Julie and Tony. And obviously, their st
ories don t match up. Tony, being seen as the powerful one in this equation, h
as been brought low in this thread; Julie, recognized as the marginalized voice,
has been raised up. There is a corrective that s occurred here the feels like
justice. And it feels good to most of us.
But not all of us. Like David, I ve had personal conversations (I m going to
avoid the conspiratorial term
privately contacted,
because I think it unn
ecessarily privileges forums like this one as the only place where conversation
can happen) this week with friends who have been concerned about the direction
and even existence
of this comment thread. They feel like, if not 100% su
bstantiated, they constitute libel, defamation, fraud and character assassinatio
n; even if no one is in a litigious mood, the accusations stated here can destro
y reputations and careers. Unlike the way these folks have been characterized he
re, these folks are not
abuse-enablers;
many of them are active agents of
reconciliation in their own communities, spiritual and secular. Rather, they say
,
An un-moderated blog is not the place for such volatile grievances to be ai
red. Both alleged victim and alleged accuser can suffer serious harm here.
I both agree and disagree. I whole-heartedly agree that, given the range of ther
apeutic and mediation options available, a blog (of all things!) is a terrible f
orum for alleged abused and alleged abusers to have a free-for all. Just terribl
e! The risk of escalation without resolution is magnified a thousand-fold on (ga
sp
shudder) Internet comments. Don t believe me? Go on Huffington Post or
YouTube, read the comments, and see how long your faith in humanity lasts.
But I ultimately disagree with my sincere, well-meaning friends who say this for
um shouldn t exist to begin with, for this reason: While a blog comments secti
on is a piss-poor place for this conversation to be happening, it s happening
here because other options have been attempted and found wanting. This is a leve
ling space of last resort.
This has been a wakeup call for me, and I invite my fellow Emerge-ers to conside
r it a wakeup call for you, too. We progressive types cheer when the Bill Gothar
ds and Mark Driscolls are brought down. But when it's one of our own? Suddenly,
shit gets real when we recognize a more universal culpability. And I hope that's
where us wrestling-and-stumbling Jesus-followers can gain some perspective from
our Story - that somehow, there's grace and restorative justice for all of us,
victim and perpetrator alike.
Even so, it s complicated to me. Because I believe in "innocent 'till proven g
uilty," not just legally but relationally. But victims of abuse are so routinely
silenced that it just feels wrong to consider their testimonies out of hand whe
n they're sharing - even if we hope they aren't true. This was the mistake I mad
e with Julie, four years ago.
But please forgive me
everyone
if I don t want to make the opposite mi
stake and throw Tony under the bus.
I want to give all parties concerned the benefit of the doubt until something mo
re can happen.
What might this
something more
look like?
I can propose nothing better than Jennel Paris:
This situation calls for investigation by a group of mature believers. Try a
clergy abuse organization
that s what they do. Try the Evangelical Covenan
t Church
they helped start Solomon s Porch. Try asking the United Methodis
t Church or other denominations that have structures in place for this kind of t
hing. I will help do this.
I was once falsely accused, in public, with great potential consequence to my li
fe and livelihood. It was awful. The matter was taken before a group of qualifie
d, mature people who reviewed the evidence and exonerated me. It is possible to
investigate the past, and the truth of events, in a responsible way.
This proposal is echoed by Brian McLaren:
I think that someone on this thread made a good suggestion. She shared that s
he was once accused of something. A group of qualified and mature people reviewe
d the evidence in a responsible way. She suggested taking what has been shared o
n this thread, along with information that can t in good conscience be shared
in public, for private professional review, making use of structures developed b
y denominations over many years of dealing with situations like these.
I think that is a good idea, and I will do my best to see it is done.
In my own life, I ve experienced Brian as a good man full of integrity, whose
insides match his outsides. I choose to take his statement at face-value, and tr
ust that he will take steps in this direction. Julie, if you and others don t
feel safe with Brian, et al, taking the sole initiative in this, I hope you can
find co-mediators you do trust. I, for one, would contribute to a GoFundMe campa
ign to get David flown out by your side.
This process has started on a blog, by necessity due to previous failed options.
But it would be a tragedy if it ended here on this blog. A Truth & Reconciliati
on Committee created by and for both parties is the way forward, I think
and
I m willing to put my own money up to see this happen.
PS: I want to affirm what Holly Roach has said here about the trajectory of Emer
gent Village, and many fellow-travelers, official and non: We re growing. We
re learning from our mistakes. And perhaps most importantly, we re diversifyi
ng. Powerful women like Holly and Teresa Pasquale are taking the lead, catalyzin
g networks like EV, TransFORM, The Center for Action and Contemplation and the W
ild Goose Festival, to say nothing of countless congregations and cohorts, into
communities for common good. We re evolving from our well-intentioned but ofte
n-terminally-short-sighted evangelical white male roots into a truly inclusive s
pace for women, people of color, and LGBTQ voices. In fact, I m on my way out
to
full disclosure!
hang with Holly and others who are in Raleigh learni
ng from the predominantly black and Latino Christian Community Development Assoc
iation about organizing and peacemaking. I wish nothing but peace and all good t
o those who have moved on from Emergence flavors of faith
and/or theism in g
eneral
because of the hurts they ve experienced. And I m experiencing th
e fresh stirrings of the Spirit, creating new life from composted ground.
Dan September 24, 2014 at 8:50 pm
I'm still shaking my head at this whole thread... "Spiritual wife?" Really? I re
gret ever approvingly quoting anything that Tony Jones has ever written. Dude ha
s about as much credibility as Rob Ford with me now. Hey Tony, can I relieve mys
elf on your lawn, me and my friends have discerned that it is my spiritual toile
t.
Mike, to be completely honest with you...I tried to be open to you...again, but
I don't trust you as far as I can throw you. I just don't. My instincts sense so
mething so far from neutrality and you reek of an agenda disguised well enough t
o the lay person, but sorry....not buying it.
Jenell Paris also said she witnessed first hand the smear campaign. Chuck witnes
sed Doug Pagitt threaten to arrest me when I was at my sons preschool. Steve Kni
ght said Jo of JoPa scrubbed the EV website of evidence. Andrew Jones said he wa
s told I was "bat shit" crazy.
There is only ONE truth and I'm telling it. I don't trust you and my instincts s
eldom fail me.
The discernment team was spiritually abusive to cover up an affair, justify a di
vorce and smear my name and mental health all while the ACTUAL person with the v
ery the serious and documented mental health diagnosis was left unchecked. I was
stonewalled and silenced even when verifiable proof of all allegations were bro
ught to their lying faces. They did NOTHING. It is confirmed Phyllis Tickle prol
iferated the smear campaign....I read an email penned by HER. I met her once for
10 minutes and she felt qualified to comment to a 3rd party that Danielle Shroy
er who I also met ONCE is a reputable source to comment on my crazy status.
This is REAL. This happened. There is undeniable proof.
There is only one truth and I am telling it, whether people want to accept it or
reject it. It happened. The are sitting on lies. They know it and I know it. Ri
ght, Doug Pagitt?!
'Nother thing(s):
Abusing someone isn't a "mistake." Abetting abusers isn't either.
TJ has had the benefit of the doubt for YEARS and from a lot of people on this t
hread who never apparently had that lofty aim when Julie was being gaslighted, t
hey just bought the BSC stuff hook, line and sinker.
I will take my concerns Mike offline.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
With permission from Kate:
Kate Willette
ebook is a very good idea, David. Your own comments, by the way, are what make t
he unfolding possible. It's like watching a group of people work together to unp
ack a stuffed closet: some want to put the damaged items right back in their box
es, some want to wave them like bloody shirts, some want to pause and see what t
hey're actually looking at. And you calmly want everyone to understand that the
unpacking is necessary, no matter how queasy it makes us, and that getting it do
ne is the only way to be okay. Well done.
@Mike - I don't have the time or inclination to unpack all the dung left behind
by the white elephants you're ignoring ... a few points will suffice ...
In an email exchange earlier this year, when I asked you once again for an apolo
gy (you said you did nothing that required an apology), I brought up the Tony/Co
urtney affair. You denied that the affair actually began before they got married
.The evidence indicates otherwise. Sounds like discrediting Julie to me.
We never had any paid professional ties - back in 2007 when we were still buddie
s, you offered your comments re about 1/2 of the New Atheist Crusader book and I
did likewise with a book you were writing. In fact, I recall when I was writing
for the Ooze expressing concern that the Ooze blogger book campaign you managed
was being handled in violation of recently established FTC regulations requirin
g bloggers to reveal if they have been paid to promote a product. I recall stati
ng that we needed to follow their regulations in order for me to feel comfortabl
e contributing - your response was to dismiss me as crazy when in fact, I was tr
ying to keep the Ooze from getting the boot by the FTC. The Ooze shut down short
ly thereafter as Spencer moved on to other things, so this became a moot point.
In a nutshell, if one runs a book campaign that's being paid for by an outside e
ntity (usually the publisher or author), one cannot then post comments about sai
d book in social media forums without disclosing this professional connection. I
was not the only one who brought this issue to you BTW.
There was a helluva lot more than one email exchange that I caught wind of here
- this included taking private emails where you and I were discussing what I was
led to believe was s confidential conversation regarding how to help a mutual f
riend only for me to learn that you forwarded portions of my email out of contex
t to that person without including your own comments. I cannot begin to describe
the hell that caused on my end as I was seen as the sole vilian when in fact ot
hers had similar concerns. For the record, this was the ONLY exchange I had with
you where I said things via email that I did not want communicated elsewhere (a
ll our other exchanges were comments I either made to the person or tried to rec
h them to chat.) But again, in this one instance, I thought I was chatting with
a trusted colleague. My mistake and one I paid for dearly.
Simply speaking at any event does not make one in cahoots with the organizers. C
oming to the immediate defense of the gatekeepers who control who gets to speak
is suspect at best. And I would encourage those who agree to speak at fugture US
emergent events to weigh carefully if they really want to continue to line the
pockets of those who engage in on and offline cyberbullying. As one watches this
debate unfold, the ones who defend the US Emergent tradition of gaslighting and
other on and offline bullying tactics are those who have a financial stake in t
he Emergent brand. That speaks volumes.
As far as the rest of the elephants, I'm leaving that dung to die. Apology accep
ted but like Julie, I don't trust you one whit. And as I am on deadline for some
projects, I don't have the inclination or time right now to resolve this offlin
e nor do I trust you to handle with integrity anything that I've pen to you offl
ine. Lessons learned.
Is anyone else triggered by watching the women repeatedly have to stand up to th
e men, only to be ignored or condescended to?
Mike Morrell September 25, 2014 at 12:03 am
Hi Julie - hearing that you don't trust me as far as you can throw me, I feel tw
o things. The first is sadness. The second is respect. I'm not asking you to tru
st me; trust or the lack thereof is your prerogative. I mean what I say about wa
lking the line - totally giving you the benefit of the doubt and the right to sh
are your story, and considering Tony innocent 'till he's proven guilty in...I do
n't know what. A court of law, or a court of mutually respected, or respectively
-chosen, peers. My heart hurts for all parties concerned, and I hope you each fi
nd the exoneration and/or support you need. I'm open to anything you have to say
offline.
As for me, I stand by what I wrote. And, despite relational and/or professional
ties with all parties concerned, as of 3Q 2014 my income is 0% dependent on eith
er Emergence or the SBNR crowd. Emergence Christianity and TLS could go away tom
orrow - or this afternoon - and my livelihood would be 0% effected. So for any c
asting aspersions based on guilt-by-association, know that I've been in touch wi
th none of the Big, Bad Stakeholders - every perception I have is mine and mine
alone.
@ Becky - you're on deadline, I'm busy; I guess we'll just have to agree to disa
gree, yeah? I've felt bad through the years as I've felt you've had some truly v
aluable - even prophetic - things to say, not to mention your gifted satire. It'
s too bad that you've forwarded emails - and photos - held to be confidential, r
uining lives and reputations all in the name of "concern" - and burned bridges w
ith no fewer than four communities I've witnessed you attach yourself to, only t
o see you (and them) become disillusioned. Things could have been conducted bett
er by all parties concerned, and I'm sorry that things have turned out the way t
hey have.
Linda September 25, 2014 at 12:30 am
Mike,
Having read all of Julie's posts, I do not see her asking for a trial for Tony,
for him to be thrown under the bus, for disciplinary action, or for a reconcilia
tion process. She very clearly has asked for apologies from the discernment team
who she felt contributed to the painful circumstances of the divorce. It is an
interesting parallel to the Mars Hill situation that rather than simply apologiz
e, the remaining board continues to create processes to impose on those who are
asking them to engage in a transparent conversation.
Matt Scott September 25, 2014 at 12:53 am
I'm dubious about wading into this conversation, but I'll do so anyway in the ho
pes that there are open minds on both sides.
@Linda- Unlike the Driscoll situation, in which there is a vast amount of eviden
ce regarding the abuses perpetrated, this situation has Julie making some pretty
stark claims against various leaders of the ECM. Julie is demanding apologies a
nd has, to my knowledge, made no information other than her claims public. I bel
ieve she commented earlier that she would provide David with evidence of her cla
ims, but I have not seen David confirm any aspects of her statements.
If this is a space for Julie (and Becky and Mojojules) to speak about how she wa
s treated, as David claims in an earlier comment, then that is one thing. If the
re is anything I can garner from reading all these comments, it's the Julie hasn
't felt heard in several years, and this space has been great in that respect. T
o demand full mea culpa from all of the mentioned parties, however, is another t
hing entirely. From my read of Brian's last comment, he admitted that some thing
s were not handled as well as they could have been, but his interpretation of th
e evidence available does not add up to the claims posited by Julie. That seems
fairly reasonable to me, an outsider.*
*I was a fringe character in the ECM from 2008 - ~2011 as an incredibly minor bl
ogger and a member of a local cohort
@Mike - Given your lack of understanding re blogging ethics, I don't expect you
to get this but you just committed libel. I wasted too much energy in the past d
ealing with people who hurled crapola like this at me for me to go down that pat
h again. With every post, you just dig your hole a bit deeper - please for your
sake, stop.
For the rest of the group, for a few brief years, Mike and I connected via one c
ommunity and that the Ooze - after our falling out, I remained in contact with S
pencer and was asked to speak at the last Soularize. Unfortunately, I was unable
to raise the money to attend. So much for being ostracized. There are no other
communities where we both intersected though we did have a # of mutual acquainta
nces given at the time we both played in the more progressive sphere of Xnity. I
OW, ignore the man behind the curtain who is creating some version of Oz that be
ars no resemblance to reality. As I have said repeatedly, when one is being gasl
ight to high heavens, one can go ballistic from the stress and trauma - I've rea
ched out to everyone I might have offended and with the notable of those connect
ed to the US emergent brand, we made amends.

Matt - see David Hayward's earlier post re those who have emailed him - this con
vo is FAR greater than simply 3 women getting PO'd. And yes, Julie has the evide
nce and has indicated repeatedly a willingness to share this info upon request.
Over the past seven years, I've compiled research or archive sites on half a doz
en situations involving spiritual abuse - some of them also involving allegation
s of criminal acts and/or civil liability, each having different thresholds of e
vidence for conviction. So I've been very concerned about issues of fact-finding
, evidence, analysis, and reasoned interpretation instead of just speculation.
In terms of issues of evidence, **assuming Julie has documents for various thing
s she has contended** (and at various points, she's indicated that she indeed do
es), then I'm relatively inclined to find her side of the situation explored on
this thread to have a lot of primary-source evidence toward finding facts and in
terpreting the truth. As I mentioned in one of my earliest comments here, I trac
ked this in late 2009/early 2010 and commented then on a few blogs. Tony Jones h
as had a lot of opportunities then and since to be specific in responding to (wh
at I see as) legitimate questions - as he was and is a public figure - but rarel
y has done so online, at least to my knowledge. Help me out with links if you kn
ow of any.
As Matt Scott notes, Julie has not posted her documents. But she's made it clear
that she has them and refers to them. They look to be mostly emails, and papers
, or otherwise are the kinds of things that are verifiable by online research, s
uch as the number of legal motions she has had to contend with. Also, if I remem
ber right, Julie has mentioned recently forwarding some evidences to many of the
people she wants apologies from, and/or that she previously offered to share he
r documentation with them, and generally has been rebuffed.
Anyway, of the first 574 comments on this thread, Julie posted 85 of them -- 15%
. This is her sharing her account of what has happened, but there is more here t
han mere narratives. When we read all of her comments (and I did a second readin
g of them this evening), we find her referencing very specific pieces of documen
tary evidence. She also mentions particular people who can supply eye-witness te
stimony to certain events or issues. Those are all primary sources. And then sev
eral people have supplied their stories of similar occurrences within Emergent c
ircles, which are secondary sources to show potential problem patterns.
Granted, this is nowhere near the scale of Mars Hill issues (for which I blogged
an extensive Research Guide in recent weeks), or number of people affected.
But consider Julie's comments again for what they report about pieces of evidenc
e she has, realizing that some details on the same item of evidence is often sca
ttered across multiple comments. At the bottom of this comment, I've pasted in s
ome of those 85 links that I found had the most specific details or item listing
s.
Meanwhile, I tend to agree with Linda that what Julie has consistently been aski
ng for are real apologies from principal people she contends harmed her in the o
verall situation. Not trials, not restitution, not mediation, etc. Who knows, Ju
lie may choose a different direction if nothing happens along the lines of basic
apologies.
But any larger and more formal process could actually get way more complicated i
n part because, as best I understand it, most of that core list of people she's
mentioned had at the time of the main events all kinds of "interlocking connecti
ons" via business companies, tax-exempt non-profit church(es), and a tax-exempt

non-profit corporation. It isn't simply that they were all friends as Emergent V
illage writers-speakers-leaders-mentors. So that brings potential regularly agen
cy issues to bear (which is some of what Mars Hill could also end up dealing wit
h), on top of the contentions of criminal actions and/or civil liability issues.
Confused? Uh-huh. Took me weeks to work through parallel issues of Mars Hill. An
d because there are some parallels, if you're interested, check out this table o
f contents on the Research Guide, and especially the links to top legal/ethical
problems of non-profits.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/07/mark-driscoll-and-mars-hill-church-r
esearch-guide-part-2e/
So that's my piece on evidences and processes. Here are some of the key evidence
comments from Julie.
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-118146 (Lists most of the main documents in evidenc
e - emails, psychiatric evaluation report, MRI, discernment letter, etc.)
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-118319 (Specifics related to Tony having her arrest
ed for violation of the Order for Protection not to contact him by cell phone.)
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-123865 (Her psych evaluation she suffered "acute di
stress.")
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-124040 (She has had only 6 months without litigatio
n ongoing since 2008.)
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-124145 (Julie and the kids live below the poverty l
ine. At one point Tony owed over $50,000 in child support.)
hug-or-the-theology/#comment-125390 (Julie's father spent over $500,000 to fight
the custody battles and motions by Tony to reduce his support.)
Kevin S. September 25, 2014 at 2:00 am
I'll say this. Does anyone do passive aggression like Brian McLaren? He's like a
character in a Noah Baumbach movie (albeit one written by whoever was responsib
le for Patch Adams). I slow clapped that.
Hi Becky - I never said you were ostracized by anyone. I said "burned bridges."
And libel? Out of all the comments on this thread, I'm the one committing libel?
Goodness me.
And, I don't think so. You and I are both what is considered in Mass Comm Law "l
imited public figures." It takes a lot more than assertions one way or another t
o libel the likes of us. In addition to proving my statement wrong, actual malic
e would need to be proven...and I mean you no malice.
In fact, I mean my apology. I mean what I said about regretting how things went
down between us. And I mean what I said about you being insightful and prophetic
.
I only wish you wouldn't utterly malign and call "bullies" all the women and men
whom, like me, have had strained relations with you over the years. We don't ha
ve horns coming out of our heads. And neither do you.
Selah.
Oops! Correction to my last comment, about halfway down: "regularly agency issue
s" should have been "regulatory agency issues."
That means like the IRS at the federal level, or an attorney general at the stat
e level. Whatever agencies oversee non-profits, or other kinds of corporations a
nd companies, and can respond to complaints when non-profits especially are alle
gedly not functioning within the public interest, or there are other issues with
governance, conflicts of interest, inurement (use of a tax-exempt non-profit fo
r the private benefit or excessive benefit of someone with insider relationships
), misuse of funds that were solicited to be spent on a specific designation pro
ject, etc.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
@ Brad - I think you're right on in naming the material documentation that has b
een cited as at-hand. If a clergy abuse organization handled mediation, these wo
uld be Exhibits A - Z to attempt to establish what has occurred.
And you realize, I hope, that not all parties are feeling able to offer apologie
s. In my case, it was fairly cut and dry - I called Julie something unkind, and
that was unwarranted. But if she's wanting mea culpas from people who feel they
have access to different (and contradictory) facts than the ones offered as at-h
and, well...that's where it gets tricky. And that's why some kind of mediation i
s in order, I think - this won't be settled by who speaks the loudest on this bl
og thread. There is a fine line between the wisdom of crowds and a lynch mob - f
or both parties.
@Mike - I can't figure out what you mean given your ongoing Oz like intepretatio
n of events. For example, you make it sound like there's this huge cacophony of
people I'm attacking gladiator style - not true in the last. I am targeting a ve
ry specific and small gorup of author/speakers who have attached themselves to t
he US emergent brand in ways that are toxic and not theological. This thread cam
e about as the result of this group's dynamics which I think have been well illu
srated as being godawful.
You really don't get it. You just don't. But it's OK, I will just pick myself up
from the bus you keep throwing a few of us under and move on.
brambonius September 25, 2014 at 3:23 am
Julie, thank you for popping the 'emergent'-balloon for me.
Years ago when I discovered the 'emerging church' online (and I was quite late o
n the game) it did help me a lot in my personal faith where I was at the moment.
But afterwards, apart from the basic stuff like discorvering I was uncurably po
stmodern (the first 'a new kind of Christian' book reall helped me in that for e
xample, as well as a lot of blogs) but actually it did not bring anything that I
hoped for. But then again, there never was any 'emerging church' here in Flande
rs. (I once made an album tongue-in-cheek called 'I am the Belgian Christian lofi scene', but 'I am the Belgian emerging church' would not have that much farth
er from the truth)
But let's do a reality check worldwider: Where is the emerging church now worldw
ide? What did happen to that 'great emergence' that had been prophecied? I haven
't seen an inch of it, just as I didn't see any rapture that was prophecied by t
he dispensationalist or 'the great revival' that people have been promising agai
n and again in charismatic circles. Why is it that I am so used to false prophec
ies in all corners of my faith (and outside of it) that they just feel normal to
me?
Was it all just a bunch of Americans trying to make a living by selling books ab
out things that were very important just because they declared them to be so? Wh
at should I even care then? I don't see much that It seems that the '-ing-form'
has since then largely dissapeared (collapsed into 'missional'?) and that 'emerg
ent' has become something that I dpn't feel any connection with. Neither the 'st
raight white males with book deals' dividing the bounty nor the people who don't
seem to be able to talk about anything without having to trash straight white m
ales can hold my attention for very long I'm afraid.
Very painful to realise that behind the talk of 'flat structures' and 'open sour
ce religion' and whatever there was a lot of power games, and people being throw
n under the bus (or sacrificed to idols like success, having a name and mammon,
that are as popular in postmodernity as in any other age). All that for a very t
iny kingdom of a few local guys that only were king in a very localised own king
dom.
I don't think Julie here is the only one. And I am quite sure that if we are to
follow Jesus, not the big guys on stage but the people like Julie are to be are
main concern, above protecting brand names and book deals and whatever. Jesus di
d not come for those in the spotlight to give them a platform no matter what, bu
t for thoe thrown under the bus, those left behing, those pushed in the corner l
osing their religion. (Okay, I failed inserting a REM reference here)
If the egos are the main focus, the Holy Spirit dissapears to the background.
Whatever it is that has to emerge to bring in a new step in the history of Chris
tanity, it was not 'emergent' in its small secluded corner of the world, no matt
er how overhyped it got. And I frankly doubt that if there will indeed be a new
500-year rummage sale, that it will come from N-America -or W-Europe for that ma
tter-. (I do think that ironically the new pope might be closer to it than US-em
ergent anyway) It will probably not start in English and might not be visible on
the internet. And if we want to understand what' emerging globally we need to b
e able to look beyond our narrow scope. (I do not doubt that Andrew Jones would
be able to report about more movements that are more interesting and furthering
the kingdom than emergent-Us than we can count on our 2 hands for exammple...)
There always is the temptation to want to be 'historymakers' above all other thi
ngs, while we are called to love our neigbor in the first place.
(sidenote: I always had the idea that Brian MC, more than just 'postmodern', jus
t has a personality who hates confrontations and likes to keep the peace on all
sides, something like an Enneagram type 9 -I recognise that, I am like that myse
lf. But that doesn't mean that the one comment he made here doesn't deeply distu
rb me. Sometimes confrontation is needed. And repentence...)
(That last one might have been slightly off-topic, but I thought is was better t
o post it here than to involve my own blog in this conversation...)

Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
Just curious
is this conversation getting any attention elsewhere on the inte
rwebs? Like, are any well-known bloggers with big, popular platforms commenting
on it?
Likes(8)Dislikes(2)
None that I know of, not even a smaller one, but maybe I'm missing something...
I've only seen Stephanie Drury posting it on the 'stuff Christian cultures like'
FB page for discussion and people like Bill Kinnon tweeting about ir. It's even
completely ignored on the 'Emergent village' facebook group as far as I can see
.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
I wonder whether someone like Rachel Held Evans is even aware of this conversati
on ?
http://bramboniusinenglish.wordpress.com/ This is from his blog and I think it i
s perfect.
"And things need to be set right. Sin is a very destructive power that needs to
be dealt with
But all judgement is rooted in love."
Love is patient,
love is kind,
it is not envious.
Love does not brag,
it is not puffed up.
It is not rude,
it is not self-serving,
it is not easily angered
or resentful.
It is not glad about injustice,
but rejoices in the truth.
It bears all things,
believes all things,
hopes all things,
endures all things.
All I have asked for here is an authentic apology. You can't even do THAT?! Noth
ing more. The people involved directly and on the periphery know exactly who the
y are. Do they have the integrity to come forward or not? That is the question.
Doug Pagitt, your behavior bordered on sadistic in your mishandling of the situa
tion. As my Pastor at the time...spiritual abuse by your hand, and an clear abus
e of power, absolutely! You are clearly incapable of any shred of humility or re
morse and that is your downfall. We all know the truth don't we? Brian McLaren,
Brad Cecil, Danielle Shroyer, Doug Pagitt, Mike King, Mark Scandrette and that o
ne to ill to ever face reality. The behavior here and now and inability of those
involved to come clean speaks volumes of their true character....or lack there
of!!
Kimberly- I have tried to respond to you since yesterday. Nothing comes out righ
t. So, I will stick with this simple, but powerful thing....thank you.
JulieI have wanted an apology from those that bullied me and labeled me things that s
hould NEVER be used as a "black spot." Mental illness is not someone's character
. I have watched brave people fight that son of a bitch and they are brave. I st
arted embracing the label. If I was bipolar then it meant my abusers saw me as b
rave and it threatened them.
I have come to realize I will never have the apology I feel I deserve from the l
eaders who trashed my personhood. That was hard to come to terms with. These peo
ple are public figures and speak into people's lives. However some where I found
that peace. It is why I have stopped calling on one. The hardest part of all th
is was forgiving myself. Allowing these people to make me stop seeing my beauty.
Stop seeing my worthiness.
The people who SHOULD apologize for what they have done should. I wish they woul
d. However, knowing their link to those who abused me, I do not foresee it. Whic
h is more than sad. I am sorry for that. It burdens my heart because on some lev
el I get it and on another I do not. I wish I could hug you and cry, scream with
you. Then do a dance of freedom after that. If the apologies never come you are
worthy and have the right to stand in your truth. Know you have a sisterhood he
re, with me and others.
Peace and blessings!!!!
Some jurisdictions are considering legislation to make a medical doctor's apolog
y inadmissible in malpractice trials. The reason for this is the codification wh
at the verifiable evidence already suggests, viz. that people who receive an apo
logy at the time are far less likely to sue later on. Generally speaking, people
just want acknowledgement, admission, a little explanation, and an expression o
f remorse, i.e., an apology. If they don't get it, a large number turn to the on
ly means available to them in order to try and secure it, and it's a very costly
alternative for everyone.
Just sayin'.
Laura_A September 25, 2014 at 9:54 am
brambonius at 3:23 a.m Sept 25--off-topic or not, thank you so much for your sec
ond full paragraph on the "worldwider" reality check. You're dead-on accurate. A
lso even in the Twin Cities, the emergent scene is not really that present in te
rms of its influence. Obviously it was different in the past, but it's a lot of
tilting at windmills.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
@Brambonius ... I appreciate your bringing in a larger perspective. I was part o
f the early days of the GenX-postmodern-emerging ministry movement mid-1990s to
early 2000s. It's always difficult to discern how things *could* sift out and wh
ere they *could* end up while you're right in the middle of such radical cultura
l change. So, as different affinity groups within "emerging" sorted themselves o
ut, I never really felt any connection with the paradigm or people in the group
that turned into Emergent Village. It seemed all about theology and deconstructi
on and still get-your-theory-perfect-and-then-apply. Still abstract, sort of the
oretical and for postmodern *philosophy*.
I ended up with the missional crowd: turning the missionary principle inside out
-- instead of going elsewhere and finding people of peace to connect with and d
isciple, you stay where the Spirit leads you locally and become a person of peac
e who welcomes and serves those in your neighborhood. More concrete, more action
-oriented for postmodern *culture*. I'm a culturologist, not a philosophist. So

that's how it sorted out for me.
I learned things from friends in other streams that were hidden in the cauldron
of "emerging." But now, here we are 15 years on, and in more of a position for s
eeing what happened with all the follow-through fruit of each of those various "
emerging" groups that split into their own paths: New Calvinism. Emergent/Emerge
nt Village. Progressives. Post-evangelicals. Missionals. etc.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@ Mike M
"I ve stayed out of it since my apology for calling Julie names several years
ago".
There's the problem right there, that's why Julie doesn't trust you. If you want
to truly own it, I mean really own, it, Mike, you don't make that your preamble
, because it minimizes and decontextualizes what you did; i.e., ALL I DID was ca
ll her names (you know, "sticks and stones..."), it was SEVERAL years ago (come
on, get over it already, Julie, what the heck!)
No, I will not reveal myself, inasmuch as I don't want my family getting the sor
t of treatment Julie got. And in all candor, I'm willing to bet it doesn't "make
you cynical", it just ticks you off.
It takes time to learn how to own it, it's not easy, it hurts, but it's probably
the first step to mental and spiritual health. It's how I came to know the Lord
in the first place, it's how I grow in Christ. And when I apologize--as I've ha
d to do on a number of occasions to my wife and children, it's never been easy a
nd they'd never allow me to qualify it. I've just had to learn to eat it whole,
choke it down. There you go, that's what you do.
Now on to the "dislikes", I truly love them and own them gladly...
@RobGrayson BTW, go over the list of authors touted as connected to emergent and
it's VERY telling to see who is silent here. Re Rachel Held Evans - she has bee
n asked on a # of occasions to lend her voice when women and LGBT people were be
ing bullied both on and offline - not only she has chosen to stay silent, but sh
e has blocked those who question her silence given her status as a public author
who claims to be championing women and LGBT rights. Hence, not holding one's br
eath here. As far as other influential blogs - take a log as the analytics of th
is blog - it's now more influential than a lot of the named authors. We are the
change we've been waiting for ...
Which brings me to @LostVoice words of wisdom. During this dialogue, I was remin
ded by some trusted friends thatI cannot ask or demand an apology - that has to
come freely from the person once they realize of their own culpability and the n
eed to make amends. What we can do is lay out how we have been wronged and then
as best we can create a grace filled space so those with ears to hear will step
up to the plate - we've seen this here with Steve Knight, Tall Skinny Kiwi and a
few others connected to US emergent. At this juncture, I feel to keep demanding
an apology will result in more bashing one's head into the wall that will resul
t in non-apologies such as the one issued by Brian or partial truths a la Mike (
sorry but you told me this year that there never was an affair between Courtney
and Tony, a fact that without a doubt discredits Julie's story. Also, as one hir
ed to promote Brian's products, handle PR for Wild Goose and the like you defini
tely have skin in the game).
What we can continue doing is speak the truth and bring this to light - this is
what happened at Mars Hill and the results speak for themselves (and good chunks
of that story have yet to be brought to light). As in the case of Mars Hill pub
lishers, conference organizers and even those leading the very Acts 29 Network D
riscoll co-founded concluded thatit was bad business to associate with him anymo
re - the blowback wasn't worth whatever buzz and bucks he could deliver. I feel
the same has happened re all those connected with US Emergent will think twice a
bout here they want to invest their time and money. As more of the truth continu
es to surface, it will be harder for authors/speakers, publishers, conference or
ganizersand othes who keep the Christian industrial complex going to say yes to
what these bullies are pushing.
@Becky Garrison: re RHE etc., that's disappointing. I guess she's too close to t
he complex
Likes(8)Dislikes(4)
I agree with Brother Maynard, apologies are not about evidence and proof, they a
re about acknowledgment of the person. It isn't necessary to throw anyone under
the bus in order to validate Julie's story.
The attempts to escalate the request for an apology to the level of an investiga
tion or trial seem intended to over-complicate the matter and avoid simply ackno
wledging the grievance.
Brad outlined above (9/25, 1:56) the existing evidence supporting Julie's story
and the potential issues involving a more complex investigation.
"But any larger and more formal process could actually get way more complicated
in part because, as best I understand it, most of that core list of people she's
mentioned had at the time of the main events all kinds of "interlocking connect
ions" via business companies, tax-exempt non-profit church(es), and a tax-exempt
non-profit corporation. It isn't simply that they were all friends as Emergent
Village writers-speakers-leaders-mentors. So that brings potential regulatory ag
ency issues to bear (which is some of what Mars Hill could also end up dealing w
ith), on top of the contentions of criminal actions and/or civil liability issue
s."
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
A significant wire service news story is coming in the next few days.
Likes(1)Dislikes(1)
@Becky - re: "sorry but you told me this year that there never was an affair bet
ween Courtney and Tony, a fact that without a doubt discredits Julie's story."
I told you no such thing. I just double-checked my email, and the last time we h
ad any correspondence was May 2013, and we were certainly not talking about T&C.
We've not seen each other or had a phone conversation in many years. Maybe you'
re thinking of someone else?
As far as "one hired to promote Brian's products, handle PR for Wild Goose and t
he like you definitely have skin in the game," see my comment last night on Spir
itual McCarthyism. What does this prove? Less than nothing. I was hired by Brian
's publisher to promote Brian; I was hired by your publisher to promote *you*! A
nd in my years with the Goose, we had hundreds of different artists, creators, m
usicians and speakers. Your much-loathed "gang of US emergent boys" made up a ne

gligible sliver of our lineup, which I'm proud to say is one of the most diverse
in its class.
Likes(9)Dislikes(7)
Now at almost 600 comments, the one thing I hope for outside of the apologies th
at Julie (and others) so richly deserve is an end to the evangelical/pomo/dispen
sational/Calvinist/church-growth/emergent/author/leadership/Christian conference
scene (pick one or more categories as YMMV). They are all being slowly exposed
as sheep-fleecing operations. Think of all the people who could actually be mini
stered to in a local community if all these "talented" Christians stayed home an
d nurtured the Gospel in their local communities.
Among the many warts the Church has, this one is really simple to fix. It only r
equires a willingness to not spend money on the celebrity culture. These traveli
ng conference speakers are beginning to remind me of celebutantes in maintaining
brand through the entourage.
Becky, thank you for your words. You're right, apologies cannot be demanded but
good and decent people have little to no difficulty ever apologizing. Things hav
e come up in my memory bank since sharing my story. After Mark Scandrette failed
to get me to "pack a bag, I am taking you to the hospital" Doug called and pres
sured me, "If you want to save your marriage this is the only way!" Through tear
s, I explained to him I just called the hospital and the intake nurse who assess
ed me said she did not in her professional opinion deem hospitalization appropri
ate for me, and further she quipped, "Honey, what you need, is a good lawyer." T
ruer words were never spoken. Then Doug said, "I'll pick you up right now and ta
ke you. I will find a hospital to admit you." THIS is the stellar Pastoral care
Brian McLaren defends?! The kicker here? The "only way to save your marriage" wa
s a lie, as he and she had already planned their mutual leavinf of their spouses
(both married at the time) plan. Doug, with the full knowledge wanted me hospit
alized to protect the brand. He knows it. And, I know it. Doug Pagitt you are a
LIAR. A BEST OF COMMENTS should be written is these nearing 600 posts (guess peo
ple has things to say!!) I love the John Hubanks, "That really says something wh
en you lose a basic decency contest to Mark Driscoll" referring to abandoning yo
ur wife and 3 kids draining all bank accounts and assets and cutting off all cre
dit cards. Then saying to the kids and I quote, "If you want milk come and live
with me....I always have plenty of milk." That sickening quote is in the officia
l court documents. Doug was made aware of how dire the situation was....he did N
OTHING. Would not respond to calls or emails....protected the brand at all costs
. Taking away my children for 10 terrifying hours while Mark was supposed to suc
cesfully get me hospitalized and refusing to tell me where they are or who they
are with....is THAT the stellar Pastoral care you speak of Brian McLaren?! If it
walks like a cult and talks like a cult....it's a cult.
@ Mike
It proves "less than nothing"? Huh? What does that mean? It means nothing.
Likes(4)Dislikes(3)
Alan Molineaux September 25, 2014 at 12:28 pm
Mike - I just don't get it.
The fact that Julie and others have been hurt by the EC machine is evident by bo
th what they have said and by the apologies offered by you and others.
Yet you seem to keep wanting to make other points.

If the 'machine' of an organisation or group has been dangerous then the apologi
es and acknowledgements need to hang there for a while whilst we all reflect wit
hout the need to further defend.
The risk of the apology is that the movement may die (deserve to die) -alternati
vely it may learn, grow, and live.
There have been some excellent points made by women and men on here that add to
our chance to learn.
If I may say that the extra baggage your words add to your apology do not help y
our apology to land.
I hope that helps.
@ Mike
Oh yes, and by the way, interesting to note that you refer to the actions of man
y here (which includes the calling of names) as "Spiritual McCarthyism" (a bunch
of Joe McCarthys they are, eh Mike? Nice use of invective), but when you call p
eople names behind their backs, come on, it's not that big of a deal, it was rel
ated to your own mental health problems, it was a looong time ago, it was just a
name (as if calling someone "batsh-- crazy" behind their backs as part of a whi
sper campaign when you should've know fully bloody well that such things could h
ave long legs and potential custody implications and implications for someone's
very freedom could somehow be equated with calling someone a name such as an a-h
ole or something like that to their face).
Right, Mike.
Oddly enough, a number of us have been thinking of purchasing our own "significa
nt wire story", too. Great minds, eh.
This is eery and accurate as God is my witness. I am many things....but a liar i
s not one of them. Strict Catholic rearing I suppose. It is the one thing I am N
OT. Right before the RV rolled out for the summer long book promotion tour by Jo
ssey Bass as the funding publisher, with Mark Scandrette and Doug Pagitt, the Ch
urch Basement Roadshow to promote the new book Dispatches from the Emergent Fron
tier, I was sat down to sign some insurance documents. I smelled a rat and so I
asked what is this? I was told that well, I thought since you had mild post part
um depression after the birth of Lily that your mental health coverage in our pl
an should be changed. I SWEAR to God! This thing was carefully orchestrated for
months. How diabolical! I said lots of people get post partum depression and tha
t does not mean they have mental illness. It was a very clear and calculated gas
lighting moment. This is all verifiable with Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesot
a. June 2008 was the plan and coverage changed to increase mental health coverag
e? Yep. I also am remembering now another gas light moment. He was speaking to B
rian McLaren on the phone and then when he got off he said, "I was talking to Br
ian and I think you are bipolar. He has a close family member that is and so he
knows and I was describing to him about you." The confusion is that an empatheti
c person with a healthy full range of emotions including righteous anger to adul
tery in their distorted minds is "bipolar." Again, the true hypocrisy is this is
coming from a person with an actual diagnosis. How messed up is that? The patte
rn of discarded and dismissing woman as "crazy" is prevalent in this misogynisti
c culture. Around this time also he asked for all credit cards because he just w
anted to "consolidate" them and it is not good to have them dangling out there d
ormant. Canceled every last one. The stay at home mom had no means to provide. I
s THAT the stellar Pastoral care Brain McLaren speaks of?! Where then? Where and
what exactly were your examples of wonderful Pastoral care given to me and my c
hildren by Brian McLaren, Brad Cecil, Mark Scandrette, Doug Pagitt, Danielle Shr
oyer, or Mike King? Stonewalling with silence is not a technique I think they te
ach in seminary.
Was "significant wire story" a threat by Mike? Bring it. I have only the truth w
hich sets me free.
wrt other significant blogs picking this up and discussing it, I know of a few w
ho have not posted specifically because they didn't want to draw the conversatio
n away from this thread. What's happening here is actually a rare but productive
form of discussion. Somebody mentioned chaotic conversation threads on HuffPo e
t al, but can anyone point out a more civil and more productive online comment t
hread that runs 600 comments? This is a special thing going on here.
@Brother Maynard: Yes
in fact, that occurred to me in the hours after I post
ed my question earlier today. It would indeed be a shame to do anything that mig
ht hinder the very unique and special thing that is happening here.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
It has been suggested that it might be helpful to post the larger context to whi
ch Becky referred. I'm rushing, so don't have time to condense it, but the langu
age is simple, so it's a quick read. Blessings all...I'll check back in this aft
ernoon.
*******
I think we need to step back and take a look at exactly what we want to accompli
sh together and, especially, what it really means to apologize. Bear with me as
I share The Five Languages of Apology, from the book of the same name by Chapman
and Thomas: The long and the short of the book is that, just as with his earlie
r work with Love Languages, he has discerned (this time with Jennifer Thomas) th
at an apology can mean different things to different people. They have come to b
elieve that there are five basic apology languages, and each of us have a
pri
mary
apology that we re looking for when someone has wronged us and if we
don t get that one, we don t feel the other has really apologized. The five
are:
Apology Language #1: Expressing Regret
I am sorry.
Apology Language #2: Accepting Responsibility

Apology Language #3: Making Restitution
Apology Language #4: Genuinely Repenting
ain.
I was wrong.
What can I do to make it right?

I
ll try my best not to do that ag
Apology Language #5: Requesting Forgiveness
Will you please forgive me?
The challenge we have, when someone is expressing an apology, is to receive it a

ccording to their intent and not necessarily by our expectation. The point is tw
o-fold: First, we need to discern whether they are sincere. We must look to see
whether their language is different from ours, and whether we are judging sincer
ity on whether or not it is what we are hoping to hear. Second, if it is not giv
en in our
language , we need to step back and look for the linguistic diffe
rence before we judge it as not enough.
As with the Love Languages, the point is to become as fluent in all the language
s, even if one is
native
and comes most easily. That would make a truly
full
apology one which includes all five. But this may also come in steps.
The thing that has been nagging at me has been that I have come to believe that
an apology cannot be demanded and it cannot, especially, be demanded in exactl
y the way we want it if it is to be authentic and transformative.
What can be and should be done is to express, as clearly as possible, the ha
rm that one has received from another. It needs to be done with as much grace as
possible, because vitriol doesn t particularly lead to confession and repenta
nce.
Each one us us have been on the receiving end of incredible pain. Some pain was
from those who were just ignorant and insensitive, other pain came from those wh
o were actually seeking to damage us. What I have come to know in the depths of
my soul is this: hurting people hurt people.
The first thing I need to do when someone hurts me is to stop and take a deep br
eath and count to however high I need to in order to let the stress hormones dis
sipate. Yeah who does this well? This is what community is for and I have co
me to believe that our primary community is the Trinity.
The second thing I need when I am hurt is someone who will bear my pain with me.
Rarely do any of us find that need met in a timely and healing manner. There ar
e just not enough empathetic listeners in the world. There are plenty of
fixe
rs
though
who will jump in and try to fix stuff, which frequently just ma
kes things worse. I refer you to Job s
friends
.
But this is where the primary community of the Trinity comes back into play. Jes
us knows our pain. He listens with an empathetic ear and heart. He sits with me
in my grief without offering either trite words or rebounding my pain with right
eous anger. He lets me pour out all my anger and resentment and grief and tears
he listens me into free speech, as our Allelon friends taught me back in 2007.
Because, in the end, it is speech that is full of grace and mercy that invokes g
rief and contrition in the heart of one who has harmed us. It gives the Spirit a
foot in the door of the other s heart and it is the Spirit who convicts the
heart.
Finally, the thing that I want to leave you with is this: those of us who have s
uffered this way have been left with triggers, a form of Spiritual PTSD, which m
ake it difficult to engage. We are fragile. I have learned that everyone I know
is wounded and fragile in some way seen or unseen. I have chosen to move towar
d grace and mercy with everyone, because if we truly knew each other s stories
, we would have more patience and kindness in our words and actions. The times w
hen I have allowed my pain to speak unfiltered (through the ears of the Trinity)
, I have usually come to regret it. When I have been patient and waited for the
right time and place, the results have been so much better.
I believe we are all called to speak what we hear the Father saying to us. We ar
e each on different segments of the Journey, with important perspectives. Those
of us with sharper swords, as it were, need to wield them wisely. I so appreciat
e each and every one of you and the way you are able to speak the truth.
I trust that God will honor our intentions and show us how to proceed so that th
e right thing is done in the right way.
*****
Gotta run. Back later....
Peggy I have been diagnosed with a mild form of PTSD from this experience with a
n NPD and through the incident involving Brian McLaren, Mark Scandrette, Mike Ki
ng, Danielle Shroyer, Brad Cecil and Doug Pagitt. I believe receiving the 5 step
apology would be incredibly healing. Can they do it?
A few random thoughts after just finishing a very productive dialog with Mr. Cof
fee where I drank in all the wisdom he had to offer ...
Re: The wire service story. I may have missed some point of information, but, fr
om all I can gather, it appears as if no one from a news source has contacted Ju
lie McMahon directly, so that whole thing just hits me as odd. Perhaps they'll g
et in touch with her later?
Re: Digital dissent and civility. I agree with what Brother Maynard just said. T
o my knowledge, this is a highly, *highly* unusual thread. Has there been anger?
Yes. Some sarcasm and/or barbs? Yes. Triggering statements, whether accidental
or intentional? Yes.
But wowzers ... overall, quite civil and thoughtful. People are attempting to cr
owd-source facts via personal narratives, and stretch the communal interpretatio
n via their questions and opinions. Various people have offered what they have f
rom their own backgrounds and giftings. I tend to focus on research, evidences,
piecing together information, context. Becky Garrison has shared some very insig
htful thoughts on the larger contexts of the whole "emerging" movements and the
Christian industrial complex and why this matters to more than just Julie McMaho
n. Others (such as John Hubanks, Danica, etc.) are deconstructing statements for
probable obfuscation and negation.
Those just strike me at the moment, both men and women, some with pseudonyms and
others IRLnyms. I don't mean to overlook anyone, as really, any/every comment c
an hold significance for other readers, and there is no predicting of what thoug
hts will end up making a connection for freedom in the mind and heart of which r
eaders. But, those names are just a few examples to illustrate where having mult
iple sets of perspectives helps us as a community overcome the problems of blind
spots and parallax.
But isn't this what "flat structure" and "communal dialogue and discernment" and
a "culture of participation" were supposed to be all about in the first place?
Perhaps ironic that those were meant to be hallmarks of the Emergent movement, b
ut now it's happening outside their box, with Emergent as the focal point and no
t driving it.
Anyway, I have seen the opposite of relatively civil interchanges on spiritual a
buse issues, so I have something to gauge this on. For instance, I tracked the B
eaverton Grace Bible Church defamation lawsuit, where five former church members
were sued for $500,000 by their former pastor and his church. There were newsca
sts in the secular media and the shrill nature of the blog comment threads that
followed some of those reports would potentially have pushed even the calm balm
of Mother Teresa into cardiac arrest.
Re: What exactly is this thing that's happening, and where might it be going? Th
ose who are students of church history ... is it accurate that most incidents th
at turn into revival movements involve truthful confessions of culpability?
The latest post from Purple-Glasses Peggy seems immensely relevant along that pa
rticular line ...
Re: Rachel Held Evans' lack of response to this and other events. She makes mone
y collaborating w/Tony Jones, et al, of the emergent movement, so it's not surpr
ising that she's not jeopardizing her income stream.
Brad @ 1:23pm,
Perhaps it's the Discernment News Service. They only talk amongst themselves.
Likes(9)Dislikes(3)
Becky September 25, 2014 at 1:50 pm
Deleted Mike's emails out of profound frustration so letting it go. However, I n
ever saw anything from any publisher indicating Mike was hired to work on any of
my books - his involvement beyond two then friends editing each other's works i
s very peripheral at best. His involvement though in promoting Brian is substant
ial. But enough about Mike 'n' me - let's look at Julie and the broader picture
- Driscoll and the US emergents are far closer in pathology than anyone would ca
re to admit.
Ken Archer September 25, 2014 at 1:56 pm
One of the most powerful scenes in NKOC was when Neo talked about his ex-wife, a
nd used his experience of forgiving her repeated affairs as a way to begin to un
derstand the forgiveness we have in Jesus.
In fact, that's what made NKOC so potent, it used people with messy lives to art
iculate some profound truths. Compare that to reading those same truths in a the
ology textbook.
It seems to me that we have to approach our daily lives the same way - our oppor
tunities to live in the Kingdom are always right in front of us. If we view inte
rpersonal strife as a distraction to doing the work of God, then we aren't livin
g in the Kingdom.
So, extricating oneself from another couple's failing marriage early on when the
y've asked us to help them doesn't seem like the right decision for someone who
I know lives a Kingdom life.
The entire response to Julie by folks in close relationship with Tony seems like
a highminded attempt to stay above some fray. But the fray is where the Kingdom
is.
It's no fun to read Julie's comments and even less fun to add new comments to th
is thread - I want to look away too. Believe me. But I would ask Tony's friends
and colleagues to consider that everyone else is seeing a woman being treated li
ke women are typically treated - as crazy and unstable - and asking us for some
justice here in how she was treated. It's not so easy to just look away and say
- oh that's a private matter.
brambonius September 25, 2014 at 2:05 pm
I had completely forgotten about the anti-emergent watchbloggers. (The only watc
hblogger I have read the last years is the Wartburg Watch, which I appreciate a
lot) If one of them picks up on this story there might indeed appear a lot of qu
ite unreadable 'heretic emergent guru sex scandal cover-up' posts on certain sit
es.
I suppose that's what you meant with 'his significant wire story', Mike?
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
@Ken Archer
"The fray is where the Kingdom is."
Love it.
Also: that's why I don't think the traveling conference speaker circuit in whate
ver brand as being all that useful for Kingdom work. Helicoptering in, deliverin
g a speech, and helicoptering out isn't a way to build the Church. Day in, day o
ut, in a local community this where life is delivered to those who need it.
Gosh I hope they do that Significant Wire Story with all the accusations of Spir
itual McCarthyism and the like. All it will do is call attention to this blog an
d Tony and Doug and Mike and Brian and the whole crew. The people already behold
en to them with feel like circling the wagons more and will feel outraged--but o
f course, that will be no different than it has always--whereas a multitude of o
thers will only have their attention drawn further to the actions of the above-n
amed.
I sense a backfire of Biblical proportions looming.
@ Mike Scolare
Amen and Amen!
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
@brad/futuristguy
I love church history. My icon over there is the Venerable Bede sitting at his d
esk recording the history of the Church in all of its weirdness and hope during
the late Roman Empire.
My reading has taught me that revival comes birthed in prayer when structures an
d institutions crumble, are attacked, or fail to defend the weak. It is often sp
ontaneous, coupled with a profound sense of sin and repentance brought about by
circumstances forcing people away from their hubris and towards humility.
We live in an age where, at least for Western Christians, the hubris is stacked
like the Tower of Babylon. The exposure of the RC leadership, MHC, SGM, and now
EV, and who knows where else, is proof that pride goes before a fall. But a fall
is necessary to receive salvation. Rank may have its privileges as the military
says, but the first shall be last according to Jesus.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
They're already aware of it on at least one other major blog that is closely aff
iliated with TWW and they are watching this closely.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
I have experienced abuse in several forms in my life; physical, emotional, sexua
l, church, etc. One thing that is common in EVERY SINGLE FORM: the abuser doesn'
t see anything wrong with what they have done. I have heard "I did the best I co
uld raising 3 children who weren't even my own" (from a woman who beat children
so severely she left scars and caused brain damage), "thought you wanted to be a
lone" (from a pastor at our abusive church who saw me, bawling hysterically, alo
ne in a dark, practically empty parking lot. http://matthew23chick.blogspot.com/
2011_11_01_archive.html).
I believe many abusers are, to a certain extent, narcissistic. It is really abou
t them. If you hadn't done X, I wouldn't have done Z. When you throw in a narcis
sist speaking for God, by speaking out, you are turning your back on God and not
being very Christian-like. Apologies are not needed if they are following God's
plan for them, for things that they really didn't do wrong, or they did the bes
t they could, even if people were hurt in the process.
Any apology you are luck enough to get turns into "I'm sorry, but..." Even if th
ose aren't the exact words, that is the meaning.
@Mike Scolare aka *He of the Venerable Bede Icon* ...
Thank you for that helpful summary -- definitely something worth reflecting on s
ome more for me. Part of the whole postmodern thing, both philosophically and cu
lturally, was that the usual approaches and structures of modernity were failing
and falling ... they (those who ran the cogs in it) just didn't know it yet. Or
suspected there was an implosion forthcoming, but were trying to fix it by The
Usual Modernist Means.
Anyway, my take from 7+ years of some in-depth studies into dynamics of toxic sy
stems is that malignant ministry can happen within any classic or contemporary t
heological paradigm, any denomination, as you've suggested. But it involves peop
le who either set up sick processes, or who allow them to continue, to where the
y become part of the warp and woof of that organization's contexture.
My church history friends always talked about how we needed to study our past in
order to avoid the same traps in the future. As a futurist, I do so hope we (No
rth American Church) can move away from intervention-level moments like this to
where it could and should have been all along, at the levels of prevention so th
at fewer malignant ministers and problem movements get their start, and intercep
tion of those which show early-warning patterns of toxicity before things get to
o ingrained. But then, isn't that the core hope of any reflection we do, so we c
an make course corrections in our trajectory of spiritual transformation to beco
me more like Christ?
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Well, I just found out that the Emperors and Empresses of the hip church movemen
t get really peeved when you point out that they're not wearing any clothes. It'
s amking me re-evaluate whether or not I want to have anything to do with Christ

ians at all anymore.
Beverley Molineaux September 25, 2014 at 3:16 pm
Hi David.
I just wanted to thank you for your great heart and insight that has led: I am s
ure you would say unexpectedly, to this fascinating and informative conversation
.
I think your art is definitely a creative source where truly a picture can say '
more than a thousand words'. To add - your words also carry great wisdom
I have followed this link and unfolding story from here in UK whilst being unwel
l ( I am not sure with work I could have found time to read it all)
I am not a commenter on blogs usually because someone will say exactly what I fe
el in a far more concise way.
This has been the case throughout this unfolding story.
Today having continued to read and digest the many comments I just felt that I n
eeded to add my small support (for what it is worth) to Julie. I have been incre
dibly saddened by your treatment at the hands of a group who clearly should have
known better. Standing up against those who are more powerful and out to discre
dit you makes for harrowing reading.
I found the latest blog written by Tony Jones really difficult reading and was s
hocked to find many comments on the blog were positive: praising his embracing o
f Mark Driscoll.
For me reading Tony saying:
'My point is this: It could have happened to any of us'.
I wanted to shout loudly - 'NO it couldn't'.
This is a blog with 'white male privilege' all over it. Written by a man who has
not considered how it feels for those whom Mark Driscoll and his ministry have
treated appallingly.
The worst of this treatment directed towards women, and as a female I refuse to
let Mark Driscoll off the hook.
So for Tony who says he hardly knows Mark and has never been hurt at his hands o
r though his ministry: to then state he has 'reached out' to him leads those dev
astated by this man and his ministry looking less capable of following Christ's
teaching to forgive.
This I feel is incredibly insensitive and naive to the pain that those exposed t
o his teaching have suffered and are possibly still suffering.
Tony also states:
'Those were heady days. Cover articles on Christianity Today and Christian Centu
ry within a year of each other
that s rare. Television coverage on ABC and
PBS. Articles in the New York Times. Speaking gigs, book contracts, conferences
. That shit can go to your head.
Let s be honest. It did.'
I would like to suggest it still has.
Someone asked if this was being picked up by any other blogs, and I've heard tha
t, yes, a story was being written by a service that has a number of wire subscri
ptions. A mainstream news source. I don't understand where "buying" or "threat"
was read into that - this is starting to feel like a bit of a mob, folks...
@Alan Molineaux - I absolutely believe that everyone who feels it in their heart
to apologize, should. Me, Steve, Andrew Jones and others here, have. I'm really
glad we have. And if others feel they can't apologize, because their understand
ing of the facts is at odds with Julie's, well - that's their prerogative, too.
Like most of you, I want to see the truth come out. Unlike some of you, I'm not
sure if continuing to repeat the same things over and over on a blog thread is g
oing to serve this truth coming out.
BTW, I totally agree that "The risk of the apology is that the movement may die
(deserve to die) -alternatively it may learn, grow, and live."
I think that all apologies that need to be made, should.
And I think that emergence - and the myriad of other names this community has IS learning, growing, living. In many networks and communities that have never e
ven heard of the "Big Names" that everyone is talking about here. I know that mo
st people in my worshiping community have never heard of these folks - they're t
oo busy housing homeless folks, working with the Interfaith Food Shuttle, and pr
acticing the Prayer of Examen in our small groups.
I don't want to
me of this must
o swept up into
rgent view must
see anything swept under any rugs - I feel like anyone accusing
be mis-reading me - either willfully, or because you've become s
one way of reading this online discourse, that you feel any dive
be swiftly - and shrilly - dispatched.
I think where additional truth-telling and fact-finding needs to happen, it shou

ld. I'm not sure that a milieu exists where this can happen to everyone's satisf
action - a mediator? A truth-and-reconciliation commission? But I pray it does.
May grace and truth find us all.
Eric,
Hang in there, sir. This battle is worth fighting.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Darren King September 25, 2014 at 4:14 pm
I am someone who was fairly involved with the EC movement for several years, but
I exited around 2010 - partly because I no longer resonated with the (what seem
ed to me) increasingly inbred nature of the dialogue, and because (probably more
importantly for me) my trajectory was taking me beyond specifically post-Evange
lical, emergent conversations, and into an exploration of higher consciousness i
n general. And in that trajectory, many of the questions being asked and debates
being had (over and over again) just weren t all that relevant to me anymore.
Claire Grave s Spiral Dynamics might give you some idea as to the reasons why
.
Having stumbled across this thread, after having been absent for several years,
I can't say I am too surprised with some of general movement dysfunction. Howeve
r, I am certainly appalled by the degree to which the inbred/machine-like nature
of the EC movement effectively ran over people like Julie in its march forward.
Having explored this thread for a couple of days now, I feel great compassion f
or Julie, and immense respect for her resilience in pressing forward and protect
ing her children.
In order to add my own two-cents to this conversation, I would like to relay a c

ouple of incidents I remember from around the time in question. I was one of a g
roup of people who one day, seemingly out of the blue (to me, anyway), received
an email from Julie (because, I suspect, I was on TJ s email/media connections
list). In the email, if I remember correctly, Julie asked TJ s extended commu
nity to help address what was going on in their marriage. I believe this was the
same time as the RV tour.
I remember being disturbed by that email, and it added to my sense at the time t
hat the blogging-focused/issue-centric/religio-critical nature of the EC movemen
t allowed people (perhaps sometimes enabled them) to ignore their home-lives, fa
mily relationships, etc. After all, it's very easy to "do community" through a b
log network (of which my online magazine was a part), when doing so keeps the li
ght away from the inner-workings of our lives and most intimate relationships (w
here the rubber truly hits the road, IMO). That was part of the reason I bowed o
ut back then, because I sensed my own priorities needed adjustment.
Soon after receiving that email from Julie, I remember getting an email from Mar
k Scandrette. In the email, Mark basically said (going by memory here) that ther
e was a group being formed that would serve to collectively counsel T and J, and
that our prayers were asked for in that endeavor. I remember being relieved tha
t the issue was being addressed, though, of course, now, after hearing Julie s
harrowing account, I see that the quality of that
counsel
left much to be
desired.
I d like to add a couple of additional points. One, while memory is notoriousl
y inaccurate in some ways (see studies on witness testimony), it seems to me tha
t Julie has more than enough support for what she s shared here to say that th
ere were some major missteps. Furthermore, in this case, the seemingly premedita
ted nature of some of the alleged actions is chilling, as is the legal onslaught
Julie had to deal with afterwards.
Let me also say that, in reflecting on those days, I often noticed a startling d
isconnect between the quality of the intellectual discourse and the actual livin
g of integrated lives. Many of us were so external-issue-engaged that we often m
issed what was going on elsewhere in our lives, closer to home (literally and fi
guratively). I remember meeting TJ in person (during the RV tour), and getting t
he sense that he was really
in his head
a lot. Now, again, in all honesty,
I think the same could have been said of me during those years. And it was part
ly that growing realization about myself that led me elsewhere. I sensed then th
at my personhood was not balanced, and I think that s probably true for many o
f the players in this emergent sphere
at least that was the case then; again
, I ve been absent for several years, so I m I can t speak to recent devel
opments.
I would also like to say something about how it s important not to equate a pe
rson solely with their actions
especially one set of actions. And I m thin
king specifically of people like Brian McLaren and Mark Scandrette. I have some
acquaintance with both of these men, and my sense is that, by and large, they ar
e kind, open-hearted, humble people. That said, in the handling of the situation
with Julie, mistakes appear to clearly have been made. I would like to see Juli
e get the apologies she s asked for (that s not asking for much). But I d
also caution us not to write people off entirely, even when they make mistakes
because we all make them.
Lastly, as someone involved in those circles
back in the day , even if indi
rectly, I want to express my wholehearted sorrow for Julie. I am so sorry that h
appened to you, Julie. While marriage is messy and complicated, some things are
just beyond the pale. And I feel for your children as well, having had to experi
ence their family being ripped apart in such a manner. Also, if I may add, in th
e religious focus on keeping marriages together (at all costs), there is often a
blanket overlooking of the matter as to how to end a marriage well; with mutual
respect and support for all parties being held as the aim. If we are to be trul
y
spirit-filled
and
higher-consciousness oriented , then surely the n
ature of the endings should be addressed as much as the beginnings. To me this a
ll speaks to incarnation. That was a word tossed about often in the EC blogosher
e, but evidently all too often in short supply in actual practice.
Bill,
I have serious doubts as to whether this is a battle that's worth fighting for m
e. I look at this event, and others that have gained attention just in the past
few years, and what I see is behaviors that are even less morally upright than t
hat of the folks who hung out in the bars I used to frequent. And there was a wh
ole lot less back-stabbing and in-fighting going on in the bars compared to chur
ches.
I'm not talking about renouncing my faith, though, just the connectivity and com
munity aspects of church. Barely an hour goes by on my Twitter or FB feeds where
someone is proclaiming that church community is of the utmost importance. Well,
it seems to me that this "community" is one that makes a concealed-carry permit
a near necessity. It doesn't give off the vibe of a safe neighborhood that I'd
care to live in anymore.
So I have been feeling slightly unheard on this thread (this isn't about poor Da
nica, and I'm not posting it to get sympathy, but to share my findings), so I de
cided to use David's newly implemented 'like / dislike' buttons to crunch a few
numbers, and compare the responses to the men on the thread vs the women. I felt
like I was getting a disproportionately low number of 'likes', and a disproport
ionately high number of 'dislikes', as were other women, in the thread.
I did not tally the gender neutral responses. I only started counting after Juli
e came in the first time (because I wanted to focus on the debate surrounding th
e Tony / Julie situation). I stopped counting after Brother's comment on Sept 25
at 9:30am, since that was where the thread ended when I started my number crunc
hing (the numbers continue to rise, but I feel like I have a fairly representati
ve sample to go off of).
Of the total comments, as defined by the above parameters, 243 were made by wome
n. 188 were made by men. Proportionately, women made up 56% of the comments, and
men 44%. So women talked more often than the men did.
The women got a total of 1864 likes. The men got a total of 4142 likes. Proporti
onately, women got 31% of the likes, and 69%. So, men got 'liked' more often tha
n men did. A LOT more often, especially considering that there were more women w
ho commented.
The women got a total of 25 dislikes. The men got a total of 39 dislikes. Propor
tionately, women got 39% of the dislikes, and men got 56% of the dislikes. So me
n were still more likely to get noticed, but women were more likely to get negat
ive attention than they were to get positive attention.
I have wondered often if it's all in my head, this perception that I must speak
'nice', or I wont' be accepted. And that my voice isn't as important as a man's
anyhow when I *do* speak. But the numbers seem to back up my feelings.
Misogyny is alive and well, folks, and I think much of it is internalized even b
y those of us who want to fight against it. I know if I'm honest with myself, I
liked men's comments more than women's. The reason I bring this up here, since i
t may seem off topic to some, is because Julie's fight against the EV machine fe
els like a fight of one woman against misogyny. It feels like the struggle of a
woman to have her voice heard amid the loud, dominant male ones. This is a strug
gle I identify with deeply, as I have felt for a long time that on many blogs (e
specially the 'theological', intellectual type ones), I do not have as equal a p
lace at the table as the Emergent leaders would tell me. And this is the thread
where I decided I was tired of being quiet and cowed by the big, dominant person
alities, especially Tony Jones, who shot me and dozens of my sisters down when h
e asked the question, 'where are the women?', but then refused to hear when we t
old him that we were simply weary of not being heard.
Alan Molineaux September 25, 2014 at 4:39 pm
Danica
This is such an important point. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
Interesting analysis, Danica--and yep, it's another brick in a very solid wall o
f noted misogyny among theological circles.
From my vantage on this thread, it's very hard not to feel "unmarginalized", if
you will, unless you at some point drank the Emergent kool-aid. The overall exch
anges have been interesting to read to me, because with the clear exception of J
ulie--who was outright wronged and is due the apologies she seeks--it reads like
a lot of typical in-house backbiting, now that things have come to light. Which
is just like every other theological trend out there where people are trying to
justify their turf of where they were "right", where they were "misled", and wh
ere they have been "wronged". Other takes on the theology have largely gone unad
dressed, or have been one-offs--because frankly, no one is interested in having
those discussions, misogyny or no.
Likes(8)Dislikes(1)
@ Mike
There's a background to everything. Many people who follow abusive church moveme
nts are well aware that such abusive organizations will release stories that get
picked up by Christian media that are purportedly impartial but are really just
paid ads for the ministry. This happened just months ago in the Driscoll situat
ion. That is the backdrop against which you are operating when you tell us, with
out explanation, about a service running a story.
Mob. Spiritual McCarthyism.
For one offering sincere apologies for calling someone names, you are quick to t
hrow to throw more around.
Likes(6)Dislikes(3)
@Danica,
I'm not sure if the metric is valid, but it irks me that you'd feel you had to r
esort to some kind of straw poll measure to have to prove your point with any au
thority -- the feeling is a symptom that underscores the truth of your point. Be
cause no matter what the tally would have said, you, my friend, are correct. You
r last paragraph is bang-on.
We have a long way to go.

@Danica, I think you're bringing up very important information that highlights c
ore gender issues.
Seems to me Emergent Village and other streams from the "emerging ministry" move
ment lost out.
There is a long line of movements that connect the gender-equality dots over the
last 50 years. For instance, there was what was called at the time "the first m
en's movement" -- men who did what they could to be supportive partners for wive
s, mothers, sisters, friends, women of the community in the women's rights movem
ents of the 1960s and '70s.
There was the challenge of the broadside/pamphlet in the African-American commun
ities of the 1970s and '80s, "Is you or ain't you a brother?" to address domesti
c violence issues as gender-equal partners.
All the way to Emma Watson's HeForShe campaign speech at the United Nations on 2
0 September 2014, inviting men to embrace gender-equality as an issue that bring
s freedom to both women and men.
Connecting those dots creates a line whose trajectory initially appeared to go r
ight through the emerging-to-Emergent movement of the late 1990s and into the 20
00s decade. It seemed E.V. was behind that all the way. But as the line has move
d on and we tilt the perspective, it seems E.V. truly was literally stationed *b
ehind* that point, but not on the line itself, figuratively traveling on it into
the future. Which is sad.
This may be part of why some of us from that ever-so-long-ago "emerging" movemen
t ultimately ended up finding more affinity within parts of the missional moveme
nt. There it wasn't so much about deconstructing theological concepts for recons
tructing a theoretical utopia, but in working side-by-side as partners in social
transformation enterprises that fit the context of the communities the Spirit p
lanted us in. In my experiences of working virtually with teams in the US and UK
, it hasn't mattered which person of what gender -- or generation -- generated t
he ideas or facilitated the planning or implementation or evaluation or revision
.
Hopefully this thread will help people connect onto that kind of gender-parity t
rajectory ...
P.S. I tried to double-like your comment but the system wouldn't let me. :-(
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Brad Cecil September 25, 2014 at 5:23 pm
I m using bullet points to be succinct in my response, CAPS ARE USED FOR EMPHA
SIS:
I M NOT GOING TO APOLOGIZE TO JULIE! AFTER THIS PUBLIC DEFAMATION - I
WANT A PUBLIC APOLOGY FROM JULIE!
I was trying to be silent because I didn t want to contribute to the p
ain felt by many people named in this thread, but I don t care about that anym
ore. I have no
pastoral care
feelings in this matter any longer.
I knew nothing of this thread until Friday when I received an email from
Julie. I didn t even read the email or thread until Sunday evening. I went th
rough the thread Sunday evening and discovered what was going on.
I ve always considered this a private family matter and have never spo
ken of this matter publicly. I ve never written of this matter on a website, b
log or any social media until now.

This entire thread on nakepastor.com seems to be an attempt to pull peop
le
offside
and get people to comment on a very personal matter between Jul
ie and Tony. Initially, I didn t want to give in and get pulled
offside ,
but I don t care about that anymore. Some on this thread have crossed the lin
e of human decency and have made very personal attacks on my friends.
This has been called
abuse
and I take that comment seriously - so
I want others to know the details. I was directly involved in the events and hav
e been named multiple times in this thread.
Background: I m the Brad Cecil mentioned in this thread.
o
I was a part of the development of the group that became Emergent.
o
I was a Pastor - I left vocational ministry in December of 2005.
o
Because I was financially able - I was never paid to be a Pastor.
o
I ve never published a book and have nothing to sell.
o
I have no financial stake in the Emergent Brand, C21, JoPa, CANA Project
, etc.
o
I have attended and even spoken at some events, but I have always paid m
y own way and have never received a dime of compensation for my involvement in t
he Emergent movement.
o
I have no financial reason to be involved in any of this.
o
I have no reason to protect anyone mentioned in this thread other than f
riendship.
I was a friend to Julie and Tony. Of all the people involved in the conv
ersation in the early days, Julie and I seemed to get along very well
in fac
t we both commented on this at various times to others. I admired her for her in
telligence, straightforward communication, sense of humor and experience in life
.
The events of 2008:
Here is what happened as I remember the events in 2008:
Doug, Tony and Mark were on tour with the Church Basement Road Show. It
came through the Dallas Ft Worth Area in July 2008 for two shows - one in Ft Wor
th and one in Dallas.
I had no involvement in the planning of the events, the details or outco
mes of events in the DFW area.
I attended the Ft Worth event only as an interested person.
While the tour was in the Dallas Ft Worth area - I received several phon
e calls from Julie; she was very upset about their marriage and asked me to inte
rvene. Up until this point, I did not know how troubled the relationship was. I
heard they were having trouble, but did not know the extent of the trouble. I ha
d absolutely no idea of any of the personal behavior going on by either Julie or
Tony.
THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT
JULIE S COMMUNICATION TO ME ON THE PHONE CA
USED ME TO BE VERY CONCERNED FOR JULIE S WELL-BEING. I AGREED TO HELP BECAUSE
OF THE PHONE CALLS.
The Night of the Dallas show Danielle Shroyer and I met with Tony, Doug
and Mark to discuss what was going on.
We held a conference call that night with Brian McLaren, Mike King, Doug
Pagitt, Mark Scandrette, Danielle Shroyer and I. This is the group being called
the
Discernment Group . Brian and Mike were not in Dallas, we sought them
out because we valued their opinion as leaders and the phone conversations had b
ecome so alarming that we felt that we needed counsel from others.
We did not convene our conversation to provide discernment about Julie,
rather to discern what should be done to resolve the matter.
THIS IS IMPORTANT - WE QUESTIONED TONY EXTENSIVELY ON HIS PERSONAL BEHAV
IOR. THERE WAS NO ATTEMPT TO COVER UP ANYTHING OR PROTECT ANYONE. THE ONLY REASO
N FOR OUR COUNSEL WAS OUR CONCERN - NOT FOR COVER-UP. OUR COUNSEL WAS NOT INTEND
ED TO HUMILIATE JULIE OR TO PERPETUATE AN IDEA ABOUT HER THAT WAS INTENDED TO HA
RM HER. OUR COUNSEL TO HER WAS DEVELOPED OUT OF A GENUINE CONCERN FOR BOTH JULIE
AND TONY - THEY WERE STILL MARRIED AT THE TIME AND WE HOPED FOR RECONCILIATION.
We did not suggest that Julie be
admitted to a Mental Hospital
onl
y that she find professionals in their area that could help. The matter escalate
d beyond pastoral counseling and we felt this was above our level of expertise.
Julie offered to post the letter
I think she should do so!
We decided in that phone call that the tour should be suspended, Tony sh
ould go home immediately and that we should provide help to the Jones family as
soon as possible.
We asked Mark Scandrette to meet with Julie because he had the best rela
tionship with her at that time.
I personally bought plane tickets for Tony and Mark. I drove them to the
airport hotel and they took the first flight to Minnesota in the morning.
THIS IS IMPORTANT
THE ONLY REASON DANIELLE AND I WERE INVOLVED IS BE
CAUSE THIS EVENT TOOK PLACE IN THE DALLAS FT WORTH AREA AND WE WERE ASKED TO HEL
P. IF IT TOOK PLACE IN ANOTHER LOCATION OR WE DECIDED NOT TO HELP THERE WOULD BE
NOTHING TO DISCUSS ON THIS THREAD.
DOUG AND MARK WERE IN THE DISCERNMENT GROUP BECAUSE OF JULIE S REQUEST
FOR THEIR INTERVENTION.
THE ONLY REASON BRIAN AND MIKE WERE INVOVLED IS BECAUSE WE CALLED THEM S
EEKING WISDOM.
OUR INVOLVEMENT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL
IT WAS REQUESTED!
I wanted to be quiet about this matter, but I can t any longer.
Recognition and Clarifications:
I don t know David Hayward so I can t speak of his motives behind pe
rpetuating this thread. I ve read the
Speak truth to power
answer, but i
t doesn t explain perpetuating all this misinformation - this is ultimately a
private family matter, but because of this thread, it s become a very public f
amily matter. It is about a marriage that ended badly.
I am sure I will be called a coward, a narcissist, a misogynist, a patho
logical liar, a gas lighter, a victim blamer, a deflector and many other names b
y the people involved in this thread
I DON T CARE
I am sure my comments will be interpreted, marginalized, re-interpreted,
psycho-analyzed, associated and dismissed I DON T CARE
I AM SORRY FOR ONE THING
I AM SORRY THAT I SAID I WOULD HELP!
Since this became public and has been called
abuse
I want others t
o know these details and I want a PUBLIC APOLOGY from Julie!
I will post one more time to add my thoughts about Emergent, Tony, Mark Driscoll
, Brian McLaren, Phyllis Tickle and a few other things, but then I will go away
I don t care to be involved in this type of behavior any longer.
Beverley Molineaux September 25, 2014 at 5:29 pm
Hi Danica
Thank you for checking that info- it is sad that women's voices seem not to be a
s valued, I want to say it's reading voices like yours and Beckys and others tha
t gives me courage to comment. So please keep it up.
ren doughty September 25, 2014 at 5:44 pm
Tony Jones, you allowing Julie to be arrested on your front lawn when she came t
o your house to get the kids, unaware of the details of the protective order, wh
en you had the ability to let her go? You can quote Scripture to me all day long
, brother. That situation already tells me everything about you I need to know.
And to those of you crying that this "shining the light on church leadership dou
chebaggery" is only hurting the church, I refer you to Jesus tossing the tables
in the temple and calling out the Pharisees on several occasions. Narcissistic f
olks making their living telling others what to do and how to live can count on
having a bright light shine their way every now and then. Some examine their liv
es and change and some dig their heels in and let glimpses of their true nature
peek out. And the listeners can observe and decide who's Godly and who's a thug.
Brad Cecil,
I apologize if what you describe here is true. Your account describes you having
little to do with it and you knew of no impropriety. Why wasn't I conferenced i
n on the discernent? That seemed off. Then things must have gone horribly wrong
after it was handed off. The letter says grave concern for the kids but then the
tour was never suspended but resumed, and there was no conversation or "tending
to the family." I disagree because this is not a family matter as it involved p
ublic figures who smeared my name. I apologize to you. I am sorry to lump you in
and I will take your words to me as truth that you were not in on it.
Julie
@Brad (Cecil),
Thanks for joining in the conversation, even briefly. Whether the accounts align
or not, it's important to hear the perspective and recollection of people who w
ere directly involved in the discussion of the pastoral response at that time in
2008.
Whether right or wrong, the "discernment group" has been accused of covering an
affair and either joining a smear campaign against Julie or attempting to have h
er committed. I think it important to note two things.
First, actions by individuals within the group may not reflect the actions or in
tent of the group as a whole or of other individuals within the group. Is it pos
sible that you acted in good faith but the execution of the group's recommendati
on went haywire? It's entirely possible - perhaps even likely, but we won't know
without testimony like yours. Thanks for providing it.
Second, and this is critical, stated for the record: the recommendation to basic
ally "stop everything, get your ass home" was entirely the right thing to do. By
Julie's account, things went off the rails in the execution, but that fundament
al recommendation was the right thing to do.
To my mind, there are still outstanding questions about whether there were under
currents going on within the group. It seems that there is evidence of an affair
, but who knew about it, and when? Before that meeting, or after? Most pointedly
, while I appreciate your note that Tony held nothing back under questioning, I'
m not convinced... though I've no doubt he would have left that impression with
everyone. If you were lied to and made a good-faith recommendation on that basis
, I would not hold you culpable. In the context of the wider group though, it se
ems odd that although there was a (wise, IMHO) effort to bring in outside counse
l via teleconference, there seems to have been an omission to bring Julie into t
hat conversation directly. On that basis, the recommendation that Julie seek car
e was made on third-party testimony - presumably from Tony for the most part. In
this, I suggest she was wronged.
I honestly really appreciate Brad Cecil's honesty and forthrightness. I apprecia
te him speaking his side of the story. I appreciate him not shying away from the
ugly details like others did. Brad, I honestly have gained tremendous respect f
or you due to that comment. Thank you.
Apologies for the delay in my response - life got in the way
Tony Jones' and Julie McMahon's court cases have gone from 2008 - 2014. They're
protected by an image verification system.
Search for Case Number 27-FA-08-5921 for
In the Marriage of Anthony Hawthorne Jones and Julie Anne McMahon Jones 2008-201
4
Search for Case Number 27-CO-13-8209 for
Anthony Hawthorne Jones vs Julie McMahon Jones 2013-2014
For Tony's (some of) public comments on courts & custody:
It s a Court System, Not a Justice System
"I ve often described the process of getting divorced (with
Hennepin County like being caught in a dream, one where you
creaming at the top of your lungs, but no sound is coming out
d everyone just goes about their own business, unable to hear
kids involved) in
re in danger and s
of your throat, an
you."
"Ours is not a justice system. It s a court system. If we can discipline ourse

lves to acknowledge that, it will benefit our mental health."
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2010/09/08/dads-in-divorce-court-at-jesus
-creed-and-tikkun/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2012/04/13/custody-laws-our-government-in
-inaction/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2012/05/25/update-minnesota-governor-side
s-with-the-lawyers-and-against-dads/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2012/06/02/gov-mark-dayton-vetoed-kids/
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2013/06/15/all-i-want-for-fathers-day-equ
al-parenting-time/
After reading these, I see that Tony Jones is genuinely distressed about not see
ing his kids.
I also see now that this situation has far more nuance and complexity than I hav
e perhaps presented.
It's easy, particularly on the internet, to perceive or promote a one-sided vers
ion of someone, and for my (small) part in that, I'm sorry.
@Brother - yes, it was bothering me as I crunched the numbers that my method had
flaws. I dropped Stats in college after a week because it was too nebulous. Cho
se Analytical Geometry instead :)
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Tim. He has regular visitation. Originally he asked that I have sole legal and s
ole physical I countered with shared legal because kids need a dad. Yes, I agree
it would appear differently. Skilled people can make things appear not what the
y are.
This is not about divorce but a group of individuals protecting their image and
brand by running over another. Often women and often with the rationalization th
ey are crazy.
A further interesting quote by Jonathan Haidt (via Tony Jones and Brian McLaren'
s blogs):
"Despite what you might have learned in Economics 101, people aren t always se
lfish. In politics, they re more often groupish. When people feel that a group
they value
be it racial, religious, regional or ideological
is under at
tack, they rally to its defense, even at some cost to themselves. We evolved to
be tribal, and politics is a competition among coalitions of tribes.
The key to understanding tribal behavior is not money, it s sacredness. The gr
eat trick that humans developed at some point in the last few hundred thousand y
ears is the ability to circle around a tree, rock, ancestor, flag, book or god,
and then treat that thing as sacred. People who worship the same idol can trust
one another, work as a team and prevail over less cohesive groups. So if you wan
t to understand politics, and especially our divisive culture wars, you must fol
low the sacredness."
Quoted on Tony Jones' Blog: Custody Laws: Our Government in (In)Action via Brian
McLaren
The question for me becomes: Are my (our) goupish tendencies aiding justice, mer
cy, and humility?
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
While I have empathized with all involved in this thread (for each response seem
s to be a genuine response, though for reasons I am unable to discern because I
literally know anyone here), I am thoroughly perplexed. Seriously. I truly do no
t know what to think anymore. While I do support free speech, I can't deny my in
ability to sort all this out from where I happen to be, dissociated from the ma
jor "players" having direct involvement with the situation at hand (which has go
ne way beyond what I thought this thread would be about, initially). I even got
questioned for detracting from the thread, though my intent was to offer my pers
onal struggle with what the thread eventually evolved into, while feeling for ge
nuinely for Julie (based upon her willingness to divulge to a public blog her si
de of the story), and while questioning all along what really happened given oth
ers' pov on all this. I am for the abused, and I am for the truth. And to be ver
y frank, I really don't know what to believe at this time. Am I to be blamed? Ha
ve I failed anyone approaching these matters from either side? Just so all here
know, I am not a Christian, nor have I ever been, while I served in various capa
cities in different churches, only to discover that I was never one of "you." Bu
t what we do share in common is that we are human beings, being quite screwed up
, and yet, pretty fricken' awesome, every damn one of us. Forgive me for taking
the "middle ground,"... or don't. I'm quite sure on this thread, I don't measure
up anyways, and that's precisely why I left the Christian faith. In any case, I
sincerely wish you all work this out, and for everyone's sake. Much peace to al
l, Chris.
*Forgive me for not going through my comment prior to posting it. I hope the gen
eral thrust of what I was attempting to communicate still came through*
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Thanks, Julie. The shared custody outcome certainly wasn't clear from Tony Jones
' blog - although he does talk access percentages in a lot of his later posts.
And the length of the court cases (5 years, including a secondary case and an ap
peal) certainly seemed incompatible with the reluctance (or was that disillusion
ment?) expressed towards the court system on Tony's blog.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Tim,
If you understand the specific condition then you understand the the legal syste
m is used by these personality types as a "litigation hammer" to destroy the oth
er person and render them penniless. I am the target. I am told it will never en
d. The term "litigation hammer" was used by a skilled professional involved. One
may appear to want to be perceived in one way but in reality that is not what i
s going on. I have offered for years carte blanche take them to dinner to help m
e out financially. I have never once been taken up on that offer. Again, I reall
y want to stress this is not about the messy never ending post divorce antics wi
th an NPD but the culture of leaders in this publishing/speaking/minor celebrity
circle that have smeared names and reputations in order to appear one way while
behind the scenes another story is going on. Actually, this is a perfect exampl
e of appearing the suffering dad who never sees his kids when in fact its Tuesda
y over nights and every other weekend. Because I insisted he be in their lives o
n the hook for being a dad. Yes, the suffering spouse wronged by the legal syste
m is played very well. Leaving your kids for another woman was a choice.
I'm trying very hard to put myself in the place of one of those people in the di
scernment group AFTER the emergency oh-my-gosh-Julie's-found-out-and-boy-is-shepissed conversation. It sounds like at least one of them meant for TJ to man up
and deal with his life, and also for Julie to have somebody there who wasn't lyi
ng to her. Hence, 2 airplane tickets to MN. Hence the suggestion that Julie (but
not TJ?) needed professional help -- which would be enough to drive me around t
he bend, in her position.
But then it sounds like everyone looked away while TJ reinvented himself as a po
or long-suffering dad chained to a crazy woman -- instead of a garden variety ph
ilanderer with an inflated ego and a professional need to seem like a good guy.
Worse, his good friend was supposed to be Julie's pastor -- someone she could tu
rn to for support and counsel. So, a double betrayal of trust, magnified times a
bout a thousand because all of it was taking place in the context of what was su
pposed to be a new & hopeful faith-practicing community.
Do I have it anywhere close?
Brother Maynard,
Many jurisdictions already make a driver's apology inadmissible in civil injury
and/or damages cases. (Well, technically, they made driver admissions admissible
but irrelevant when determining liability.) The insurers wanted this, so it was
done :-)
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Fair enough, Brad Cecil. You seem the most forthright of all.
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
Yes, Kate. I am beginning to think that some of them got played and were pawns i
n a strategic plan. Especially since it was discovered in a canceled check that
a lawyer was already retained when he made the group believe that he was doing e
verything in his power to save his marriage. I think now Brian McLaren, Brad Cec
il and Mike King got played and used as pawns in the strategic plan. Mark too? I
t is very difficult to believe Danielle Shroyer (her pastor at Journey church) a

nd the church where the dissertation was being written about, knew and observed
nothing in those frequent trips to Dallas? If she had no idea, then I wish she s
hould say so. I am not sure because only Brad is talking. I am very sorry for th
inking they were all in on it....now I think maybe just 2 or 3? I think Mark was
the pawn sent. It would be helpful if there was dialogue. I am quite confident
Doug will not admit his role. I know HE won't. Daniele did you know a lawyer was
already retained? Did you know there were daily phone calls between the two sta
rting May 2008? And, Danielle...did you tell Phyllis Tickle that I am crazy? An
email says you did, so I would like to know if you did or not?
I am the Sarah Cunningham who commented very early on in the thread. I offered,
at that time, my opinion that if you take Tony's post about Driscoll in the cont
ext of all Tony has said about Pastor Mark, it's very clear that Tony does not "
reflect the refusal of the church to understand spiritual abuse" as David observ
ed.
The full record, as I have read it, actually shows that Tony has actually writte
n against Driscoll's spiritual abuses so many times that one might actually conc
lude Tony is an example of how the church DOES SOMETIMES CONFRONT ABUSE. His rel
entless calling out of Driscoll's abuses, in fact, is heavy-handed not understat
ed in my opinion.
In this post (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2012/03/22/mark-driscolls-h
ouse-of-cards/), for example, Tony points out that the problems were NOT just th
eological, but that "Mark Driscoll has fired pastors and elders who had the gall
to question his leadership" and "Petry expressed concern that Driscoll was havi
ng the by-laws rewritten to consolidate his power."
In this one (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2014/03/06/how-mark-driscoll
-gamed-the-publishing-game/), he drew attention to how "Mark Driscoll and his ch
urch hired a firm that used a thousand different credit cards and thousands of i
ndividual names
the names were supplied by the church
to drive Driscoll
s marriage book onto the bestseller lists."
Here Tony criticized Driscoll for using his celebrity to start a Twitter campaig
n critiquing the President's faith because it is different than Driscoll's own.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2013/01/23/responding-to-mark-driscoll-wi
th-the-bible/
While I don't want to burden this post with too many more specific examples, the
re are PLENTY more criticisms in the 17 PAGES of posts Tony wrote criticizing Dr
iscoll's abuses at this link if you'd like to investigate. http://www.patheos.co
m/blogs/tonyjones/?s=mark+driscoll
Later my comments were referred to dismissively as if my opinion, based on havin
g read all of Tony's posts on Mark, was invalid JUST BECAUSE I happen to be a sp
eaker at Christianity21.
I understand why that conclusion was drawn, but I would like to pause and offer
some additional nuance into who I am.
My name is Sarah Cunningham. And I am a moderate EVANGELICAL. Although I conside
r one of my former pastor and some of my former church staff to have participate
d in emergent, I was not part of the Emergent movement myself. Prior to a year a
go, I never attended an Emergent event and never used the label to describe myse
lf, nor do I use it now. I have even declined the opportunity to be more involve
d in some progressive Christian events, because labels like Emergent and Progres
sive do not reflect my theological positions and do not always FIT with how I se
e or practice faith.
As a young Christian, I even asked my publisher NOT to brand my book with any Em
ergent markings because despite having respect for some of the attitudes within
it, Emergent was not how I identified. This was so true that in this book, Dear
Church: Letters From a Disillusioned Generation (Zondervan, 2006), I wrote phras
es like these:
----It can t ever be a tag like
relevant
or
emergent
or even
se
eker
or
purpose-driven.
Churches can t pay an association fee or read
a certain book in order to be listed on some online directory of
authentic c
hurches.
Authenticity doesn t work that way.-------I don't always want to call myself a Christian.....The emergent church opts
for
Christ-follower
which, I have to admit, is the best term I ve got as
well. (But darn it, I don t want to be pigeonholed as
emergent
either.)
---In the book, I also quoted some of D.A. Carson's criticisms of the emergent move
ment.
With this background, I'd like to give you the full disclosure on how I know Ton
y.
I first met Tony at the National Pastor's Convention in either 2007 or 2008. Our
interaction there was brief and uneventful. Not long after that, I began attend
ing a yearly gathering of Christian leaders in Philadelphia where Tony was also
in attendance. Despite being in different places on the Christian spectrum and h
aving many theological differences, our friendship began there. Over the years,
I have had the chance to work closely with Tony as well. I did contract work for
a brand Tony also did work for. And I speak and have helped with organizing Chr
istianity21--a conference Tony runs--because I hope to help create a place where
people from diverse Christian camps--such as Tony (who came from the Congregati
onal Church and now blogs for a progressive platform) and me (who grew up in the
Southern Baptist tradition who identifies as a moderate) can come and share ide
as and interact respectfully.
I want to be especially clear, then, when I emphasize that Tony and I do not see
eye to eye theologically. I am more conservative than him and that has led to m
any discussions between us. We have spent hours in person and on the phone discu
ssing our differences in our theology, and I have freely and frankly disagreed w
ith him so many times we both have likely lost count. But suffice to say, I have
called him more than once to push back on blog posts where I disagreed with his
tone and/or content and each time, he has spent the time to fully hear me, has
validated my voice, and sought to learn with me. In one case, we even spelled ou
t our disagreements in a blog post. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/tonyjones/2013/
11/27/maybe-schism-was-the-wrong-word/
For those of you who aren't familiar with the evangelical world I come from, it'
s important for me to mention that many people from where I come from do NOT see
Tony as someone who would advance my career as a moderate evangelical since he
is such a provocative critic of many in my camp. In fact, if anything, some of t
he people at the conservative presses who published my books probably wish I DID
N'T interact with Tony because his theology is considered harmful and his reputa
tion as a progressive is sometimes perceived as dangerous. So when I come to Ton
y's defense, please understand that I do not do so in an effort to boost my care
er. In fact, I possibly defend him at the risk of raising eyebrows in my home tr
adition. But I do it in an effort to honor my genuine and meaningful friendship
with him--to tell you the unexpected truth about how I came to dearly respect so
meone that many in my camps would vilify.

With that, because David has welcomed everyone's voices in an attempt to discern
truth, I'd like to offer a couple thoughts.
I certainly cannot speak to Tony and Julie's marriage. I do not have any first h
and information about this time in their lives, nor is my expertise in marital c
ounseling. No one besides Tony and Julie know what happened there, and their acc
ounts are very different.
While I cannot myself question Julie based on my knowledge, I think it is fair t
o at least point out that there is legal documentation and testimony to support
that Julie's side is not the only side of the story. That divorce, as we would a
ll expect, is messy and dark, and ex-spouses rarely agree on how or why it got t
hat way.
Being honest about my inability to speak to that, I WOULD like to leave you with
my own experience. I have and still do work with people from across the Christi
an spectrum. I often serve in "middle ground"areas between progressives and cons
ervatives and as a result, have experienced community--both highs and lows--with
many tribes.
Although there have been times where Tony and I do not see eye to eye, I want yo
u to know that no other man I have worked with from the right to the left has tr
eated me better as a co-leader, habitually asking for and respecting my point of
view, and insisting that I co-shape shared projects as an equal than Tony Jones
. In fact, if at any point I ever default to language that implies Tony is my su
perior, he has halted the conversation and told me that he never wants me to tal
k that way; that I am an equal and co-creator in anything we do. This has always
struck me as refreshing since unfortunately, I also know what it is like for pe
ople to treat me as if I am the support staff rather than an intelligent and edu
cated leader. I can honestly say that although I've challenged Tony's public ton
e or content, I have never had to once challenge how he spoke to me or how he tr
eated me as a woman because, if anything, he was uniquely conscious of the need
for him as a straight white man to sometimes defer to my skills and abilities.
Whether Tony was like this in the early Emergent days, or whether he has always
interacted with women this way, I have no way to judge. It is incredibly difficu
lt for me to imagine that some of the accusations made here could possibly, in a
ny way be compatible with the Tony I know now. Since I never observed that Tony,
I did not befriend him with the requirement that his past meet some list of cri
teria. I befriended him as he is now.
The Tony Jones of 2014? I would like you to know that I believe in what God is d
oing in his life today. I believe that he is healing from his divorce just as I
hope Julie is, that I believe he has learned and grown from both his divorce and
early leadership days, and that God continues to breathe redemptive love and st
rength and talent into Tony's life. I believe he is happy. And I believe his bes
t days are ahead of him.
I wanted to post earlier, but did not want to be a part of an online forum where
emotions can sometimes run understandably high and don't always bring out the m
ost objective listeners in any of us. I did not want to take away from the goodn
ess I believe my friend Tony has found in this stage of his life. And I did not
want to add to comments that drug up what the courts and public officials have a
lready judged on for years, at the possible expense of hurting Tony's family mor
e than all of them have already suffered.
Instead, I wrote David an email. I clearly stated that I knew it was David's rig
ht to moderate how he wanted, and I noted that I believe it is fair to talk abou
t silencing in church systems, but I asked him to consider the damage and misinf
ormation that a free-for-all like this can have when it takes a huge left turn i
nto picking apart people's personal darkness from a far. I am not sure if David
counted me among the attempted silencers he mentioned, but the harsh responses t
o those who defended Tony seemed to suggest this place was only safe for one kin
d of people: the people who are against Tony.
That made me feel like I might not be welcome here. But I want to try anyways.
I do believe that many of you are well-motived and are genuinely concerned with
injustice as I am, and that this leaning toward helping victims may have led you
to this discussion in order to promote the cause of good. I am praying you will
show me that same generosity and grace to offer one more piece of the story fro
m my point of view.
I appreciate all of you for taking the time to listen, even if your point of vie
w is different than mine.
Sarah, having me arrested in front of my kids to take a run at flipping custody
is present day activity. I can email you the Ex Parte document where he says, "b
ecause their mother is arrested, I ask for immediate custody." Thankfully a wise
judge saw through it and denied it. Did you read that account above? I do appre
ciate your response. However, I am not sure how you would reconcile what others
have witnessed and wrote about here. The smear campaign. That is your choice. Yo
ur voice and others are welcome but you are speaking at at JoPa event coming up
so, I imagine that would be difficult to entirely separate. Thank you for sharin
g your view.
All, I accept the apologies that I have received to date, and I would hope for m
ore, but I am not expecting any. I think the larger focus should be on the issue
of how to dismantle a toxic culture that operates very similar to Mars Hill. I
wish my story on no person! It was and is awful. I gave my honest and true accou
nt of all events. I am confident the ones at ground zero will spin and deny, and
that is their choice. Coming clean is hard for people. For those on the discern
ment team, if you were a pawn that is very unfortunate and I would absolutely ow
e you an apology. I guess I will never fully know. I pray that the Holy Spirit w
ould use my story to help others. Encourage others to speak up and call out when
they experience injustice or if they are a bystander. Peace, Julie
Just a couple more thoughts.
1. Sarah's post reminds me strongly of watching defenders of Clarence Thomas spe
ak of him during his confirmation hearings. They were very calm, thoughtful, bel
ievable women who just honestly could not even conceive of him doing what he was
being accused of doing. And yet he had done those things, as others (besides An
ita Hill) who knew a different side of him were perfectly prepared to say under
oath. Those defenders weren't lying, but they also weren't qualified to speak to
those allegations.
2. There is a very large burden on people who call themselves pastors. They're l
ike teachers and parents, in the sense that what they say and do (or fail to say
and do) is going to echo in their congregations forever. This site exists becau
se so many people have been damaged by the behavior of men (nearly always men) w
ho, when trusted with their spiritual well-being, gave it all the tender care of
a blind ox.
3. There's an EB White story/free verse poem called The Door, in which he names
a series of things that once represented hope. It's about despair. This language
has stuck in my head for more than forty years:
"First they would teach you the prayers and the Psalms, and that would be the ri
ght door(the one with the circle) and the long sweet words with the holy sound,
and that would be the one to jump at to get where the food was. Then one day you
jumped and it didn't give way, so that all you got was the bump on the nose, an
d the first bewilderment, the first young bewilderment."
He's naming the special terribleness of realizing that church -- which ought to
be a refuge -- can also shut its doors against you. This thread isn't resonating
because TJ is such a bad guy or because people take pleasure in watching someon
e get called out for hypocrisy. It's resonating because it hurts to trust that m
uch in an institution only to find out that it (and the people in it) do not car
e what happens to you.
That's the wrong we're trying to right, and not just for Julie.
The fact that Julie herself offered an apology suggests the very real possibilit
y that this is not a witch-hunt, but a kind of mediation. I've sat in on mediati
ons before and they are always confusing, messy, and emotional. However, they ar
e also fruitful if done well. I believe the participants in this conversation ar
e trying to do it well. So I'm confident if we persist in bringing our truths to
light in a humble yet confident manner, even more good fruit will come of this.
It makes me thankful to be a part of this experiment in community.
Lost Voice September 25, 2014 at 10:54 pm
I have always found it interesting and frustrating in the conversation about spi
ritual abuse and/or other type of abuse within the Emergent circles of how women
and men in the "inner circle" use "they have always been nice....." "They have
always been up standing...." As someone who has been on the receiving end of som
e toxic spill of a leader I found and still find it demeaning. How many times di
d Mars Hill people hear that? Yet, the truth came out.
I know I longed to hear "I know this person. I have not experienced what you say
, but I cannot deny what happened is your truth." Or some kind of thing on those
lines. Instead I was guilted and I was shamed. People would rail me for speakin
g out. I was made out to be a liar because how could this great leader, well lik
ed speaker ever do what I claim(ed).
I see the same thing here.
The thing is folks, whether you like it or not there are many emergent leaders a
nd even followers guilty of abuses that have been voiced.
So out is this, how do we allow talk happen? How do we take the curtain away and
admit, the emergent tent is guilty of things that have been well hidden?
Sarah,
It's great that Tony Jones can maintain friendships with some women. Unfortunate
ly, Jesus' focus is on how we treat "the least of these"; "the poor, the widow,
the orphan, and the oppressed"; and "our enemies".
We all fall short when subjected to this standard. But, nevertheless, that is wh
at we should aspire to, and particularly those who are teachers, leaders, and/or
pastors.
Brother Maynard September 26, 2014 at
@Sarah,
I remember you from 2007-8 around when
d to blog more, um, prolifically. It's
to note your theological distance from
imes.
12:29 am
your first book came out, back when I use
good that you added your background here
Tony despite close working proximity at t
I think it's important to understand what @Kate was talking about, esp. her poin
t #1. Also note carefully the part of @Brad Cecil's comment and my response abov
e on basically this same point. Way back in the thread, I said that some psychop
aths don't go around killing people, they just get jobs as CEOs and pastors. It
is very characteristic of some types of psychopathy, including NPD, that the aff
ected person would portray drastically differing personalities to different peop
le in different contexts. This is not a form of MPD at all - it's wilful. Once t
he individual has no further use for or finds they can no longer manipulate some
one, their treatment of that person can change to polar opposites. Basically, on
ce they can't get what they want or no longer need anything from someone, there'
s no longer any need for a charming front.
This is the chilling part about when the TV news reporter interviews the neighbo
r of the latest heinous criminal, and gets some stereotypical shocking comment a
bout how one would never have known because they were so nice. It's the same fac
ade that covers so many abusers... you just can't imagine them doing it because
of what you've seen. The issue is that you've only seen a role that's being play
ed for you... only what they wanted you to see. When the individual is highly in
telligent, it only gets more scary and disorienting.
Based on what we've learned here about what went on, including in the "discernme
nt meeting", it's entirely plausible that an individual or a select few could ha
ve played the others to get the result they wanted. Do I think it possible that
Tony could have done this? Yes, I do.
Nobody of Importance September 26, 2014 at 1:20 am
Just an observation. Julie has described a range of psychological abuses, legal
abuses, abuses of power and position, breach of spiritual and tribal trust, psyc
hic manipulation, numerous forms of sociopathic threats, physical harm, and cons
piratorial behavior. And yet, those here with a defensive narrative (Brian, Brad
, Sarah, Jon S, etc..) have avoided these critical issues. Instead, they collect
ively pat Julie on the head, saying "well deary, maybe you didn't get the memo,
but divorce IS messy."
Sarah did it ("divorce is messy and dark")
Brad did it ("this is about a marriage that ended badly")
and others farther back in the comment thread.
No, Brad. While I honor and appreciate your enlightening reply, Julie's core iss
ues are NOT about divorce. You folks are using the same rhetorical trick over an
d over. Maybe you can manipulate and B.S. your local religious community, but it
doesn't work here.
Too many of us following this conversation are keenly sensitive to abuses of rel
igious power, which happens to be a central focus of David's work. Too many of u
s have seen these same patterns, over and over. When religiou$ power is challeng
ed, it immediately attempts to censor, obfuscate, manipulate, gaslight, smear, p
ull rank, gang up, change the story, and whatever else it takes to hold onto its
power while denigrating and destroying its foe. Many of us see these identical
dynamics being used against Julie, and the evidence seems quite compelling, over
whelming in fact.
So, please, stop insulting us with a "divorce is messy" story arc. And recognize
that what's being discussed here is not just about Julie's experience, but an a
ll-too-common experience in Christendom that MUST be talked about, talked about,
and talked about, openly and publicly, until these sociopathic abuses are elimi
nated from our communities.
@Lost Voice said, [["I have always found it interesting and frustrating in the c
onversation about spiritual abuse and/or other type of abuse within the Emergent
circles of how women and men in the "inner circle" use "they have always been n
ice....." "They have always been up standing...."]]
I edited a friend's book on her experiences surviving domestic violence. She too
k inspiration for her title from an incident where she was at a gala community f
unction. As the husband of the woman seated next to her rose and went forward to
the podium, the wife turned to my friend and whispered, "He hits." The man was
receiving the mayor's Citizen of the Year Award.
@Brother Maynard said, [[It is very characteristic of some types of psychopathy,
including NPD, that the affected person would portray drastically differing per
sonalities to different people in different contexts. This is not a form of MPD
at all - it's wilful. Once the individual has no further use for or finds they c
an no longer manipulate someone, their treatment of that person can change to po
lar opposites. Basically, once they can't get what they want or no longer need a
nything from someone, there's no longer any need for a charming front]]
Wow, was that a trigger to some nasty flashbacks ... I went back to the survey I
filled out in 2008 for Barb Orlowski's doctoral research on church and ministry
leaders who'd been subjected to authoritarian control/abuse by other leaders. I
found the notes I was looking for, where another co-leader and I (both of us we
re the brunt of severe treatment) eventually got back together to talk. He'd bee
n kicked out and shunned about a year before I finally felt the freedom to leave
.
My friend said, "[PASTOR'S NAME] kept people around as 'options.' "
I said, "He treated staff like okay-for-now, but always kept his eye out for 'up
grades.' "
No one really seemed to see that early on but us ... because he mostly had his n
ice/happy face on. Gradually many others saw his not-so-happy face. He went thro
ugh at least 3 or 4 children's ministers and 6 or 7 worship leaders in just the
first 3 years -- most of them leaving because they were creeped out, burned out,
or sold out. Those, he brutalized as he had us two. Meanwhile, I learned that g
ood people, bright people, nice people can be quite taken in by someone with no
conscience, no compassion, and no remorse.
claire September 26, 2014 at 8:52 am
Hi there, I have just been observing this dialogue silently and from a distance.
I have no connection with any parties involved. This blog post was referred to
me because I'm experiencing a very mild form of what I consider pastoral abuse a
s I try to leave a church I've been in for many years. It's nothing like what Ju
lie has described (I am so sorry for her. It's absolutely chilling) However, som
e parts are ringing a bell.....
Like the part about women-blaming and shaming combined with the pastor digging u
p offenses from the past, referencing an emotional distance he feels from us as
we leave, citing his own pastoral involvement and authority in the decisions of
our lives up to this point, threatening to talk to the pastor of the church we'r
e visiting to share his "concerns," and suggesting that I'm just a weak mess of
emotions and that's why I can't handle the life-sucking horror that has become s
undays at this church.
Does anyone know if there are certain personality types that are more prone to n
arcissistic behavior? And the types that are more susceptible to fall for it?
Does anyone have any suggestions on how to combat the idea that "he's not doing
it on purpose" therefore I shouldn't be hurt by it? I keep getting told that the
pastor isn't manipulative "with malicious intent" so I shouldn't be so alarmed
that it's happening and he's "not a bad person"...Is it just me or does that sou
nd like bull shit? So...as long as he's ignorant of his own behavior he can get
away with it? How does that make any sense? Ugh.
Anyone have any thoughts? Thanks for this thread. On the one hand, it's really h
elpful because it makes me feel less alone, even though my experience is much le
ss severe. On the other hand, I'm just chilled to the core. Wow. :(
Claire,
If someone has to cite their "authority" over you, claiming a warped interpretat
ion of Hebrews 13:7 perhaps
run, don't walk to the exits. And the not "malic
ious intent/bad person" comments are just a smoke screen for his bad behaviour.
In the book, Wisdom of Psychopaths, the number 8 position that Psychopaths are d
rawn to is church leadership. Don't be shocked if this is what you've encountere
d.
I've had that question from a pastor: "whose authority are you under?"
I should have said "Jesus' authority".
Because being under anyone else's certainly hasn't worked out well...
@Claire,
Not just you - it's actual bullshit.
What you're being told is standard fare to keep people in abusive relationships.
He doesn't know, he can't help it, he doesn't mean it, he can't control himself
, whatever. You know what? You don't have to prove those are false because the d
amage is the same either way. Get yourself out of danger. And don't buy into the
common one that friends say that it's okay for them to stick around because it
isn't directly affecting them or their family. That's like saying, "We have this
paedophile that wants to teach Sunday School, but I'm okay with it because my k
ids aren't in that class." It simply doesn't matter whether they mean it or not,
just get out of harm's way.
claire September 26, 2014 at 10:40 am
Thanks everyone.
The thing that really raises my blood pressure is that if I said "It seems like
you're threatening us" "it seems like you're shaming us" "It seems like you're t
rying to control us" I can already hear and see the response of "I'm so sorry yo
u feel that way, I certainly never wanted to communicate those things.....blah b
lah blah." And then it would turn around to "you're judging me, you're bitter, y
ou had a hard childhood, you're projecting....etc." How do you deal with that? I
t's utterly maddening, especially coming from a pastor.
@Claire said: "Does anyone know if there are certain personality types that are
more prone to narcissistic behavior? And the types that are more susceptible to
fall for it?"
I've got some thoughts on the second question. Actually, that issue of "what mak
es me [or anyone] susceptible to being taken in by abusive people?" comes up all
the time in spiritual abuse survivor communities. It's the core issue behind qu
estions like, "How do smart people fall for tricks like that?" and "I don't know
why she's picked me to pick on" and "Why did this happen to me?" Very legitimat
e question - and one that it seems like is common to wrestle with in an abuse re
covery process.
In thinking through the years about what made myself and others susceptible to b
eing taken in by spiritually abusive leaders, I've concluded that it could be an
ything. There is no formula or one-tactic-fits-all. But I think the main working
principle is that each of us has vulnerabilities -- both good things and bad th
ings in our life
that can be exploited by someone who has no scruples. So, t
heir "best practices" end up as our worst nightmares.
* Do you have a strong desire to know the "truth" or believe that doctrinal know
ledge is what gets you close to God? Some bully pastors can provide a complete s
ystem where it's all spelled out for you, no major work on your part required ..
. just listen to them and say what they say, do what they say, be what they say.
* Desire for "family" or a "father figure"? They've got a charismatic figurehead
father, plus a covenant plan to keep you in their clan for your whole lifetime.
* Are you highly relational, or may emotionally starved, and susceptible to
l
ove bombing ? They ll pour on attention until you re hooked -- and then th
ey give you nothing, or maybe dangle attention in front of you just often enough
to keep you linked in, or maybe even switch over to negative conditioning/guilt
to keep you on the line.
* Do you have a higher need for structure and discipline, especially if you've s
pent much of your life in chaos? Some can provide regimentation to the max, just
what you [think you] "need."
* Or are you susceptible
"negative conditioning"
arn this, don't do that,
rnet, don't gossip about
to
guilt bombing
because you ve been trained by
to respond to demands that you perform, give, serve, le
you must say this, you can't be that, keep off the inte
leaders ... or else!
* Do you need for supposed freedom after years spent in bondage? They
de a space where anything goes!
ll provi
Also, researchers on "cults" and "totalist institutions" that control people dis
tinguish between tactics that are used for recruitment to get you to join, and r
etention to keep you there. They aren't necessarily the same, and again, what wo
rks to attract some people in is what eventually repulses other people out.
Anyway, we all have blind spots, genuine needs, and legitimate spiritual aspirat
ions that create vulnerabilities that people of neither conscience nor compassio
n will seek to leverage to their own advantage. And what our particular vulnerab
ilities are almost doesn't matter -- predators always find ways to lure in their
prey. So, if their tactics don't work on you, they likely will still work on ot
hers.
A book you might find helpful to think through the kinds of personalities that s
eem to be particularly prone to bullying others is: *Emotional Vampires: Dealing
with People Who Drain You Dry*.
http://www.amazon.com/Emotional-Vampires-Dealing-Revised-Expanded/dp/0071790950/
And as you continue your journey, and maybe consider journaling, this article ma
y give you some helpful thoughts and questions to think through what's happened
to you and reflect on insights about what to do next:
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/is-it-time-to-tell-my-story/
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
kate willette September 26, 2014 at 10:53 am
Hi, Claire
How about, "That's exactly what you would say if your were trying to control me,
isn't it?"
Followed quickly by, "Goodbye."
Claire: This is common behavior, not only in the church, but all organizations.
The leader's personal success and reputation is very tied in with the organizati
on's. It's like a car manufacturer overlooking faults in a car so that they won'
t get embarrassed or go broke because of a massive recall. It's the same thing.
I think that often there isn't malicious intent involved, just that they are so
consumed and obsessed with the success of the perceived good impact they are hav
ing on the world that any kind of setback would be seen as unfortunate.
I think one of the most important aspects of this entire thread is that, while s
ome argue that a blog is an unsuitable forum for such a conversation to take pla
ce, the silenced are thrilled that they have finally found a venue that gets the
ir voices out there. And their voices aren't just heard, but they are actually c
hanges things. It reminds me of Wall St., where those in authority resented the
fact that their precious street was littered with hippies, radicals, and homemad
e protest signs.
Conversation is happening. Even if there are heart-wrenching stories, strong dis
agreements, uncomfortable corrections, and even strong rebukes, the dialog is pr
ogressing and getting somewhere. There is some resolutions, respects, recants, a
nd reconciliations. I think this is remarkable.
And no official oversight committee is in charge controlling what the outcomes w
ill be.
Who said the blog isn't appropriate? Where is that rule written down?
The fact remains... marginalized voices are being heard. Things are changing.
So, maybe a blog IS a suitable place after all.

I would also like to make it clear that I have no investment in the outcome of t
his discussion. But I am heavily invested in the process. For me, what's most im
portant is that people feel free to tell their story. THEIR truth. My hope is th
at as we do this together, as a community... a community that not only shares ag
reement but disagreement... THE truth will eventually emerge so that the communi
ty and its members can be healed. I might have high hopes, but this is my hope..
. because I think it is possible. If only all would lay down their arms and talk
truly.
Jeff Straka September 26, 2014 at 12:26 pm
David said, "I often think there isn't malicious intent involved, just that they
are so consumed and obsessed with the success of the perceived good impact they
are having on the world that any kind of setback would be seen as unfortunate."
// Yep. Cognitive bias.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
I meant to include this link: http://io9.com/5974468/the-most-common-cognitive-b
iases-that-prevent-you-from-being-rational
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Ke September 26, 2014 at 12:38 pm
@ Claire - I left a church about a year ago under what it sounds like similar ci
rcumstances. I had bullied and isolated by two women, and had a pastor who didn'
t want to do anything about it. Interestingly, the bullying behavior was by two
women were limited to a group that participated in a single church service, and
when I left that service, stopped volunteering in the ministry I enjoyed the mos
t, and stopped attending on anything other than Sunday morning, the bullying sto
pped. I realized much later, however, that they had actually won by isolating me
in the community and limiting my participation. I finally left once other churc
h leaders went on a shame-and-blame offensive to get people to volunteer again.
I realized that not only would I be shamed and manipulated until I volunteered m
ore, but that I would likely also face the same bullying behavior that I had pre
viously faced a few years prior. That was my breaking point, and I left.
I made the tragic mistake of speaking with the pastor prior to our departure to
express my concerns. He had previously been a pretty decent person and had provi
ded good spiritual advice to me on unrelated issues. I was met with a response f
rom someone who seemed like a completely different person. He repeatedly said th
at it was impossible to hold church leaders responsible for their treatment of o
thers. He denied, attacked my personality, blamed my past experiences for my per
ceptions, blamed behavior within his church on things like deaths and illnesses,
and threw in some non-apologies like "I'm sorry you feel that way." He took a p
roblem that was serious (adult bullying) but addressable and magnified it greatl
y with his responses. It has the effect, unfortunately, of making the church he
leads an unsafe place for the foreseeable future.
Like you, I've spent the last year trying to figure out why I was susceptible to
this, why I didn't foresee that the pastor would turn on me so quickly and comp
letely, and how I can avoid churches like this in the future. My mantra has been
"never again." I don't have any answers, but from all the reading I've done, I
realize that Christian culture contributes to this greatly, as we are told that
standing up for ourselves isn't kind, and that confrontation and dissent is wron
g if may hurt others. We are strongly encouraged to keep silence to maintain the
perception of peace, even when it isn't really there. As I look back, I recogni
ze that there was a strong culture of silencing dissent, and the group as a whol
e had very little tolerance for criticism or even just suggestions for change, e
ven where it was not directed at particular people. It also had a strong "inner
circle" and had no interest in input from anyone outside that circle. I also rec
ognize that I let denomination play a role. As a former evangelical, I put some
faith in the fact that I was in a church that was part of a mainline, liberal de
nomination. I know now that liberal doctrine provides no guarantee of a function
al or healthy church environment.
My advice for anyone leaving a church under circumstances where there has been
any level of abuse or mistreatment, however mild, is to simply WALK AWAY. You al
ready know that the church turns a blind eye to it, so it's unlikely that confro
nting it head-on will yield any other response other than more denial or mistrea
tment. You can do this responsibly (if the abuse isn't constant and/or widesprea
d), if you are involved in volunteer work, by letting a leader know you won't be
returning and providing whatever practical instructions are needed to get that
person up-to-speed. Do it in writing and don't respond to questions asking why y
ou aren't participating in the ministry anymore. (I don't think you need to tell
those leaders you are leaving.) Then write a letter to the pastor telling them
that it's time for you to move on. I will quote Frank Viola (an evangelical writ
er for Patheos) on this point: "It is not a good idea to meet with your pastor i
n person and tell him/her all the things you don't like about the way he/she run
s the church. In addition, it's unwise to criticize his/her sermons. Unless of c
ourse you want to be boiled in olive oil or roasted over a slow pit." http://fra
nkviola.org/2012/05/29/leavingchurch/
While I think Viola is mostly talking about churches that aren't necessarily abu
sive, my experience was that you're even more likely to be boiled in oil if you
dare to speak out about church leaders who engage in bullying and/or abuse. In m
y case, speaking out ended up helping no one, did not stop the behavior, and pro
bably helped the pastor to circle the wagons against future confrontation. And a
ll it did is hurt me even more, and ruin collateral relationships since now I tr
ust almost no one who still attends there. I know some people will disagree abou
t the speaking out part, but for me, it was a total disaster.
Danielle Shroyer September 26, 2014 at 12:47 pm
Dear Readers of Naked Pastor,
I will not echo all that Brad Cecil has said above, but I share his sentiments a
nd my experience was the same: I got involved because Julie contacted me, and I
was extremely worried about her. I got involved because Tony asked me for advice
. I will not apologize for responding as any decent human on the planet would ha
ve done.
That night we responded to an urgent request for pastoral care and did so to the
very best of our abilities, and with GREAT CONCERN for Julie and Tony. It was n
ot a smear campaign, a conspiracy plan, a cover-up, or some attempt at saving an
empire.
As imperfectly as it may have unfolded, that does not UNDO the go
od intentions and honest care that was offered. I am extremely offended to have
been accused of spiritual abuse. I agree with Brad that Julie s accusation des
erves an apology. It is a SERIOUS accusation and an unfair one.
I am not interested in getting mired in what would be an exhausting effort to co
rrect all the misinformation on this thread despite my frustration at so many of
my friends being unfairly judged and accused. Julie has assaulted my integrity
on this issue for years and it needs to come to an end. I will only briefly addr
ess issues pertaining directly to me:
The only woman mentioned that night in 2008 was JULIE. The only focus of
conversation that night was saving Tony and Julie s marriage. End of story.
I have read through every email I ever exchanged with Phyllis Tickle. We
never once discussed Julie. To my best recollection, I did not have a conversat
ion with Phyllis about Julie.
During every trip to Dallas Tony has ever had when I have seen him, I HA
VE OBSERVED NO IMPROPRIETY, EVER.
I do not intend to return to this thread. I am
rther comments, accusations or questions about
I believe is far more than most everybody s
ergies to go do some good in the world, rather
not interested in fielding any fu

these matters. I have shared what
business. I suggest we use our en
than spread more gossip.
KR Taylor September 26, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Danielle, It's not "gossip" if it's your OWN experience and story. That's a comm
on shutting-down technique, to accuse one of telling their own story of gossip,
but it simply isn't valid.
Ke September 26, 2014 at 1:20 pm
@ David - I agree with you that the defensive behavior described by Claire is co
mmon to many organizations and not intentionally malicious, at least initially.
And I agree that occurs because the leader identifies so strongly with the organ
ization's success. But I question whether after some period of time, we can assi
gn some level of ill-will or malicious intent when church leaders continue to de
ny and attack in the face of persistent claims of mistreatment and/or abuse.
To use your car manufacturer example, how long can the company deny there is a p
roblem (there's no defect), claim the result is the operator's fault (you drove
on those tires too fast), attack the operator's character (if you weren't so rec
kless/agressive/timid etc. the result wouldn't have happened), issue non-apologi
es (Mistakes were made. We're sorry you think you were harmed.), and silence peo
ple (like firing people who knew about the problem, for example), before we can
assign maliciousness to that company? I think at some point the defensiveness be
comes just as bad or even worse than the initial injury, and we have to admit th
at there is at the very least a callous disregard and contempt for the injured b
y the leaders of the organization.
So much of what we recognize now as serious patterns of church abuse originate n
ot from the actual abuse but from the people deny and cover it up. If you look a
t the high-profile history of the Roman Catholic sex abuse cases, for example, I
would guess that some smaller portion involves the priests who actually engaged
in the abuse, while some larger portion is the cover-up. I don't think in most
cases that the priests and bishops involved in the cover-up actively desired for
children to be abused, they just wanted to maintain the church's outward reputa
tion and did not care that the collateral result was that the victims did not re
ceive justice and that in many cases, more abuse occurred. If it was isolated,
I think we could say it wasn't intended as malicious, but where there's a repeat
ed pattern, or just continued denial over an extended period, I think we are qui
te justified in describing the behavior as malicious and intentional.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Oh I agree Ke. Totally. I said "I often think..." when I should have said, "I th
ink that often..." I'll correct that. Yes... some people who are more sensitive
catch on quicker, while some who are so invested in their own identities or thei
r organization's, etc., that they take longer.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
"I was met with a response from someone who seemed like a completely different p
erson. He repeatedly said that it was impossible to hold church leaders responsi
ble for their treatment of others. He denied, attacked my personality, blamed my
past experiences for my perceptions, blamed behavior within his church on thing
s like deaths and illnesses, and threw in some non-apologies like 'I'm sorry you
feel that way'."
_____________________________
We just need to realize there are some vicious people out there, many of them ar
e drawn to churches and leadership, I sincerely believe, because they know they
can hurt God's people more efficiently that way. I no longer consider atheists m
y enemies, they're generally just people trying to get through life like me, man
y of whom have experienced abuse from Christians so-called and thus (in my opini
on) have tragically thrown out the underlying message. I wish I could convince t
hem that Jesus is being wholly misrepresented by people like you former pastor.
My enemies are the the ones who destroy in the name of God and their enablers. I
believe they're the wolves that Christ warned us about. I can pray for them, I
can forgive them, but I want nothing to do with them.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
So here's my question: how much marriage/psychology counseling education do past
ors actually have vs. someone in the secular/independent professionals who are s
pecifically TRAINED AND LICENSED for such counseling? It's my understanding that
most seminaries don't require instruction for an MDiv, and when they do, they a
re primarily introductory. Might this not be a large part of the problems we see
?
I think Danielle you have righteous anger and for that I apologize if what you s
ay is true. However, given that she was married and you her Pastor...that seems
highly unlikely, but you claim it's not. So, "you hard pressed on me and in me"
sex email isn't inappropriate while married? Help me out here. The picture with
you and the two wining and dining entitled "Clouds and Tony Jones"
I do know some things that absolutely do not add up and the one(s) holding the k
nowledge will not come clean. I find it very difficult to believe, but you are s
aying it is your truth...so be it.
Then why the stonewalling? Why was there zero follow up? Why would you ever disc
ern WITHOUT the other person present or on conference? Why then when I had the p
sych evals verifying things, no one wanted to "discern" anymore? A lawyer was al
ready retained when you sat down and asked pointed questions...I have the cancel
ed check, so if you bought the story that everything was being done to save the
marriage, then you were fooled and yes used as a pawn. If there was such great c
oncern then why wouldn't the 6 speak to me....once they were put on a plane, yes
things obviously went horribly wrong. There was no "tending to family" whatsoev
er. It was Doug pressuring me after Mark had left to get to St. Mary's hospital
for a psych eval because he called and they had a bed available. Not one of you
followed up with me so I think your great concern....wasn't so great.
@Jeff Straka -- Only the Holy Spirit is necessary. End of discussion. ;)
Likes(4)Dislikes(5)
And, Danielle....you just called Phyllis Tickle a liar! She heard it from YOU an
d she said she respects your opinion highly so it must be gospel! "Assaulted my
character for years?" I have NEVER spoken to you except for a brief ONE TIME mee
ting on Princeton's campus in 2003. How exactly have I done that? On my blog? I
don't have one. At Christianity21 conferences? I attend nothing of the sort. Isn
't it more likely I had my name and mental health smeared since there is ACTUAL
evidence by witnesses of that on this thread. I don't run in the speaker/author
minor celebrity circles and so you need to apologize to me I think because you j
ust falsely accused me of "assaulting your character for years." Danielle, I rea
d the email with my own eyes....so you need to take that up with Phyllis Tickle
if you never said a disparaging word about me or my mental health. Which you DID
because it was verified....so you can come down from your pedestal now and admi
t your role.
Jeff Straka in this case yes you would think there would be training but when I
went back to the 6 to share the results of the psych evals which exonerated me,
but actually revealed a serious personality disorder which someone mentioned is
in no way suitable for leadership....they would not respond. I was told by Doug
Pagitt, "I don't want to know....don't send it to me." Why wasn't he discerned t
o be sent to a hospital? Interesting.
Adie September 26, 2014 at 2:23 pm
It seems to me that we're beginning to see a bit more of the full picture emerge
. I personally am sympathetic to the plight of pastors/overseers in some of thes
e situations. To some extent, one can only go on the information that is availab
le (especially when these are ad hoc meetings). And as someone mentioned earlier
in reference to "official" court records, there is often more to the picture th
an is immediately available. In the same way, there is often more to the story t
han an overseeing group is made aware of. And there's only so far they can go to
uncover more. In other words, these operate to some degree on a "good faith" un
derstanding that truth is being spoken. Now, that said, it does seem like not in
cluding Julie in those meetings was the biggest oversight. That one step would n
ot only have provided the group with more information (there are always at least
two sides to a story), but it would also have prevented Julie from being in the
unenviable position of having to wonder all these years what went on there. At
this point my larger concern is less with that emergency pastoral group (because
it sounds as if, as I would have initially suspected, several of the people inv
olved were not guilty of anything other than trying to do their best in a less t
han ideal situation) than I am with the follow-up afterwards. Of course, what Ju
lie has had to endure since then (I'm thinking of the alleged arrest in front of
her kids over a technicality, and other such matters) is still chilling and dis
heartening, to say the least.
"I am not interested in getting mired in what would be an exhausting effort to c
orrect all the misinformation on this thread despite my frustration at so many o
f my friends being unfairly judged and accused.
________________
Honestly, that's spoken like a true liar.
"...so you can come down from your pedestal now and admit your role."
_________________________
Don't hold your breath. She writes like one who doesn't give one whit about the
truth. Kick the dust off your feet, let her go, it's between her and God.
Adie, to be fair where fairness if warranted yes! I am in agreement. If they in
good faith were played then would they please direct their rage at the person(s)
who played them? They would not speak to me which is a little odd don't you thi
nk? I asked questions....what is going on? I was hung up on and given no respons
e...only silence. One is left to fill in the blanks when the other parties refus
e to respond. This is the first responses I have received on this issue. Daniell
e is being disingenuous in part, and she knows that but has put on a good show.
Agreed, discerning with only the party with the crafty and clever diagnosis was
indeed their downfall. Plus, I never called them and asked them to gather and di
scern without me!? That is untrue. I was ambushed. I was sleeping with my nappin
g 3 year old when Mark Scandrette walked into my bedroom. I was wearing only a r
ob. He sat on the end of the bed and said, "Your kids will be fine and you need
to pack a bag for the hospital." Does this seem like good Pastoral care? I was s
cared to death! If they were played and I am not entirely convinced because of s
ome discrepancies....then yes I apologize but the smear campaign that took place
to justify the divorce, cover an affair and save book deals? I think that is ve
ry much real as testimony here has verified....not holding my breath for those p
eople to come forward. If they were capable of that....doubtful they are capable
of a simple I am sorry.
Lainie Petersen September 26, 2014 at 3:04 pm
Lurker coming out of the woodwork here to answer Jeff Straka's question: Every M
.Div. program is different, so it is hard to say what people actually learn in t
hese programs about marriage counseling. My own M.Div. program required minimal
coursework in pastoral care, though the importance of referring people to compet
ent practitioners was certainly stressed. We had the option of taking additional
counseling courses, but they certainly didn't equip us to be counselors, much l
ess marital counselors. Some people could, however, go on to programs that did o
ffer specific, graduate-level training in counseling that could eventually lead
to licensure.
I did take a course that focused on identifying major mental health disorders, i
ncluding personality disorders. This course served me well: For one thing, it ma
de me well-aware of my inability to diagnose or treat such disorders. It also ta
ught me that clergy have to be on our guard against both parishioners and other
clergy who have such disorders, particularly since we are often on ego-trips abo
ut "helping" people and get happy-clappy about spearheading redemption stories.
From what I know, marriage counseling is its own beastie and many licensed menta
l health practitioners (much less pastors) are NOT trained in counseling couples
. This is problematic, particularly if there is abuse involved. Naturally, many
pastors and counselors are likewise not good at spotting signs of abuse and thei
r counseling, when it happens, often worsens the plight of victims.
In short: I think that clergy, no matter how well-intended, are often out of the
ir depth when trying to address marital breakdown, particularly when mental heal
th issues (and especially personality disorders) are a factor. This is true whet
her the clergyperson is working on her own or with a group of equally unqualifie
d clergy. From reading this thread, it appears to me that, at the very least, so
me well-intended individuals attempted an overreach that seriously backfired on
at least one person that they thought they were helping.
Julie, I am truly, truly sorry that this happened to you. You deserved, and cont
inue to deserve, better.

@Lainie ... I was just saying that there is so much arrogant, even if unintentio
nal, Messiah complex running rampant in the Church and her pastors and leaders - groups of "equally unqualified clergy." Thank you for "un-lurking" to share yo
ur wisdom here.
Lainie Petersen September 26, 2014 at 3:19 pm
Thank you for your kind response, Peggy. And you are right, the complex is real
and it is quite possible for clergy to feast together on it. Blessings to you.
" But I question whether after some period of time, we can assign some level of
ill-will or malicious intent when church leaders continue to deny and attack in
the face of persistent claims of mistreatment and/or abuse. "
Brad the futurist guy taught me something about this. He put words to something
I had witnessed but could not explain. What you are describing above is a "close
d system". The "behavior" you described becomes "institutionalized" whether they
realize it or not. And they operate in a closed structure even if they appear t
o be the opposite on stages. The level of their own deception is enormous.
I was in seeker megas as a consultant and saw this first hand. People would come
on staff and over the course of a few years several things could happen to them
. 1) they seek power and access to the leadership so they are completely on boar
d or 2) They are uncomfortable with the system but go along. In effect they have
sold their souls for a mess of pottage because they are never really happy but
stay anyway. or 3) they figure it out and leave or are fired... sometimes even c
ausing trouble by questioning things first. We called them the "no cake" people
who simply disappeared and no one dared ask about them.
The first group which includes the leadership, this becomes their "normal". Noth
ing more important than image, brand, buildings, books, conferences, etc. It is
all for the glory of God, you know. I have seen perfectly humble men become char
latans in a few years and not even realize it because they made their own pitche
r of kool aid in the closed system. It is heady stuff to be close to so much pow
er and be able to slap a fish on it and call it spiritual. And keep in mind, to
grow a movement or a very large church takes some serious ego, charisma and mane
uvering, etc. It takes a while to earn the trust of the people so they can be se
t apart from them.
So when you are not a good little admirer from the pews but instead ask uncomfor
table questions, you will get what you got depending on your potential pocketboo
k. I used to encourage people to ask to see a budget because I knew they would n
ever be given one. Ever. I was amazed at how long they would play the "no seeing
the budget game" because of this or that excuse and how many departments or peo
ple they were sent to with the outcome: Don't you trust our elders?
I wish I could say most Christian movements or mega churches are not like this b
ut my experience over many years says different. I am ashamed of my time in them
but at least I went out fighting pegged as a troublemaker and "emotionally unst
able". Yep, they will do all they can to marginalize folks. So my advice is run.
Don't even bother with trying reason or understanding. Wasting your time. I hav
e a copy of their playbook. :o)
Danica,
I know a woman, an educated theologian, who did an experiment back in early blog
ger days by presenting herself as Larry on many pastor blogs. Larry was taken qu
ite seriously and engaged. But when she was Laurie, who had the some exact posit
ions and level of discourse, she was ignored. She did it to prove to herself she
was not nuts. There really was an underlying misogyny that even the men did not
recognize they possessed.
Brad Cecil,
Smart people who care and want to help are often used very badly by Narcissists
and/or Sociopaths in "ministry" positions.... as I well know. The key to this is
what I learned from it even down to who got hurt because I went along. Because
I owed them even if I was duped, too, because I did not seek out their story.
My new position is now always" truth first" instead of first being a compassiona
te helper that gets duped into hurting others when I think I am doing the right
thing. (And truth first is messy and hard work) Now, instead of believing the "t
itled" positional person (and their defenders) I always check all sides. Wise as
serpents, gentle as doves because there are lots of wolves out there.
This from Pastor Shroyer (I use her title because she came here to scold us into
behaving better):
"I will not apologize for responding as any decent human on the planet would hav
e done."
Since she's left, I'm not speaking to her but instead to those in ministry who m
ight be lurking here. It appears that Pastor Shroyer believes herself to be blam
eless. She believes herself, on the night of the crisis, to have merely behaved
as a decent human doing what decent humans do. They try to help. That's the end
of the story for her. She tried to help, it didn't work out, and now she's being
publicly named as someone who callously helped a philandering friend when he wa
nted nothing but to make his angry wife shut up.
I can see how that would be annoying. I can even see how it would seem unfair, e
specially if it's true that she didn't know at the time that he was a philandere
r, much less one who had already hired a lawyer but was pretending that he wante
d to stay married. I take her at her word on that. She's been falsely accused.
What Pastor Shroyer doesn't do is recognize that in a very small way, this false
accusation against her is a bit like the "batshit crazy" one that her friend's
ex-wife has been tagged with secretly for a number of years. (Ironic.) She also
doesn't address the question we're all trying to approach in our different ways,
which I'd characterize this way:
What recourse does a church-goer have when they've been shunned and shamed and a
bandoned by people they ought to have been able to trust?
This thread is evidence that it's not an uncommon thing.
What's been uncommon, until recent times anyway, is for pastors to be called out
publicly by parishioners who have found their trust abused and their places in
their communities taken away. My introduction to the Mars Hill story was a blog
post that exposed how a young man was shamed, publicly humiliated, and shunned f
or the sin of confessing that he'd been sexual with his fiance. And then it turn
ed out that there were LOTS of people who had been abused in various ways at Mar
s Hill, and then that there were also lots MORE people who had experienced simil
ar things at their own churches.
It seems like something ministers, including Pastor Shoyer, might want to think
about. It's not going to work to simply suggest that everybody go do some good i
n the world and stop gossiping. We know good when we see it.
Lainie,
I've also seen pastors way out if their depth when attempting to counsel addicti
on, depression, anxiety,
But the expectation that they'll know everything (f
rom their congregations) becomes internalised. There's little criticism of their
abilities, or suggestion to pass things on to those better qualified - even whe
n they acknowledge not being qualified!
The result: shattered, disappointed people; and a pastor psychologically pressur
ed to shift the blame.
And Danielle Shroyer:
Giving voice to the poor, the widow, the orphan, the oppressed; the victims, the
bullied, the silenced;
Hearing testimony about truth from many sides;
Clearing up 5-year-old miscommunications and misconceptions; and
Making peace
These ARE good in the world. Your own saviour says so.
(And he wasn't adverse to causing a mess or commotion while doing so; nor offend
ing those in power.)
While I sincerely wish I could claim to be surprised by Danielle Shroyer's reply
, I am not. If this response is an example of her idea of good pastoral care the
n anyone in her church would well-advised to begin work on an immediate exit str
ategy. Unfortunately, her reply is little more than a show of concern for hersel
f and her friends, and the fact that we are once again faced with an accused per
son in a ministry position who spews indigation without the slightest attempt to
engage by offering counterpoints or supported statements lends still more credi
bility to Julie's account.
It's telling, to me at least, that Shroyer can't even be bothered to attempt to
address specifics. The classic "I know something you don't know" posture is litt
le more than a cop out, and I am becoming increasingly tired of hearing those wh
o have supposedly answered a call to be shepherds to the flock proclaim their go
od intentions. Good intentions mean little when the outcome of one's actions are
harmful. Why, I really must ask, can you not find it within yourself to express
even the slightest concern for what may have been your part in a serious breach
of pastoral ethics, Pastor Shroyer? One would assume that, had you been behavin
g with the best of intentions and with the utmost care at your disposal, such ou
trage as you have expressed here would be best directed at those who deceived yo
u. But you've come here with the intention of nothing more than shutting down a
woman who has long been silenced. As a pastor, as a minister of any variety, you
do not have the luxury of doing such a thing. Your position does not afford it
to you, and if you can't see that for the truth it is then you have no business
offering guidance or counsel to anyone. What you've done here is an abject failu
re to live up to the responsibilities you have accepted willingly.

Truly, Pastor Shroyer, if you are innocent in all this then I can't encourage yo
u too stongly to investigate the facts of this incident. You may believe you alr
eady know them, but if you do in fact know the full facts then you do everyone a
disservice by your reply here. If Julie's story has even a portion of the truth
, we are left with only two conclusions regarding you. Either you were a dupe an
d your outrage is misdirected, or you were a full participant in a grave offense
against Julie, against your position, and against your Savior. I can only hope
it's the latter, but you owe a much greater accounting than you have offered her
e. If you have will not, or cannot, offer it in this space then at the very leas
t you owe Julie some answers. She may owe you a few of her own. Perhaps the two
of you, assuming your innocence is genuine, can suss out a clearer perspective o
n these matters and see some wrongs righted. As it stands, you've done no better
(and in some ways far worse) than your colleagues who have appeared on this thr
ead previously.
I don't deserve a reply, but Julie absolutely does. Live up to your creed, Pasto
r Shroyer. Demonstrate some humility and answer the claims Julie has made.
Eric September 27, 2014 at 5:30 am
I have been engrossed in this exchange on this thread and the interaction here.
Here are some reflections:
Julie
Wow, what a journey. I, too, wouldn t expect too many flat-out apolo
gies for this simple reason: they live in a world where litigation and human (fa
llen?) power is exercised over the weak and flat-out apologizing places people i
n a weak position as they make themselves vulnerable. As they have observed, tha
t vulnerability or weakness is often exploited and abused by those in their *imm
ediate* circle. So, they don t want that unwanted litigious attention turn tow
ards them, whether by TJ or, even, yourself. So, in light of your stating that t
hey don t have the personal integrity to respond to your request for an apolog
y, I think there s at least another explanation and, indeed, one that might he
lp you develop charity towards them (though, from your posts, it sounds like you
already have that in good measure): People psychologically think that everyone
thinks and acts as they do/might, so they may be projecting; they *fear* that th
ey will be attacked. And, that indicates that they haven't experienced love in t
hose deep places of fear, yet; perhaps that an invitation to pray for our enemie
s and those that have persecuted us....
The push back from some has been good: to see nuances and new information come t
o light have been helpful to draw out complexity and help us draw away from simp
lifications. I have appreciated your responses in charity and your push back on
issues (inconsistencies?) that clearly remain outstanding. The terrible enactmen
t of group think that you ve experienced
and, I commend you for realizing
that person-specific parts of your accusation many not be accurate, though the b
road sweep very well may be
really highlights the need for fearless prophets
within leadership circles; where were those checks and balances?
I also think that, given that there is current, on-going litigation the call by
some for mediation is at worst disingenuous and at best mis-guided as so much ha
s to happen before I personally would feel comfortable sitting across from those
that have hurt you and then make myself vulnerable to them once again. I would
need a number of things to happen before I would put myself in such a position,
including: a dropping of all litigation action (that a pastor would choose to li
tigate when Scripture expressly says that that is a ridiculous course of action
in 1 Corinthians 6.1-8 raises a red flag for me .), a period of psychiatric co
unseling for TJ where he accepts that he has a problem and expresses and acts on
the desire to move towards help and healing. Unless God spoke or speaks directl
y to you and told/tells you to go ahead, the precaution voice by some here
t
o stay away from NPDs completely
holds. I see a long journey before all of t
hose conditions are met in order for a constructive, productive and restorative
(my definitions of success) mediation to occur.
And, jumping on the issue that this is a private matter and ignoring the fact th
at TJ and others are public figures, I still think that Julie has a solid case f
or going public. Scripture says to dismiss accusations against an elder if it
s just one accusation, but there s more than one witness here: not only has a
commenter on this thread corroborated a toxic pattern, but there s more than o
ne witness prior to that: Court ordered psychiatric evaluations of both Julie an
d Tony make for an easy second witness and their reception and understanding wou
ld demand appropriate steps for discipline. It s sad to see that there may hav
e been a head-in-the-sand reaction to this (new) information.
Brambonius
much appreciate your broadening the conversation re: emergent mov
ement, and your hinting that much won t be recorded or blogged about. There
s far too much attention focused on those that can afford to access a web-enable
d computing device. As someone living in Asia and connected to people that advoc
ate for the persecuted Church in this region, much of the church is undergoing r
evival on many level, both explicitly Spirit-led and implicitly Spirit-led (Huma
n effort). One thing that has contributed to this imbalance is the North America
n Church s skewed self-view that they are a major part of Christianity when, i
n fact, the NA Church is a large branch at best (perhaps even only a twig?) on t
he great tree of Christianity. That much is obvious here in Asia. Not only has e
mergence been skewed narrowly (initially to white males, but now broadening to b
e a bit more inclusive on some level within NA and also worldwide around the glo
be (Cana, etc )), but also emergence needs to take heed about potential abuses
of those in power as it expands (there is fertile ground for abuse, even here i
n HK, where many congregations quasi-worship their head pastor.) which could und
ermine and slander the good work that God is doing in Asia.
Mike Morrel
I have much appreciated Mike from afar, and even hope to attend
a Wild Goose. That said, however, I find his argument against guilt by associati
on to not be 100% compelling (though not 0% either) for the very reason that par
t of the argument for group think lies in the fact that deep relationships (& th
eir adherent commercial opportunities) lead to a conflict of interest. Some disc
ipline of self-recusal for reflection might have helped here. As new information
has come to light, this conflict of interest has become less, but has not been
completely answer satisfactorily. Sadly, esp in MHC s case, the wrong persons
were recused (and, arguably, the tools of defamation and ad hominem were also
used in Julie s particular case). I appreciate that Julie has acknowledged som
e of that, but think that
as someone that stands outside the inner circle
your argument may hold much for you than for those in the inner circle.
In such a lengthy comment thread, there have been multiple issues discussed. How
ever, it seems that the overall direction and purpose of this comment thread is
for Julie s story to be heard and acknowledged by the discernment team.
But why do this on a public blog with such an audience? Because there is an unde
rlying purpose for the greater listening audience to discern the trustworthiness
of the public leaders represented here. This audience listens to these leaders
in the public sphere, and they expect openness from trusted leaders. A tone of s
ecrecy indicates an attempt to withhold from the public what really happened. Ge
nerally a demand for secrecy is a cloak for behaviors that are not above-board.
The remedy for suspicion is to bring things to light, to present the stories of
both sides in a place where they can be heard by all. Although this can be painf
ul, in the end, it can bring healing.
To the discernment team, as leaders of a national conversation, surely you under
stand the importance of listening. Here is an opportunity to understand Julie
s perspective, her story, things she endured of which you were unaware. Do you b
elieve that Julie yet feels that you understand the hurt that she felt?
It is also an opportunity to share the story of your intentions and your role in
the discernment meeting. Julie seems willing to consider that the harm she expe
rienced unintended by some members of the team. Perhaps the team must be willing
to consider sources of the discrepancies in the story.
I believe that we can agree from Julie s story that she experienced pain from
the actions of a group that she expected to advocate for her. When finally heari
ng Julie s painful story after five long years, I would expect to see statemen
ts of empathy and regret from the members of the discernment team who claim to h
ave intended sincere pastoral care.
Where are the statements of empathy and regret? Instead each one has adamantly s
tated that they will not continue this conversation, once again reinforcing the
silencing that Julie has experienced over the years.
You say you were trying to help, but that doesn't erase the fact that Julie was
hurt. If she has a story of pain that she experienced in which you were involved
, it is disappointing that you have been unwillingly to truly consider and ackno
wledge the pain of those events or any regret over your involvement.
@Linda, while I absolutely agree with your comment, for me there is an even grea
ter and broader purpose in pursuing this conversation in a public place: so that
people can become aware of some of the deceptive (whether intentionally or not)
and dangerous behaviours and practices that sometimes (often?) take place away
from the public eye.
I have a pretty realistic view of what people can be like, especially where mone
y, power and reputation are at stake. Christians are by no means immune to this
in fact, they're often worse because they find ways to justify their actions
in the name of God. In my opinion, however, many, many Christians are unbelieva
bly naive when it comes to human nature and the kinds of power dynamics exposed
in this conversation. They simply don't want to acknowledge that this happens to
Christians, and well-known Christian leaders at that. Thus the cycle keeps on r
epeating itself.
The more people start to wake up and realise that these things happen very, very
frequently in churches and ministries of all kinds, the less opportunity there
will be for such scenarios to keep on taking shape in the future.
The church
which means you, me and everybody
needs to get its head out o
f its ass and realise that this is the reality. And it then needs to think serio
usly about how to prevent these kinds of abuses in the future. For me, this kind
of conversation is vital to that process.
Dear Readers:
Because of the massive attention this blog post and ensuing comments has had, I
of course have been thinking a great deal about it. Here are some thoughts:
1. Those normally with the microphone have all kinds of resources available to t
hem, while the silenced have slim options if any. Even though the silenced have
enjoyed a safe space to raise their voices here, many insist that a blog is an i
nappropriate forum for this. My suggest the silenced don't care about propriety
as much as those who officiate.
2. I realize that providing a safe place for victims, the controlled, the silenc
ed and the abused to speak without censor or censure makes me look like I take s
ides. I can honestly say that I take sides for the truth, free speech, and justi
ce, as well as those who carry these. I not only care about the people on that s
ide, but the people on this side. I was hoping that this conversation would enga
ge all those involved and that through mutual authenticity we would all become a
ccountable and end up amicable. That hasn't fully happened yet.
3. One way to feel personal control over a conversation is to dominate it. Anoth
er way is to walk away from it. Even though it is completely the right of those
who have done so, to leave a comment and say you're never coming back is a way o
f controlling the situation. It just raises more questions for me.
4. I have been contacted outside of this conversation by many, mostly leaders, w
ho have provided advice to me on how to manage this blog post and comments. I'm
sure, for the most part, their intentions were good. But at the same time this i
ndicates how those with authority or a reputation enjoy other ways to control or
influence conversations. Maybe this wasn't always done to silence me or others,
but it does tell another story about how influencers assume various methods to
manage information that the silenced cannot.
5. The alleged abused invited the accused into this space to respond to their de
mands for apologies. As unsettling and uncomfortable as this would be, some risk
ed it and graciously met their demands. As far as I know, there has been healing
in those relationships. On the other hand, some didn't. Those who didn't have t
heir own reasons why, from good to suspicious to bad.
6. I wonder if "ignore it and it will go away" hasn't come to play in this conve
rsation. That is, for the most part, the conversation has been carried by the al
leged abused. For the accused to refuse to enter into the conversation isolates
and ghettoizes this conversation. In the minds of some, this diminishes the pote
ntial power of what's really happening because it seems to make the conversation
ineffective in bringing about the change it demands. The alleged abused end up
whistling in the dark to the sound of crickets blending with just the voices of
agreement. Some people would point to this conversation and say, "Just a bunch o
f whiners. It'll whither away soon." I definitely don't believe this is true, be
cause this conversation has started something significant. I'm not sure what yet
, but that will become apparent soon I think.
7. I am convinced that no movement will move ahead well without dealing with the
sins of its past. I've seen it too many times where an organization hopes an em
barrassing stain will fade for the sake of its success. The same with people
they hope their past impropriety will be invisible or overlooked so that they ca
n get on with their lives unchallenged. I think it's apparent that the emergent
movement crashed. Certainly this post and comments has brought even more to ligh
t that may have caused the crash. Perhaps a lot of people were hoping that true
clarity, contrition and conviction would come, and that the movement, in a healt
hier state, would lurch forward again.
It's
It's
sn't
d in
been an honor to host this conversation that, for the most part, is civil.
a testimony to how gracious and bold we can be simultaneously. I trust it i
over perhaps not here, but in the hearts of those who care about this, an
the fruitful conversations of those outside this particular blog.
Your host,
the nakedpastor,
David Hayward
Nathan September 27, 2014 at 12:07 pm
I've actually read this whole thread. What a friggin' mess.
I wasn't an EV inner circle person, I had the chance to be around some events an
d some people. I can say that I remember picking up in the ether the "difficult/
crazy/mentally ill" vibe from people. And I'm sure, if I remember correctly, tha
t it was a passing intimation in a passing comment from some person 3rd or 4th h
and. So that narrative was definitely out there.
I didn't think much of the divorce and the rumours simply because things were tr
ickling to me 3rd and 4th hand, and it's really not good practice to dig into he
arsay, especially if you don't have that right kind of relationship with any of
the players.
That being said, despite having to wade through the well intentioned mess from o
ther commenters, I find Julie's openness, posture, and supply of facts quite cre
dible.
In this case, it's clear that she has been on the receiving end of abusive treat
ment by a few people.
@Julie, thanks for pressing through. As you know, the claim of "abuse" doesn't m
ake it so, but your fearless openness with supporting facts and information is c
ompelling.
@DaveHayward, thanks for letting this thread unfold.
@others, some of us genuinely want to seek to understand, and it's not good enou
gh to expect people to just accept serious charges simply because they've been a
sserted. This thread was filled with a lot of accusations that requests for data
, etc. were an attempt to shame or silence Julie. The fact that I am convinced o
f the truth of Julie's claims are solely because of her relentless honesty, and
her posture of openness. I see no bald face assertions from her or obfuscation,
but I see it from those accused.
You really were of zero help to her cause when it came for an observer like me,
and in fact you made it harder for me to do the very thing you want all of us to
do, which is to be open to hard and uncomfortable truths about people we either
know, or used to admire. Seeking to understand, ask for clarifications, etc. cl
early wasn't safe on this thread.
You're right that abuse needs to be taken seriously and jumped on like a fly on
poop.
And some of you are simply just as stubborn, self-absorbed and arrogant and into
lerant of disagreement as Tony.
Hi Nathan,
I apologise if I was one of the people who made it unsafe for people seeking to
understand or ask for clarifications. That was not my intention. (And however si
gnificant intentions are, I acknowledge that effects are more important). I was
happy to make room for disagreement - and I am sorry if that didn't come across.
My understanding of the situation is different to yours - I felt safe to ask que
stions, and did a number of times. I also felt safe to offer background research
and context (some of which seems irrelevant in hindsight).
As you've noted, Julie has been incredibly open throughout this entire process despite the incredibly personal nature of the conversation. It is to her credit
that she created a safe place for discussion.
I agree that there were some really difficult situations confronted in this thre
ad. But I think it would help to distinguish between the questions or clarificat
ions themselves, and *how* they were expressed. (And, regardless of how the ques
tions were expressed, and the consequent tone of the responses, quite a lot of t
ruth came out in the process.)
This is what I saw: I saw techniques used to manage and control people called ou
t. I saw people deconstructing common attitudes of oppression and suppression. I
saw people level the playing field by bringing truth out into the open. I saw e
qual, fair, and just treatment demanded for everyone: no secrets, no denials, no
obfuscations, no pressure. I saw commenters disagree. I saw people apologise.
I believe that any open discussion of complex issues is bound to be messy. I don
't see that as a failure. Instead, I see that we have many different styles of i
nteraction and understanding. We clash. We apologise. We learn to get along.
If you or anyone else wishes to ask questions, I will support you.
As will many others here.
Thank you Nathan for affirming the crazy campaign. I welcome you and appreciate
you speaking up. It IS a mess! I got an email early this morning from a women ex
periencing and observing similar pain and dysfunction. Ironically, the influence
s can also be traced back to the Leadership Network Bob Buford days..I think it'
s interesting that this culture that has been created of celebrity author speake
r conference person bore rotten fruit on both strands...Mars Hill and Emergent.
This hostility, shut her up, everything she said is wrong is the same exact trea
tment I received for years when trying to have a "generative friendship, authent
ic community, relational generative orthodoxy" from my view they talk it but the
y in no way walk it. The person who goes back to 1997 with her observations ment
ioned the other Young Leadership Network shining stars that ended up bearing rot
ten fruit. Not just Mark Driscall. The toxic culture created is a larger story.
Based on books sales, speaking gigs and conferences....I asked for years, "where
's the fruit?"
I noticed a serious misstatement in my previous comment. In the course of expres
sing my ire toward Danielle Shroyer's reply, I said that I hoped one particular
option of the two I offered was the case, but I erroneously referred to the wron
g option. My hope is that she was deceived by those around her at the time of th
e events under discussion, but I mistakenly referred to the possibility that she
was a willing and fully aware participant. While I would hope my meaning was cl
ear based on context, I believe the error is serious enough to warrant clarifica
tion on my part. Stated plainly, I hope Pastor Shroyer was an unwitting particip
ant who was acting in good faith but was nonetheless acting under a serious misa
pprehension, as bad as that would have been in its own right.
We've all been duped at some point, and narcissists are consumate liars. For all
of her bluster, something in me holds out hope that the source of her indignati
on could in part be a result of a deeper sense that she may have been accessory
to a grievous offense as a result of some she trusted behaving dishonestly and d
ishonorably.
@Nathan: I would suggest that you may be overlooking the support others' comment
s, including my own, offer in validating the abused and their stories. I have re
ceived friend requests on FB, as well as private messages, from those thanking m
e for speaking out forcefully here, to use only myself as an example. While I ac
knowledge your point that expressing such ire can sometimes make engagement more
daunting for the accused, in cases such as this one the support it lends the si
lenced more often than not outweighs the additional burden it places on those do
ing the silencing.
Not to put too fine a point on matters, we do a tremendous disservice to the cau
se of justice by suggesting that those who have done the silencing have some rig
ht to expect any sort of deference when called upon to answer for their misdeeds
. To do so would be an insult to the harmed, most especially when those doing th
e harming assume the position of ministers and champions of the Gospel. Answerin
g these accusations with anything less than humility and grace only furthers the
harm they have done.
I fully accept that the accused have every right to answer in their own defense,
and for the few who have availed themselves of the opportunity in this thread b
y showing humility and grace, those answers and the subsequent apologies have be
en accepted with equal measures of grace. I am entirely unfamiliar with the part
iculars of Julie's divorce beyond what has been shared here, but as has been sta
ted repeatedly those particulars are secondary to the points being raised. Havin
g lived through my parents' divorce as a teenager, I'm fully aware of the fact t
hat each side has its own perceptions, and the truth often lies somewhere in bet
ween. However, what has caused me to join in here and continue to engage is not
the details of the divorce but the concerted effort of those who have worked dil
igently for years to silence, discredit, and marginalize Julie. While it's possi
ble although apparently increasingly improbable that some involved were not
in possession of all the pertinent facts when Julie's marriage was being destroy
ed, what is abundantly clear is that all involved have participated in the subse
quent efforts to silence Julie and support Tony Jones.
Determining the motives of those people is beyond my pay grade, but motives don'
t count for a great deal in the face of such egregious behavior. As I stated in
my reply to Pastor Shroyer, even assuming that some were acting with the best in
tentions, the quality of pastoral care on offer was piss poor, to say the very l
east. The defensiveness and indignation which has been offered after the fact on
ly compounds the offense, and it further violates the considerably higher standa
rds to which ministers of the Gospel must necessarily be held. Julie, as you cor
rectly point out, has offered support for her claims, and the principle figures
in this mess have answered with nothing more than outright dismissal and disdain
for her, and that at least to my mind gives the lie to their protestations
of innocence, whether before the fact or after. I would encourage you not to add
your name, albeit unwittingly, to the list of those who have made matters worse
by attempting to shut down this exchange.
"I asked for years, 'where's the fruit'?"
_____________________________
That's the operative thing, that's everything, that's the way we know anyone, wh
ether they're really meaning what they say about Jesus or whether they're a comp
lete fraud, the ones about whom Jesus and others warned us 2,000 years ago.
I don't care what anyone claims to

verse, whether they hang with the
ether they can work up a quivering
e as they call us to repentance or
believe, whether they can recite doctrine and

right crowds, write the top-selling books, wh
lip and an impassioned voice at the conferenc
wholeness in Christ or [fill in blank].
Means nothing.
Some people believe in Jesus like they believe in the tenets of the Republican o
r Democrat party, like they are a Chevy man or a Pittsburgh Steelers fan. They c
an run down a list of reason s why what they believe is true and passionately de
fend it.
Mean nothing.
Doesn't mean they've ever come to serve and know that Jesus; doesn't mean they e
ver will. How do you know them? By their fruits.
Much to ponder in the last 10 posts or so that have helped, I believe, in moving
us ever closer to a more coherent interpretation of the fact-base on here and t
oward broader application to paradigm systems and ministry movements out there.
I have recently been writing extensively about the meanings and practices of tak
ing responsibility for spiritual abuse. One thing that strikes me especially aft
er reading @John Hubanks' thoughts (September 27, 2014 at 1:32 pm) is the differ
ence between *being responsible* for something that happened, versus *taking res
ponsibility* for our part in it.
And that reminded me of a much earlier comment by @Mike Morrell (September 24, 2
014 at 8:31 pm) where he suggested formation of a "Truth & Reconciliation Commit
tee." I don't know if he was referencing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC) set up in the Republic of South Africa in 1995-1997, but I happened to be
reading about that recently as well as watching related documentaries. And I ob
tained one of the original flyers about the TRC, written in both English and Zul
u, and distributed in South Africa in the mid-1990s. It notes that "The Truth an
d Reconciliation Commission was created by the Government of National Unity to i
nvestigate and report on gross human rights violations committed between 1960 an
d 1993. It will also consider applications for amnesty by people who committed p
olitical crimes."
Three thoughts emerged out of my studies on the abuses of apartheid, Nelson Mand
ela's facilitation of a culture of forgiveness, and the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission that all ties together the issues of survivors, perpetrators, and th
e larger community. I think they hold some stark and astonishing potential paral
lels to what we've been seeing happen here.
First, it was clear to me that black South Africans sharing their stories was cr
ucial for their healing as individuals, and reclamation of their dignity as a pe
ople group. They spoke of atrocities of violence committed on themselves, of fam
ily members tortured and murdered. They received catharsis that had been withhel
d from them by requiring they hold on to their narratives in silence, as if they
and their loved ones were of no value. They reclaimed truth about what had been
lost and dignity in who they were. Some were able to openly forgive their oppre
ssors, including the specific individuals who had harmed them.
Second, the opportunity for amnesty gave others the chance to search their actio
ns and clear their consciences of misdeeds that had brought great damage to othe
rs. I was startled as I watched excerpts from the TRC hearings and other intervi
ews when white South African policemen and security agents described specific ta
ctics of terror and torture that they'd used on black South Africans. Several wh
ites also spoke of how their separation from blacks under apartheid was all they
'd ever known, and that they'd believed it was right, and so they had been willi
ng to commit themselves to its protection - including doing whatever it took to
preserve their way of life. Some were in visibly shaken by the realizations of t
heir toxic beliefs.
Third, now the nation knew both sides of their history and could not officially
hide. A much fuller knowledge of the horrific truth had been laid out in public
hearings and in printed materials and could not be retracted, even if someone th
en willfully chose to ignore it. But those investigations and hearings for justi
ce were also part of a larger relational movement toward health and unity as a n
ation, and hope for a united future after decades of official apartheid that had
followed over three centuries of subjugation of blacks by white European settle
rs.
I blogged about post-apartheid South Africa a few days ago. That article has lin
ks to key resources I've used in my studies, in case you're interested in more:
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/23/surprises-from-post-apartheid-southafrica/
Final thought: As I mentioned early on in this thread (September 15, 2014 at 11:
39 pm), I was one who watched this story unfold five years ago. I am thankful fo
r the emergence of more details and witnesses, even while wishing this had happe
ned back then instead. Maybe it wasn't the right timing then, not a "chairos" mo
ment. But it seems that the larger network of contemporary Christian communities
has much to reflect upon from what has unfolded here recently. May all sides in
volved and those beyond all learn from what is happening in this potent moment.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Pat Green September 27, 2014 at 3:08 pm
@david. Thank you for standing firm and letting this conversation take place.
@julie. I do not know you. I know a little about you and I am sad to say most of
it was not complimentary. I am of little note. I was once a guy trying to get i
n the inner circle of outlaw preachers and EV. I had many justifications, but it
was a broken and insecure man stroking his ego and wanting stroked in a circle
jerk of narcacisstism and call that shit god.
I screwed up my marriage. Hurt my ex wife emotionally. Hurt my daughter and almo
st lost my relationship with her.
I quit ministry and started driving a taxi cuz I couldn't get hired anywhere els
e.
I read things from others that make me uncomfortable because I used to embrace t
heir harmful mindsets. I am not a player in your matter. I never said anything a
bout you. But I know that I was once one of "them". An example. A racist may nev
er have called Maya Angelou the n word, but they have used it. They are the same
as those who did it to her.
I am sorry for the man I was. I do not know if this gives you any comfort.
I got me head out of ass prior to the divorce. I fired my slimy lawyer, did the
right thing, let me ex have the lions share. Gave her a no excuses apology for m
y behavior and harm. Had a very hard convo with my daughter and won her heart ba
ck and do so every day. My ex will likely never trust me. Don't blame her. I hur
t her. My daughter does and I try to prove the worth of her investment every day
. For whatever that tat is worth. Some assholes get therapy, take meds, quit pre
aching and say they are sorry.
That's all. I don't know you but I love you and I am glad that the emerg world m
ay be changing, but I am no longer party to it.
Wow Pat Green. Wow. Thanks for taking the risk to share that story.
Sorry for the typos. F***.
Syl September 27, 2014 at 3:13 pm
Yes, what Still Cynical said - it's what someone does, how they treat others, no
t what party line they spout.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Thank you. Fwiw, David, I hated you and your blog when if first came out. I accu
sed you of trying to be the new cool kid. Truth was, I was childish and was jeal
ous of the attention you were getting. Yeah, my brain and dick was that small. Y
ou are good people. What you are doing here matters.
Is there an edit feature for people who do not type well on cell phones and tabl
ets? F****!
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
See if you can edit it now. And thanks Pat. Lots of people think I'm a dick. Tha
t's okay. I appreciate saying what you did to me. Thanks.
claire September 27, 2014 at 3:54 pm
I continue to be helped by this thread!
Question, there's been a great deal of energy spent on describing the problem...
Can anyone tell me how a pastor is *supposed* to treat people who disagree or wa
nt to leave or leave their church? I know it seems like a stupid and general que
stion, but for someone who has been in a bad manipulated place for almost a doze
n years I'd like to know what I was supposed to have experienced to have sort of
a contrast. Thanks for any thoughts!
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Pat Green I embrace you and your typos. I actually like typos. I'm human and I'm
going to mess up and leaving typos reminds me and it's okay. Your words and hon
esty have hit me. Thank you. Your daughter thanks you for listening and sensing
it was about self and not about humbly serving. God bless you! This here...what
David has unleashed IS spirit filled...and tremendously healing. If I sound like
a love hippie...then good!
claire, a pastor (or any person), who has any sort of disagreement, can choose t
o:
Listen
Humble themselves (that is, don't control the situation, and don't assume they u
nderstand or perceive the situation perfectly)
Identify how they contributed to the situation (whether consciously or unconscio
usly, directly or indirectly)
Take responsibility
Apologise
Allow the other person to express what they want done (and do it, if it is withi
n the pastor's ability, and truly helpful)
Support the other person's decisions, even if the pastor disagree with them
Empower the other person at every step
Part friends if possible, and at peace, if at all possible (and never go to cour
t - Jesus and Paul call this dangerous and ridiculous, respectively)
There are so many things I could say, but this list captures the essential respo
nses I would want.
Can anyone tell me how a pastor is *supposed* to treat people who disagree or wa
nt to leave or leave their church?
_______________________________
The pastors should listen and consider that the person might darned well be righ
t. They should shut their blasted mouths and just sit there, because far too man
y pastors are so used to hearing what comes out of their own arrogant mouths tha
t they can't even consider what anyone else says and don't think it to be worth
the time to listen.
But frankly, all the pastors ought to be doing in the first place is being a ser
vant and a slave to others--that's what a pastor is anyway, at least what sketch
y little bits of "pastor" roles can be made out in the NT, as it's scarcely ment
ioned--not necessarily standing up there and teaching everyone two or three time
s a week, running the show, and acting like some kind of CEO. A leader ought to
be the one who is the obsequious little nebbish, the little guy or gal running a
round asking "How can I help, is there a way I can serve, feet I can wash, demea
ning thing I can do so no one else has to do it?"
So about the only thing a pastor ought to be criticized in, if they're a real pa
stor (not one of these narcissistic, wannabe CEOs who probably wouldn't know Jes
us if He walked up and game them a hug) is that they're not being servant or sla
ve enough--because that's their danged role.
If there's any way you can get anything other than that out of what Jesus said a
bout leadership based on what He directly and unequivocally said about it in Mat
thew 20, I'd like to know what it is.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Yes, Still Cynical, we do tend to ignore almost all of the qualifications for le
adership mentioned in the scriptures:
Jesus said be the servant of all, love all.
Paul said choose someone who is not polygamous, not a drunkard, not angry, not a
lover of money, has a family at peace,
There's very little about being a talented speaker, leader or manager in there!
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)

Actually, I should quote Paul directly here: "Anyone who wants to be an elder sh
ould be the husband of just one wife "
Therefore, if one has a "legal" wife, and a "spiritual" wife, that would be an i
nstant disqualification. Whatever language is used to justify it.
A quote from a blogger I follow that's quite relevant to the discussion of the c
onditions that enable abuse (in reference to the atheist and science fiction con
vention scenes):
"Having one thing in common, whether it be a belief or enthusiasm or hobby or po
litical mission, does not make you immune, individually or as a class, to all th
e other ridiculous social baggage humans carry with them all the time. The belie
f that it does or should, among other things, creates within any assemblage the
space for assholes to thrive and prey on other people."
-- John Scalzi, People Are the Problem and They Pretty Much Always Will Be
In short, a belief that we're better people because we're (Christian, American,
Educated, Atheist,
) leads us to avoid preventative measures against abuse, a
nd justify abusive behaviours when they do occur.
And a further quote:
"You don t get credit with me simply for believing something I believe. You ge
t credit for how you deal with other human beings."
I think Jesus said something pretty similar.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
And this final quote describes what we've seen of the Emergent dynamic right her
e on this thread:
"I think internalizing the fact that no opinion/belief/enthusiasm inoculates eit
her you or anyone else from the baser aspects of the human condition, or the lar
ger social milieu in which we all exist, is probably a very smart thing to do. I
t helps manage the disappointment when the cool new group you find yourself with
is eventually revealed to be full of flawed and fallible human beings, and it h
elps to free you from the initial desire to rationalize shitty behavior within a
group merely for the sake of identity politics."
There's a church in Austin TX where people who make a commitment to join also ma
ke a commitment to not leave without saying goodbye. It's really a policy that's
meant to hold the whole church accountable -- to make sure that those who find
themselves wanting to exit get a chance to say publicly why. I've seen enough pe
ople go quietly from what used to be their church "homes" that the idea intrigue
s me. No more whispered guessing, or sneaky rumor-mongering, or back-biting afte
r the fact. Just a moment to say, here's where I'm at, here's why, and thank you
. I haven't seen this in action, but I can imagine that just knowing it was part
of the package would change the way a faith community interacts -- and I mean b
oth for pastors and members.
They do this during their Sunday morning gatherings, just as they accept new mem
bers in those gatherings. It seems healthy to me, especially when compared to Ma
rs Hill's shunning practices or what happened to Julie & others here.

Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
@PatGreen
Thank you for your honesty and transparency. Worth any and all typos. :)
@JohnHubank
You sir, are a gem.
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/09/rachel-held-evans-suggests-six-w
ays.html
This critiqueof Rachel Held Evans' critique of Mark Driscoll by Wenatchee the Ha
tchet (the #1 most reliable source for Mars Hill insider scoops BTW) is critical
for this two convo in two regards ...
1) Wenatchee identifies correctly the right issues that need to be addressed in
Mars Hill - and in skimming this list, one could easily subsittute "emergent chu
rch" and the list would be just as apt for the real changes that need to happen.
2) This critique also correctly identifies the reasons why those who still have
"skin in the game" as it were are not best suited for offering critqiues
kate, my healthiest church experiences were the ones where we all said goodbye.
My unhealthiest were the ones where people didn't know why I'd left (or even , i
n some cases, that I'd left!)
However, in some of those cases, I couldn't even articulate why I was leaving I just knew I needed to get out!
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
don't know who this guy is or if he's credible or what but a quick Google search
brought met to this:
http://www.samstorms.com/enjoying-god-blog/post/pastoral-bullies
It's really helpful because I actually think the most common form of pastoral ab
use is the more insidious "bully." All of these describe my experience.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
don't know who this guy is or if he's credible or what but a quick Google search
brought me to this:
http://www.samstorms.com/enjoying-god-blog/post/pastoral-bullies
It's really helpful because I actually think the most common form of pastoral ab
use is the more insidious "bully." All of these describe my experience.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
From Rachel Held Evans (the full article is posted above by Becky Garrison @6:10
PM today.
1. We must educate Christians about abuse, bullying, and misuse of power in chur
ch settings.
2. We must value and preserve accountability

3. We must take misogyny and homophobia seriously.
4. We must measure
success
by fruit of the Spirit, not numbers.
5. We must protect people over reputations.

6. We must treat our pastors and church leaders as human beings
x, and beloved by God.
flawed, comple
@bill and @david: thank you. Your words mean a lot.
@julie: my thanks to you open up a world of emotions for me. Thank you.
To all who contributed to this thread, including those of you who pissed me off,
thank you. This conversation is important and the ones whom ignored it, denied
it viability and dismissed it have shown disregard for the concept of "the conve
rsation". The marginalized spend their lives living under the thumb of the rules
of the privileged. People want to be heard and when they are hurt and ignored,
they scream and yell. It would behoove you to listen.
Please please please do not let this end when this thread is no longer shiny and
hip.
Lost Voice September 27, 2014 at 6:51 pm
Pat was one of the OPs that first acknowledged what was happening with me and ho
w it was wrong. It meant a lot to me. Pat became one of my greatest defenders. S
eeing him post here about some of that means a lot. It takes me back to those wh
o stood when it meant losing a lot.
The hardest part about being in this thread is reliving it all. Remembering thin
gs I wanted to forget. Not long ago i deleted all my evidence. Plus, those who k
now what was said about me have said they would not ever talk about it outside o
f a small group of friends. I know this because when one of my abusers came out
with a book there was interest in what they had done to me. A reporter was looki
ng into it and other wrongs they had done. People quickly closed their doors. So
on after I deleted everything. No one was ever going to back me up. No one was e
ver going to believe me.
I had friends on the inner circle. Hell, I was a part of emergent way before tha
t label ever showed up. I had friends on the inner circle of OP (outlaw preacher
s). When those friends stood for me they lost a lot too. From what they have tol
d me, they were in a room with my abusers for hours. The best they could come up
with was that I was bipolar, insane, a bully, and deserved any shame I got.
They did well.
Until this thread I had not realized what I had let happen. The day I deleted it
all was the day my abusers win. I gave up. Julie did not. That says a lot.
And, to complement Julie's post of Rachel Held Evans' 6 points, here are Wenatch
ee The Hatchet's 6 counter-points (also posted by Becky Garrison):
1. We must educate ourselves on how publishing and media industries work because
the last year's [2014] worth of Driscoll scandals shine a light on how those in
dustries may have made him a star to begin with.
2. An unstinting internal critique of the actions and ethics of people on "our"
team is vital and must be sustained and maintained even if it is awkward and pai
nful.
3. Identity politics as usual is not only not a way forward, it was one of the k
ey reasons none of the last year's controversies did not come to light earlier.
This needs to change.
4. The last year's worth of controversy are simultaneously a commendation and co
ndemnation of the state of "Christian" journalism and associated punditry, but t
he alternative is not necessarily blogging or "just" blogging, but a reappraisal
of our ethics and interests in the public sphere
5. Christians should not operate under the illusion that "our" heroes are not al
so capable of being monsters.
6. We should attempt to understand the scandals associated with Mark Driscoll as
indicative of the crimes and passions we excuse or berate in our various heroes
as a mirror to critique our own loyalties and ethics.
Likes(6)Dislikes(2)
@Tim and @John Hubanks,
Thanks for your responses. To be clear, neither of you were an example of the "p
roblem".
@Julie,
I am praying for you. I was just talking with my wife about this situation and s
he and I are dumbstruck and grieved.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@John Hubanks,
I appreciate your concerns, and even agree with what you're saying could happen
with others. But with respect to me, I didn't try to shut the telling of the sto
ry down. My point was that the some people on this thread actually didn't help J
ulie's message get through even as they saw behaviors trying to shut it down. Th
e info Julie shared here was disconcerting, upsetting and incredibly disappointi
ng with respect to people who should know better. It needed to be shared.
but if others want people to hear and honor her story, some (again, not you) of
the stuff said here just became turbulence.
So, no. I wasn't even "unwittingly" shutting things down. In fact, many of Julie
's advocates were getting in the way of the very things they wanted.
And, frankly, if my words are saying to an abuse victim she shouldn't share, wel
l, that's only for Julie to say, since it's her story, and that's the story you
and I both agree should be out there.
That's my 2 cents.
Peace.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
LostVoice:
Hi kiddo! Thank you. I am. Of sure I risked anything . I did not get to play in
the inner circle of a fiefdom that fed toxicity. In my great fall, I gained a de
eper world with my daughter....who you were helpful to me when she was going thr
ough hell, more than any of them (some of them contributed to her pain). ..and I
gained a better, albeit broker me. I like me now. I didn't back then.
You did not lose. You did what you felt was right in that day and time. You win
by living your life free of the codependent abuse. You live your life and keep g
oing. You are wonderful and good and a friend even though we don't talk a lot.
I don't know if what is happening here has momentum. I am not much o a joiner th
ese days. My priority is me and my daughter. But emergent village and progressiv
e Christian alliance hurt my kid, and unlike me, they never tried to make it rig
ht. I will stand with you and Julie and any other victim if needed.
I've been observing from a distance, but I'm really in SHOCK at the number of pe
ople who have condemned this thread. It appears that all of this could have been
avoided if numerous opportunities to answer emails and questions had not been i
gnored. Besides, mediation is ALWAYS a wonderful thing. It's ugly and messy and
no fun, but truth is coming out, misconceptions are being cleared up, and healin
g is taking place!
Resolution is the goal. That's truly been made clear by Julie's quickness to for
give those who have apologized. So to all those saying your name and reputation
have been tarnished on this thread: get on here and hash it out! Leaving the thr
ead does nothing. Clear the record and work out the miscommunications. Restorati
on can be reached.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
@Nathan: Thanks for responding and, most especially, for correcting my misconcep
tions about what you were saying.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Sadly, artistglover, there appears to be an awful lot of fear - perhaps of/for l
itigation, reputation, livelihood, movement, or even identity.
I would encourage everyone, but particularly those who follow Jesus' words:
"You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
"Perfect love drives out all fear."
And maybe this thread isn't a safe communication mechanism for some. That's ok.
I hope they find a way that feels comfortable for them.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
@Bill Kinnon: Thank you very much.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Lost voice (found here) you didn't let them win. I know those people and they ar
e not happy. It is not possible to be happy carrying on through life with a fals
e self. Trampling over people to get to the next rung. You have already won, not
them. You are here. Who cares if you deleted all the evidence. We believe you!
We are holding your story with you. I am not really familiar with Outlaw Preache
rs but I know I reached out to Nadia Bolz-Weber and she hung up on me. Silly me
thought surely a feminist will care about what I have to say! They didn't care t
o discern some serious and real information. Aren't they Pastors? What Pastor ha
ngs up on you? What Pastor hears real and serious information and won't email yo
u back....does nothing about it?! I think that is highly suspect.
Lost voice, some people are never happy, and will always try to convince you tha
t you are lost, and have lost.
But you took action to protect yourself and move on. That is courageous, and sho
ws inner strength.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Checking back in, so glad to see this thread going strong. I specifically want t
o address Nathan - I agree with you that All The COmments are distracting ... bu
t for me (I've commented a lot on this thread), I've honestly commented for myse
lf. I needed to be able to confront the Strong Male Leader and I feel like this
thread has been one more step in my journey to finding and practicing my voice.
So I guess I would like you to know that it's not just about Julie and her story
, but about lots of other peopel in what seems to be almost a mass catharsis.
Also, your typos are totally fine by me :)
Danica, I completely agree with you...this is a collective story of people who h
ave been kicked to the side, marginalized and silenced. It's not okay and we are
speaking up!
@Danica, thanks for being open about your process and journey! It's a good thing
for me to see those dynamics too. and, btw, you weren't one of the people I was
talking about either.
@John Hubanks, thanks for seeking to understand. I know I don't always communica
te well. In fact, there have been times that I look back on and really regret th
e way I've communicated with people (IRL and virtual). So, thanks responding and
letting me clarify.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
shannon September 28, 2014 at 12:11 am
In some ways weighing in at this point of the game is a little daunting, but I h
ave read almost all of the posts. Despite the many posts already, I feel like I
have a few things to contribute to the conversation.
Julie- For the sake of disclosure, I am outing myself as a person who has surviv
ed a narcissistic spouse, relational violence and divorce. I would never want to
co-opt your story and your pain. I hope that I can write this without doing tha
t. I am so proud of you for being able to voice your truth and to do it even tho
ugh you know that there are those who don t get it and those who are still try
ing to discredit you. I am also proud of you for being able to support your chil
dren and take care of yourself while going through substantial litigation which
resulted in both financial difficulties and was probably emotionally traumatic.
I know going through the custody process with my narcissist was hell. Mine laste
d two years, during which we were assigned a custody advisor who analyzed both m
ine and my exes
parenting skills and collected lots of personal and private i
nformation. This is not a process that the state of MN takes lightly and they ar
e generally adamant that fathers continue to have visitation and share legal cus
tody of their children. Actually, despite my having a protective order against m
y ex and being afraid for my own and my child s safety, I was required to allo
w my ex to have visitation. I was even being pushed to try mediation. I declined
knowing that mediation with a narcissist is never fruitful! For awhile my mothe
r chaperoned the visitations until the school counselor informed CPS that my kid
had reported being abused by my ex. Even though the custody evaluator was aware
of this situation and compliant with the recommendations of CPS, she chewed me
out and told me that she thought I was trying to discourage a relationship betwe
en my child and my child s dad.
In the end, after much stalling my ex ran out of money for legal representation
and had to defend himself in the final trial. All this to say that I believe you
r account of the divorce and custody proceedings and I know that if you got cust
ody of your kids that you deserved it and your ex must have serious issues for t
hings to go so
badly
for him. I consider my custody fight to be a pretty s
erious ordeal, but the public records of your divorce/custody proceedings are 3
times as long as mine (I looked them up before the link was posted). The only re
ason that I share my story is that people have no idea how difficult the custody
process is and how much judges and custody advisors want to preserve the father
/child relationship, even it puts the mother and children at risk to future harm
from the abuser. I am glad your kids are doing well and seeking counseling to d
eal with having to continue to expose themselves to emotional abuse. This is a t
estimony to your parenting and to your care of them.
Before I escaped my abusive ex I was part of a church plant in the Twin Cities t
hat was deeply involved in the ideas and philosophies of the emergent church mov
ement, even though they did not name themselves as such because of being part of
an evangelical denomination. My ex pastor liked to name drop some of the bigger
names in the movement who he knew in some capacity. Before my ex left, my pasto
r was involved in covering up that my ex had stalked a woman and was pursuing se
veral young women in the congregation. I had no knowledge of either of these thi
ngs, but I had discovered salacious emails to several women. The confrontation I
had with my ex over these emails accelerated my exe s abuse and this precipit
ated the end of our relationship.
When I went to my pastor in search of pastoral care, he told me about my ex purs
uing other women in the church. No steps had been taken to protect the woman who
was stalked and she was discouraged from going to the police. This
pastoral
care
just added salt to my wound. I continued attending this church for about
18 months after this mostly because there were still a few people in the church
that were my support system. The support lessened as I pressed the pastor for a
resolution or apology for how he handled things. I m not sure if the pastor b
ad-mouthed me, but it seemed that people started to avoid me. I left quietly, li
ke a good Minnesotan. No one wanted to know why I left. I tried out a few church
es in the same denomination, but church felt like a scary place to be. Church sh
ould be a safe place, but it was no longer a safe place to me. It was a place th
at harbored abusers and evicted victims. Two years ago I gave up trying and took
a year off church. I saw a counselor and feel like I healed a lot that year. I
made some friends who were supportive and although many of them are Christians t
hey supported me in my churchless phase.
A year ago a friend asked me to attend church with her and I opened myself to th
e possibility of trusting a pastor and church family again. I promised myself th
at I wouldn t fully participate in a church unless the pastor or a significant
staff member could listen to my story and offer me compassion. I was getting re
ady to have that conversation soon. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I no longer n
eed to have that conversation because I am certain that my story would not be he
ard due to comment that were made by this person in response to Julie way early
on in this discussion. I cannot function under or alongside a pastor who would a

llow Julie to be treated this way. Thank you Julie for sharing your story, which
allowed me to recognize some signs that I had been trying to ignore and to get
out now.
Shannon, thank you for adding your story to this collection. I am sorry that you
r Pastor did not hold your story as they should have. I like that you are listen
ing to your truth when it tells you this does not feel right. I invite you and a
nyone else looking for a safe refuge to join the on line community here with Dav
id Hayward the Naked Pastor, The Lasting Supper. You will be warmly welcomed. Lo
st voice (found here) you too! The support in there is something special. A plac
e to heal. Also, friend me on FB I am starting a NPD survivors group in the Twin
Cities. There is nothing currently out there for us.
shannon September 28, 2014 at 12:44 am
Thank you, Julie! I friended you (I think that's you anyways).
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
@naked pastor: Re: "The alleged abused end up whistling in the dark to the sound
of crickets blending with just the voices of agreement. Some people would point
to this conversation and say, 'Just a bunch of whiners. It'll whither away soon
.' I definitely don't believe this is true, because this conversation has starte
d something significant. I'm not sure what yet, but that will become apparent so
on I think."
This resonates with me, David. Whether or not abusers own up to the abuse, apolo
gize publicly or privately, or even take a moment to seriously reflect upon thei
r past and present behaviors, something significant does occur when the evil dee
ds of darkness are brought into the light.
I believe that "this significant thing" occurs within the abused and mostly for
the benefit of the abused. It takes strength to speak up and out when you have b
een battered, shamed, devastated, belittled, embarrassed, threatened, etc. It ta
kes an enormous amount of courage to speak into a very public venue when you are
accustomed to having every action, word, personality trait, and even idea quick
ly, harshly, and repeatedly attacked. Many significant things can happen through
the brave act of speaking your truth (as I have learned through my own experien
ces as both the receiver and, unfortunately, the giver of emotional and spiritua
l abuse).
At first, when you find and use your voice, you feel empowered. There is an almo
st otherworldly relief in discovering that telling your story does not incur lig
htning from Heaven! You have been conditioned to believe that what you say, thin
k, and feel counts for nothing--yet, because you have been threatened and warned
and cautioned to shut up, you suspect that there is some kind of deadly power i
n your truth. You think that if you tell the secret, you will die. You finally c
an't help it and shout out the truth. Of course, you don't die. But your self-sh
ame and self-loathing, and sometimes the power of the abuser, get a quick glimps
e of the Grim Reaper. And when you realize that He's working for you and with yo
u, on behalf of the truth, your confidence builds.
Then, depending upon the response you do receive, you feel validated or invalida
ted. And there is almost always increased personal growth in either case. You fi
nally can relax into the nurture and comfort of a safe space if you are validate
d. You feel an exciting sense of satisfaction at hearing that you are not the on
ly one; you are actually heard and UNDERSTOOD. This creates a wonderful sense of
community, increased compassion and trust, but it can also create new personal
challenges related to genuine intimacy for one who has for so long been denied t
rue relationship.
And in the opposite scenario, should you receive invalidation, several things ma
y occur. You may be triggered right back into your "victim state" with all of it
s sadness and isolation. You might feel angry or righteously indignant that the
Grim Reaper doesn't appear willing to finish the job and take out the abuser. Yo
u might feel even more liberated with less inclination to back down because you
now see that whatever the abuser does, it doesn't matter to you anymore. You mig
ht become our own version of the Grim Reaper wielding a sharp sickle and swingin
g wide. What the abuser thinks doesn't really matter to you anymore. What the ab
user does becomes almost comical in a way. You don't care; you just come at the
abuse, swinging hard.
Each affirmation of truth builds the muscles of your identity; in a short time,
you have developed some six-pack abs on what formerly felt like a flabby yellow
belly and you feel like having learned to take care of you, you can now stand up
for others too. Sometimes you become hellbent on preventing further abuse--in a
way that may seem obnoxious to some who have not been on the receiving end of a
buse, but is seen as necessary by those who know the pain of being forced into s
hadowy corners.
Sometimes, with the passage of time and deeper reflection, you might realize tha
t what you were so sure of in terms of how you framed your past abuse, has becom
e a little less clear. In my own case (and in no way am I saying that this is tr
ue for Julie or any other person who has been hushed up, tangled up or fucked up
by an abusive system or a specific person), as I spoke my truth out loud to tru
sted friends and even a few strangers and unwitting passersby and heard their re
sponses, I realized that I had formerly seen only part of the truth. My truth--i
n all of its glorious validity for me at the time--was a much smaller part of a
much bigger truth. The significance for me in such instances, was that I was giv
en the opportunity to forgive my abusers, the observers who stood by and did not
hing, and yes, even myself. Seeing the larger picture forced me to struggle with
the concepts of repentance, forgiveness, and redemption.
Like you, David, I believe that this post and lengthy comment thread is only the
beginning of significant change. I'm SO grateful that you have allowed this con
versation to flow unimpeded and that you have attempted as blog moderator to all
ow every voice to contribute to significant change. We are all blessed to get th
at powerful glimpse of the Reaper (perhaps incorrectly labeled "Grim") and to se
e the amazing action of a sickle harvesting what is ready to be cut and clearing
a space for, hopefully, even better crops.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Lost Voice - I hear you. I didn't save my paper trail for the same reason. But t
hat experience enables me to recognize the patterns in Mars Hill and Emergent li
ckety-split and then help encourage those like Julie who are speaking out to kee
p preachng it. That's what broke forth the Mars Hill story - there was a serious
shift from outsiders telling what was wrong with Mark's theology, etc. to those
whe had been impacted sharing ther stories. Made all the difference.
R. F. September 28, 2014 at 3:22 am
Julie, I am the friend who invited Shannon to the church in question. This threa
d has been going on since September 5, but I just found it early Tuesday morning
(Sept. 23), and I have also made the decision to stop attending. I am so sorry
for what happened to you. I'm sending you a friend request of my own, and I hope
that your experience here telling your story ultimately turns out positive.
I like this.
"Not to put too fine a point on matters, we do a tremendous disservice to the ca
use of justice by suggesting that those who have done the silencing have some ri
ght to expect any sort of deference when called upon to answer for their misdeed
s. To do so would be an insult to the harmed, most especially when those doing t
he harming assume the position of ministers and champions of the Gospel. Answeri
ng these accusations with anything less than humility and grace only furthers th
e harm they have done."
Here is what I do not understand about any of this: Why is it that these people
think our Lord does not love truth? And in these situations, getting to truth is
a messy business. I can no longer be about sweeping deception under the rug. I
can no longer be about the false teaching that seeking truth is gossip or underm
ines Christs reputation. I now see that thinking as the exact opposite of what o
ur Lord is about.
Jesus Christ IS truth and loves truth. We should always seek it.
Lostvoice, I got rid of my evidence, too. You are not alone in that. I vascillat
e between that being stupid and wise. My entire life was immersed with people, i
ncluding what family I have left, who were part of that world as leaders, so muc
h was lost. It is a scary place but Jesus has never been so real. I don't blame
Him because our glorious God created us with free will. We choose to devalue our
selves by staying in deception or practicing it. Once we realize that, our choic
es are clear. And for some, that means driving a taxi like Pat did. God bless hi
m for choosing truth which is a lasting legacy for his daughter.
"but if others want people to hear and honor her story, some (again, not you) of
the stuff said here just became turbulence.
So, no. I wasn't even "unwittingly" shutting things down. In fact, many of Julie
's advocates were getting in the way of the very things they wanted. "
Hi Nathan, I grow so weary of this. People cannot be listened to because they do
not say things "right" or with the right a"tone"? I have heard that over and ov
er again from the Evangelical Industrial Complex. It is just another way to dism
iss the ugliness of what was done to someone. We are hearing about some serious
spiritual, physical and emotional abuse here using the Name of Jesus in a nefari
ous way.
What sort of turbulence do you think "viper" and "white washed tomb", caused?
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
susan J September 28, 2014 at 8:51 am
@ David As I reread my comment (which I will repost here), the edit button appea
red. I did the edit. Then what I now see is unedited and I am listed as "undefin
ed". Since I could not find the delete button, could you delete the comment by "
undefined"?
do not often write on open forums because of certain life circumstances. I will
start here by quoting from two previous comments, hoping I can get the format co
rrect.
1. @Julie McMahon September 27, 2014 at 9:28 pm

"...this is a collective story of people who have been kicked to the side, margi
nalized and silenced. It's not okay and we are speaking up!"
2. @Becky Garrison September 28, 2014 at 1:59 am
" But that experience enables me to recognize the patterns in Mars Hill and Emer
gent lickety-split..."
I have been reading the comments here for about two weeks and following the Mars
Hill situation for 2 months. Perhaps oddly, and then again not odd at all, I ha
ve come to recognize that some of my struggles are echoed in what I have read. I
do not have a personal paper trail. I do have papers and books which have helpe
d me to understand my history of being sidelined and silenced. I first saw patte
rns in 2000 as I was reading books related to "church change". The patterns went
back to a previous church in a previous time. I began to know experientially th
e burdens and shaping of these methods somewhere around 1986. There was a defini
te cognitive dissonance and somehow God opened my eyes enough that I took steps
to separate from the growing misinformation and group think. I could not depart
from the situation and would remain in it at that church for about 10 more years
. It was actually an opportunity to see certain patterns at work and to know God
s sustaining faithfulness in a difficult situation.
The wrestlings and confusions have come and gone. There have been years when I t
hought the pressures had been left behind. Those were times of respite and refre
shment. Then I would recognize that the pressures to conform had returned. To be
seeking to know God and to walk with Him simply, trusting Him with outcomes, an
d beginning to speak only to be told that was being unsubmissive, rebellious, in
dependent, negative. For a few years those comments would shut me up. In God's g
ood providence, I read from the books of Christian men long dead. I was at a tim
e when I could not trust my reading of the Bible. I was again confused. And then
I knew that if I simply read the Bible, there was a real possibility that I wou
ld be pushed by God to speak and ask questions more openly. Almost 3 years ago,
I decided to begin reading the Scriptures and simply trust God with whatever hap
pened. I was not shamed or guilted into doing this at that time. God was graciou
sly opening my eyes to my need. Within the month my husband and I met with the p
astor with some of my questions about specifics at the church. We met with him a
gain a month later. There was token understanding., and a figurative patting on
the head. And then I saw the pattern (like Becky wrote).
The patterns go beyond Mars Hill and emergent. Emergent and Mars Hill are simply
more recent than what I was influenced by and which began around 30 years ago.
What could have led to this?
I am grateful for stumbling upon these comments. My now grown children were rais
ed while I was struggling and standing, searching and speaking, being silent. Ma
ybe the time has come for these issues to become open. I pray and am trusting Go
d for direction, for timing, for listening, for speaking,to making restitution,
for remembering my times of repentance for my own complicity, for repenting as n
eeded.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
susan J September 28, 2014 at 8:55 am
I now see that both comments (unedited and edited) are attributed to me. It is t
he first one that I would like to have deleted.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
hm. i didn't see it as undefined. i deleted it anyway. thanks!
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Philosophicalpastor September 28, 2014 at 9:21 am
It has been grueling to read through this entire thread. Talk about "triggers!"
Wow! Julie your story has obviously opened up space for others to process their
pain, their questions, even their doubts. I am so sorry this happened to you. Is
there any redeeming value in telling our stories? I think so. I am intimately a
cquainted with what happens when one is married to someone with NPD, and what ha
ppens when one is in a workplace setting with a full-blown narcissist. It has se
emed to me that until you are personally harmed by narcissistic behaviors (or th
e fallout) you don't really "get it." That is why posts like the one from Sarah
Cunningham emerge. She may be a very nice, very intelligent woman (I have no ide
a who she is ) but she is obviously unaware (as Brother Maynard pointed out very
well) of the fact that some of the "nicest" people you'll ever work with can be
quite sick inside. The illness is demonstrated in this high capacity for puttin
g on a persona that is calculated to bring the narcissist exactly what he or she
craves: a mirror that only reflects what they want to believe themselves to be.
What is that? They want to believe they are AWESOME. Threaten that image, and y
ou will quickly find yourself on the murderous side of the narcissist's personal
ity. I have never been so quickly hated, defamed, cut off from friends and famil
y, lied about in private circles when I am not present in order to alter others'
perception of me, etc etc, as when I have threatened the facade of a narcissist
. Some of us do this unknowingly and the experience is even more perplexing. Oth
ers, having seen a chink in the narcissist's armor, perhaps tried to say somethi
ng because that's what good people do--you know, point something out nicely in h
ope of healing or reconciliation-- only to find out that healthy, real relations
hip is not on the "do-do" list of a narcissist. The one, the only, the ultimate
goal is to make sure that the only thing reflecting back when the narcissist loo
ks around a room (or a blog) is "this guy/gal is AWESOME." The narcissist is so
focused on this that they will "admit to" something just to be awesomely humble
or transparent or whatever. But it is all bullshit aimed at maintaining an image
. There can be no real relationship with a narcissist. All you can hope for is m
utual admiration and image-polishing (if you want to get into that scene).
Claire asked what kind of personality is susceptible to getting tangled up with
a narcissist. I would say the number one soft-spot in the armor is oddly this ve
ry same trait: the desire to be "seen as." Seen as nice. Seen as up-and-coming.
Seen as loveable. Seen as making-a-difference. Seen as on the "right side" of ev
ery issue. Seen as faithful. The need to be "seen as" is a need the narcissist i
s expert at fulfilling for you, as long as you return the favor with unfailing l
oyalty.
So no, this thread is not about two people and the details of their divorce. Thi
s thread is about what happens when narcissist-meets-world, a world that tends t
o divide into two groups on impact: the ones who need to be awesome, and the one
s who figure there are other more pressing needs in the world.
So leaders knowing about this are negligent to allow them to stay leading.
Anita September 28, 2014 at 9:45 am
Julie, I have read this entire thread over the past 4 days and I am almost speec
hless. My heart aches for you but I am so proud of you! How anyone could support
, minister with or be a part of any conference or publishing/blog with your ex h
usband, who writes about a "legal wife and a spiritual wife," is beyond me. That
is just plain old fleshly, lustful crap, in the guise of spirituality. I am sor
ry for what you have had to endure. Thank you for being brave enough to speak up
and speak the truth.
@Nathan, I really appreciate your willingness to forthrightly speak your opinion
, but then at the same time have a listening posture to those who disagree! Than
k you. Also, I would add that there are probably a lot of people who read your a
mbiguous 'some people in the thread' as directly about them (as I did), when tha
t's not who you meant at all. Lots of us grew up thinking everything was our fau
lt in some way or the other, and so *any* ambiguous accusation like that is imme
diately internalized. A few years ago that comment would have sent me into the s
hame spiral and shut me down (although I'm totally not trying to shame you here
- just offering perspective! Like I said, I love your openness, coupled with you
r willingness to speak your truth)
And I also echo NP - I love what's happening here :) So much healing. So glad we
didn't all just go away and STFU as suggested (in not so many words) by the det
ractors earlier on!
philosophicalpastor September 28, 2014 at 10:51 am
Julie, you wrote "So leaders knowing about this are negligent to allow them to s
tay leading." I am not sure whose comment you are referring to so I apologise if
I am mis-interpreting what "this" you are referring to. I think unfortunately i
t is not as straightfoward as neglecting to fire someone or make them "step down
" (gotta love that image-preserving language, eh?) Narcissism, being both a ment
al illness and a manifestation of brokenness in the human being, means we are al
l "snake-bit" to some degree and so we are also, to one degree or another, alway
s co-participants in the perpetuation of the disease (to use disease metaphorica
lly). I am only speaking from my own experience now, but I have found that the m
ost effective thing I can do in response to being wounded, harassed, punished, "
messed with" and so on by persons who have made narcissism something of an art i
n their own lives, is to avoid letting those wounds become my own "narcissistic
wounds." I perpetuate the disease when the wounds inflicted by a narcissist beco
me a reason for me to become the center of my own universe, when I only talk to
people who affirm my wounds and lash out along with me at those who inflicted th
em, when I develop an "us vs them" mentality... it all starts to look like nothi
ng more than the mirror image of those damn narcissists out there that hurt me.
I want to be Well, not merely affirmed. Affirmation only goes so far. Then I hav
e to figure out what to do with these wounds that are disabling and contagious,
that I didn't ask for but now are mine to deal with. Ya, I'm super angry at so m
any things: how this could have happened, how nobody seemed to care, how so many
seemed to be "duped" and how virtually no one has ever apologised to me for wha
t happened. It would be wonderful to hear "I'm sorry" from the people who have i
njured me, and my kids, in an effort (knowingly or unknowingly, intentionally or
unintentionally) to either protect their own image or the image of someone who
is protecting their image... but I am pretty sure it won't happen. Most of those
people probably don't even think about me anymore. Nobody thinks about my own w
ounds more than me. Jesus comes in a close second.
It is true that good healthy leadership will recognize narcissistic traits and b
ehavior and make efforts to root it out. However, it has been my direct observat
ion in the workplace that this is far easier said than done. Usually the narciss
ist is there in the first place because of a system that has made it easy for th
em to "get in" and has probably entangled quite a few people into the web alread
y. The negligence, therefore, goes back further, at the point of hiring the narc
issistic individual, and assumes the hiring committee or person was healthy enou
gh to know the person was sick. That is a lot to assume these days, unfortunatel
y. I know I sound pretty glum and pessimistic. Sorry :( I just think narcissism
is a systemic and epidemic problem that rivals any ebola virus. You can go in th
inking you're going to fight it, and end up infected yourself. It scares the shi
t out of me, honestly.
I wrote a post today inspired by this post... about providing safe spaces for us
to process our anger, etc.:
www.nakedpastor.com/2014/09/are-you-so-angry-at-the-church-you-could-spit-nails/
Rhonda September 28, 2014 at 11:25 am
I read the Tony Jones blog post (and some of his comments here). The idea that "
this could've happened to any of us," seemed to be referring to himself, Brian M
cLaren, and the other guy mentioned, ?Brad Cecil. I didn't see where he meant an
y of us in the sense of "There but for the grace of god...." I don't know much a
bout Jones, but he gives off THAT vibe. You know, the one where he is superior b
ecause he is American, Christian, caucasian, and has a penis. A guy like that co
uld be in the same shoes Driscoll is in now.
Patrick O September 28, 2014 at 2:15 pm
I want to add my thanks to those in this thread, especially Julie for her willin
gness to share her story and David for his willingness to host a safe place. I'v
e been involved in emerging stuff since the 90s, before there was a term for it,
but here on the west coast. I've never been part of Emergent narrowly defined,
attending only one conference, one that hosted Moltmann in 2009. I've made emerg
ent and Moltmann areas of study, with a book coming out in early 2015.
I open with my story of experiences with the movement, where I was burned out wi
th it before Brian McClaren's book really took the publishing world by storm. I
was burned out because I realized even then that the rhetoric didn't match the p
ractices. Leaders easily drifted into authoritarianism or justifying their ego's
whims with spiritualized language. I know and know of so many who burned out, a
friend featured in a major book even died of an overdose when life got out of c
ontrol.
This is all important here because at the core of what emerging messsages stood
for was no more of the status quo, no more shoving things into "private," no mor
e leader-dominating communities. I know enough to know there really are communit
ies that are living this out even now. But it seems that early group didn't fare
so well in navigating the transitions, even as they promoted some great suggest
ions. Great theory can hide a lot of dysfunction, because they can always point
to the ideals.
This kind of thread is important because it is freeing, it shines light, it make
s that which is already public (court cases, conferences, etc.) into a really op
en discussion that really does matter. How do people treat those who have someth
ing they want? Or are seemingly preventing something they want? That's where rea
lity meets rhetoric, and I've been very saddened by the responses to Julie here
by those in leadership. I can understand having different perspectives. What I d
on't get is the angry defensiveness that is about defending territory. I've been
called out by people and I think even in disagreement we are to show grace and
invitation, not dismissal and diminishment. But that's all I've seen. Julie, in
contrast, has shown herself to be responsive, apologizing, opening doors, and cr
eating a space where others can voice their own stories.
I don't claim to know all the background or the whole story. We do know basic fa
cts and those point towards issues of concern, concern because trust and loyalty
and commitment are not throwaway traits whenever temptations strike. Those are
worth talking about because they strike at the claimed rhetoric and the response
s here make the claimed rhetoric even more seemingly disingenuous.
We're called to be open not dismissive, people of confession not people who just
ify our yearnings of either physical or vocational victories. We're called to be

people who help free others, not tie them up and commit them to emotional or le
gal bondage.
This is too long, but I want to end with something I wrote about Moltmann's theo
logy a while back, which is very relevant for at least 2 of the players here, wh
o have published claiming his works as defining for them. This thread makes me w
onder how much that is true in fact.
"[In Moltmann's theology] the comprehensive work of the Spirit interacts with hu
manity in pervasive ways, calling each person to a renewed relationality and an
emphasis of life over death in their particular contexts. In all situations, the
Spirit leads towards that which expresses life and leads away from that which e
xpresses death. For humanity, then, the soul crushing affects of domination, res
triction and limitation are fought against.
"This is a liberating work of the Spirit, who liberates the oppressed from their
oppression, and liberates the oppressors from their oppressing, leading all to
a new relationship of equality and freedom, in which each person is fully able t
o be who they were created to be without having to define themselves over and ag
ainst others.
The perichoretic movement of God, in the power of the Spirit, enables a new way
of living, calling forth
a broad place where there is no cramping,
a holis
tic expression of eschatological life in which the freedoms of God are expressed
in passionate and creative freedom. It is, indeed, a dance, a dance of life, a
dance of hope, a dance of freedom and invigorating friendships. This liberating
call leads people to hope in a new way of living, one that calls them forth to e
xpress this new life, and which, in places of restriction, causes the chains of
repression to chaff and be resisted.
For Moltmann, this work of the Spirit is highlighted in the life and work of Chr
ist, with Moltmann emphasizing a strong spirit-Christology, in which the power o
f the Spirit is seen as influential and defining throughout the whole life of Ch
rist, especially in the cross and in the resurrection. This work of the Spirit m
eans that Christ is also with us in our suffering, sharing the same Spirit, able
to communicate the hope and empathy of Christ s historical experiences into t
he contexts of our experiences, so that Christ is a brother to us in our sufferi
ng and a redeemer for us in our salvation.
We do not have to be defined by the restrictions placed on us by others, but in
the Spirit we are defined anew by Christ, given freedom in a renewed identity, t
hat calls forth our creativity and contributions, calling us to live life in a w
ay that enables others, indeed the whole world, to find their own freedom and pa
rticipation."
Patrick O September 28, 2014 at 2:52 pm
I want to add one more thing. Another reason why this is so important is because
abuse, dismissiveness, affairs are so prevalent in the church world, by pastors
and theologians. It is crazy how many very, very well known theologians, global
ly influential, are now said to have had very long lasting or repeated affairs.
I know of at least one other very currently popular theologian with rumors swirl
ing about (and because both parties have stayed silent about it, I don't feel it
has been pushed to the front for a conversation). Does that undermine their the
ology? Maybe. Maybe not. It does undermine their authority. Because their theolo
gy wasn't sufficient to keep them doing what Christ would have them do.
This thread is important because in shining light on this issue and particular c
ases, it helps others realize that what was overlooked in the past is no longer
going to stay in the shadows. Even if someone is tempted to stray, their sense o
f pride will keep them from doing so as they realize it will become an issue. An
d maybe that's enough to keep them moving forward until the background issues (t
he truly private issues) are themselves resolved, before it becomes public separ
ation and public proclamation (by both sides).
Those who rise in leadership will see the temptations, the failings, the hurts,
and may now choose a different path that doesn't introduce chaos and pain and su
ffering and alienation. That is a huge step in the renewal of the church. We wil
l no longer look away and make excuses. Would that the church learned this 1000+
years ago.
Thank you for sharing your insights Patrick. They should be given weight and con
sideration because of your involvement and long history with the emergent moveme
nt.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
We all know the lawyers are coming, right?
The behavior of cowards with big egos who can no longer silence their victims hi
re lawyers. They go after the Julies and the Davids. They speak of flat churches
but will go after what they perceive to be the head to silence the body.
Don't let this be the end. Please please please let this be the beginning.
Patrick,
I have always appreciated your wisdom in these long-term conversations. As Linda
said, thank you for being willing to share your insights here.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Pat,
No doubt a lawyer's letter may be in the future but any potential threat needs t
o be countered with, "we look forward to discovery." Cowards don't want the trut
h to become part of the public record.
Homebrewed Christianity - a male-led podcast in direct partnership with the Emer
gent movement - recently had a podcast conversation with Peter Rollins, one of t
he "edgy" emergent stars pushing Radical Theology. At about minute 17, he gets i
nto a critique of Driscoll and Mars Hill. It is fascinating - and disturbing - t
hat someone who's theology is all about deconstructing the power-structure of in
stitutions, cannot (or will not) deconstruct the very institution that he has be
en a part of ever since coming to the U.S.. He can CLAIM he is a "prophet" opera
ting at the edge, but if your living is made strictly by books, tours and on-lin
e courses within the "emergent empire", you are not a prophet, but rather a "pro
fit". My point is that the Emergent leaders/voices do not take their OWN theolog
y seriously. http://homebrewedchristianity.com/2014/09/26/tnt-authority-language
-jesus-and-ideology/
"We all know the lawyers are coming, right?"
For what?? Can you explain to someone with no legal knowledge how sharing your s
tory on a blog could have any legal ramifications? And real ramifications or jus
t threats?
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
cronut September 29, 2014 at 12:36 am
A General Electric ad (of all things) reminds me of this conversation.
http://youtu.be/sfmQvc6tB1o
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
artistglover,
In one sense, the precise civil case doesn't matter. Any legal matter can tie yo
u up in the courts for years, and cost plenty of money to defend. Regardless of
the merits of the case, or the spuriousness of the accusations.
That's one reason that some public figures may have been hesitant to engage with
this thread - any apology, or even private information disclosure, could potent
ially ruin their careers. (I am not suggesting Julie would do this - I imagine s
he's quite sick of the court system!)
I will, however, repeat the concerns raised by some in this thread: libel, sland
er - which are essentially civil damages due to loss of income or reputation; an
d/or becoming involved in ongoing litigation around Tony Jones and Julie McMahon
- either as a witness or a party.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Dana Ames September 29, 2014 at 1:35 am
Julie, I met you once when I visited SP in April 2007 while I was in M'polis for
a Northumbria Community weekend. I went to 4 San Diego Zondervan Pastors' Confe
rences 2006-2009. The EV authors were putting on paper what I had been thinking
about for at least the previous 10 years, and I wanted to connect with them pers
onally because I was (pretty desperately) looking for a group of Protestant Chri
stians with whom I could seek God, hoping to find anything like what they were a
dvocating and describing near where I live in the Coastal Range of northern Cali
fornia - the pickin's were and are really slim. What can I say - I'm somewhat of
an idealist... I regularly read many Emergent blogs back in the day, hoping....
Interestingly, the wind began to go out of the Emergent sails for me at that ver
y visit to SP, in the way that communion was served. I suppose what ended up bei
ng for me a rather free-for-all melee, instead of a real experience of communion
with like-minded and ostensibly like-hearted folks, is sort of an object lesson
that ended up characterizing most of the rest of my journey in Emerging church
circles. Doug made time for me - a nobody overweight, middle-aged housewife (and
helped me process my "allergy" to one M. Driscoll, who was speaking in the next
room that year). Tony and other big authors actually conversed with me. I met s
ome really interesting and, in my experience, very kind people - Phyllis actuall
y was the kindest. However, I was on primarily a theological journey, and ultima
tely, even though the people treated me well in those venues, Emergent (and for
me all of Western) theology just developed a lot of holes. I couldn't patch all
the leaks, and there was nothing left for me but to abandon that ship.
Julie, I believe you. I'm so glad you are standing firm in the truth, taking suc
h huge positive steps, and finding support in your worship community of the mome
nt :) It's not that I expect people I admire to be perfect, but bringing this to
light has certainly erased my admiration of some and deeply tarnished that of o
thers; I value honesty a lot more than bare theological concepts. Lord Jesus Chr
ist, have mercy on us... I wish those people I admired - one in particular - wou
ld peer into the depths of their hearts and find the humility, love and courage
to do the right thing by you.
I actually ended up in EO - was received in June 2009. That year's San Diego con
f. was the last time I took communion as a Protestant; it was my farewell. The n
ext Sunday I was made an Orthodox catechumen, and felt like I was finally home.
We EOs certainly have our share of problems, but (so far) there's not a Publishi
ng/Speaking engine "stoking [any] star-maker machinery..."
I once shook your hand, while thinking that you were one of the most strikingly
beautiful women I had ever met. After having read this thread, I still believe t
hat to be true in more ways than one, and send you a big virtual hug.
Dana
Pat Green September 29, 2014 at 6:58 am
If sharing your story involves another party who does not want their story told
and they are a public figure, they sometimes choose to sue for libel or slander.
Lawsuits are not the only avenue. Cease and dissist letters are common avenues.
In other news, this blog thread has allowed me to reconnect with some good folk
I've not talked to in a long time. When I left that world I left it all. It was
too difficult to sift the wheat from the chaff. I tried. I was also in a really
unhealthy space in my own life and had to draw firm boundaries from toxic commun
ities that fed my unhealthy coping skills until I learned to stand on my own.
I am not going to blame all religion. Some pockets of religion are very easy spa
ces for unhealthy people to not only exist without treatment, but they can lead.
The dangers for fostered codependency and harm to others that may result from t
hat are being showcased in this thread. It ain't just emergent though. This is a
disease that affects all denoms, theologies and mindsets.
Anyway, gotta take kid to school, meet a friend for breakfast and go back to bed
.
I have said anything useful I have to say. I'll be following and clicking thumbs
up to stuff.
Thank you again David and Julie and all the brave victims who kicked ass here.
Thank you Dana for your kind words. Those conferences were especially painful fo
r me as I observed so much ego, and so little God.
Just a mom September 29, 2014 at 10:52 am
I've been reading this for 2 days now, so many times all I could mutter was "WOW
!"
My heart is so sad for the "church", I once thought I had found truth, once.
Our family got connected with a Mark Driscoll wannabe here in MN (whats with MN?
!)
Crossing Church in Elk RIver,MN under Eric Dykstra, I believe this church to be
a cult- one that I lost my son to for far too long, he is now "home" with his fa
mily, thank God! And we, as a family, are healing and moving forward.
But what happened to us all has had a profound effect on my spiritual life, I am
a wreck- dont know what to believe anymore. Will not attend church, scared to d
eath of it.
I just wanted to say, I hear you, I believe you, I grieve this with you....
Here was our story http://onemothersjourney7.blogspot.com/
I want to take the opportunity here to extend a personal invitation to the peopl
e who've commented on this post to our online community, The Lasting Supper. It'
s been a great place to deconstruct and find a way back to spiritual health and
independence. Several people here are already members and can testify to that. I
realize some people might interpret this as me taking a selfish opportunity to
gain members. Others will realize that The Lasting Supper is a great community t
hat genuinely helps people, and it would be wrong of me not to offer its service
s. Anyway, I invite you.
ALL... of you... are VALUABLE!!! <3
@Just a mom,
Wow - I read your story at the link you provided. Don't know if it's a "cult" bu
t it's definitely an abusive situation, no question. Glad to hear your son is ba
ck with you and out of that environment. (Did his marriage survive?) I'd encoura
ge you to join David's online community and connect with people who have been th
rough similar things... it's helpful to share experiences; it brings healing.
ReliStuPhD September 30, 2014 at 7:22 pm
Even though I've only read about a quarter of the comments here, it was enough f
or me to go ahead and scroll down to the comment box.
5-6 years ago, Tony Jones came to our semi-emergent church in Dallas several tim
es to speak (I am told this is where he met his 'spiritual wife.' Pardon me whil
e I laugh derisively). It was clear to some of us at the time that 'TJ' was an i
nsufferable prick, trying to sell a religious idea that anyone with even a modic
um of theological training could see through (if they were willing to apply a da
sh of logic to their evaluation). Setting aside the latent chauvinism, the blata
nt narcissism, or the word-that-rhymes-with-'atant' snake-oil being sold, it was
ultimately the self-referential incoherence that I found so mind-boggling. It's
good to see the Emergent Movement eating itself. I don't believe in a vengeful
God (if I believe in God at all), but I'm sure this is what HeSheIt would look l
ike.
As to Julie's courageous stand here, all I can say is that had some of us known
what was actually going on with a certain photographer within our midst, we woul
d have left the church much sooner. There were a lot of pathologies, both indivi
dual and corporate, that were going around that community, however, including an
other "cheating scandal" that involved one of the core personalities in the grou
p (who is still there, as a leader). I'm not sure that something like this could
have been heard above the din that came from a failed financial model, the loss
of an admittedly cool place to worship, and the general pushback against any so
rt of moral accountability. I'm still not sure that community is healthy. I don'
t bother to check. It long ago became a place for people who wanted to keep the
label of "Christian" without adhering to any of the concomitant beliefs that com
es with it.
I might post more later about the actual question posed by David, but for now, I
think the above ill suffice.
PS For what it's worth, I would encourage many of those here who seem to cling t
o the notion that TJ is someone still within the fold to abandon. There are some
who claim the name of Christian who really aren't.
PPS Juuuust in case someone decides to PM me, please be under advisement that I
might cut and paste your PM here if it will serve to strengthen Julie's story.
ReliStuPhD September 30, 2014 at 7:45 pm
I should clarify the PPS as pertaining to Julie's detractors (if the whole threa
t-by-PM thing is still going on).
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
Just a mom September 30, 2014 at 10:32 pm
Yes, we are a very intact family now, enjoying my daughter in law very much!
Thank you for the invite, have been considering joining - the fear is real ;) on
one hand scared to look at this too much again as I fear falling back into that
awful time and facing those emotions again- on the other hand, ready to not be
stuck in my current spiritual mess anymore.
Thank you for the invite Brother Maynard :)
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Just a mom (so much more than just a mom fyi) I read your link story and holy bu
ckets awful! Clearly an abuse of power and spiritual abuse....yuck! I am sorry y
ou went through that but glad you are all good now.
RelistuPhD (great name) thank you for coming forward and attesting to what I obs
erved as well. I knew there was a whole lot of sketchiness going on down in Dall
as, Texas at Journey church with Pastor Danielle Shroyer at the helm, but I just
didn't know to what extent. Yuck!
ReliStuPhD October 1, 2014 at 12:44 am
Julie, I was not at Journey church, so I think Tony's "spiritual wife" must have
spent time in between two (or more?) churches. Whether he met her at our church
or elsewhere is beyond me (as I said, we were preoccupied by other issues at th
e time).
I can't really comment on sketchiness at Journey, but many of the issues that we
re at the core of our particular pathologies were based in many congregants' pas
t spiritual abuse at the hands of arch-conservative pastors, and how that played
out in a sort of rejection of anything resembling traditional (orthodox) Christ
ianity. It was (perhaps still is) a very complex situation of people being being
unable to abandon the label of "Christian" even as they railed against anything
that resembled traditional Christianity. Perhaps that is less a testament to th
eir own pathologies more to that of a previous generation (mostly Texas Southern
Baptist).
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
Julie McMahon October 1, 2014 at 1:03 am
Ah, I see. Maybe they threw the baby Jesus out with the bathwater?
The photographer was very "busy" back then. Mr. Hamilton her husband....then oth
er peoples husbands, and flitting between churches. How exhausting! And then the
re is all the picture taking of her subject. The Greek mythology of Narcissus re
enacted in a modern day twist. Again, Freud really would have a field day with t
his one.

I'm not sure the baby and bath water analogy even works in this case. I'm going
to have to mull this over, because I'd love to be able to put my finger on what
was happening there theologically.
As for the "spiritual wife," all I can say is that it all strikes me as a repeat
of the very thing the movement was trying distance itself from. It's as if the
whole movement has seen too many who don't practice what they preach, so they ju
st change the preaching so it fits. If preaching against adultery would indict y
ou, well, just declare it not to be a sin and then you're safe. Can't be a sinne
r if adultery is not sin, right? Voila! It's far more abusive than anything they
were trying to pushback against. After all, even Jimmy Swaggert worked within a
moral system that could indict him. If you just eliminate the moral system (at
least the individual element of it), you can do whatever. You might be a bad per
son for not speaking out against genocide in Darfur, but you'll never have to wo
rry about infidelity in marriage. As I said, self-referentially incoherent.
PS Isn't it sad that Jimmy Swaggert's moral code was superior by comparison?
A follow up post to Andrew Jones Emergent Dust Storm post.
http://tallskinnykiwi.com/2014/06/emergent-dust-storm/
JULIE
Submitted on 2014/06/25 at 10:51 am
Thank you, Andrew. I forgive you wholeheartedly, and feel your stand with me now
all these years later.
My children and I were delivered from the Emergent church. It was not a blessing
for me and my family, but bore only rotten fruit.
From my view it was money, male ego, greed, and sin.
I truly was a victim of key Emergent Village leaders and betrayed by my own past
or at the Emergent church where I worshiped in Minneapolis.
My children forever changed. Scarred.
I m still waiting for their public apology. They know exactly who they are, an
d what they did. It was wrong. It was sin.
It was about silencing the ugly truth to preserve book deals and speaking gigs.
An expensive bus tour with a large sponsor from a publishing house.
The
discernment letter
written by the six of them that night in Dallas, Te
xas will go down as one of the most ungodly acts against a woman done by men who
claim to be of God, progressive, pro-feminist, Christianity 21. Plus, discernme
nt 101 requires that I would be part of it, and not just the husband FYI. I did
not even know these men. (plus, Danielle Shroyer)
All this
discernment
in an attempt to cover up an affair.
My own pastor at the time covering up my husbands adulterous affair in order to

save his own career. Especially heinous!
Sadly, the Emergent
conversation
went silent when I attempted to talk abou
t this sin, and sought healing and redemption from those involved. No one cared
to
discern
the irrefutable evidence I offered to show them even saying,
Please don t send it to me. I don t want to know.
Because God is bigger I still wait in hope for those men to step forward and say
,
I m sorry, Julie. That was wrong.
I will warmly forgive them.
That was years ago now. Those were crazy times. A $140,000 book advance for a bu
s tour from Zondervon (I think Jossey Bass in San Fran?) publishing. An affair w
ould have been quite messy, quite untimely.
To this day, it is all neatly denied and the
Julie is crazy campaign
rocks
on to rationalize bad behavior, but why else would six men (plus Danielle Shroy
er) try so vehemently to have me silenced even flying one of them
at great
expense
to Minneapolis with the sole mission to get Julie locked up flew th
e red eye to get that done all that work to try and have a sane woman committe
d to rationalize an affair, and a rapid divorce? Sick, sick stuff.
When their plan failed due to my sanity (much to their dismay) my pastor said,
I bet I can find you a hospital to admit you.
Speechless.
I was instructed the only way my husband would stay married to me is if I commit
ted myself I found out later he had already retained a divorce lawyer and was
in full swing with his now wife.
The intake nurse said,
o need a good lawyer.
Honey, you don
t need to be admitted here, but you d
Those words turned out to be prophetic. Despite my attempts they never spoke to
me again, but the heinous rumors came back to me. Very hurtful. Betrayal. Lies.
I believe it is time for forgiveness and healing. Which one of you will be brave
enough to start that
conversation?
J
Jim Hebert October 1, 2014 at 11:20 am
"Because God is bigger I still wait in hope for those men to step forward and sa
y,
I m sorry, Julie. That was wrong.
I will warmly forgive them."
That's the thing, you should have forgiven them already. For your own sake, for
their sake and exactly because of the point you made at the beginning of this st
atement: God is bigger.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/mars-hill-emergent-movement-emergent
-meltdown/
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Julie McMahon October 1, 2014 at 12:05 pm
Pastor Ken Silva was a good guy. We emailed just two weeks ago. I am sorry to he
ar he died. His Christianity was much more conservative than mine, but he would
regularly email me and check in on me and the kids and tell me he was praying fo
r us. He called this whole Emergent cover up story out publicly years ago. And w
as SILENCED.
"That s why I am asking all of you to never click on a link posted by Ken Silv
a, or Christian Research Net, or Lighthouse Trails Research, or Apprising Minist
ries. Never use their names in a post or on a website (as I just did). And if yo
u ve got any old posts that link to their site, delete the links.
I m not asking you to do this because I m afraid of criticism. If you ve f

ollowed me at all in the past few years, you know that I m not. I m asking y
ou to do these things because these critics are dishonest. (Online source, bold
his)."
Tony Jones
http://apprising.org/2010/01/07/emergent-pain-and-discord-in-the-emerging-church
/
Ken Silva
Sep 12
to me
Hi Julie,
It's nice to hear from you. I hope you and your children are well.
Hmm, Tony calls out Driscoll; the pot calls the kettle black.
jmac
Sep 12
to Ken
Hi to you! Yes, we are doing great. The irony is too rich. Peace!
Ken Silva
Sep 12
to me
Glad to hear ya'll are doing great. Yes, the irony is deep indeed.
Ken Silva
Sep 18 (13 days ago)
to me
Hi Julie,
Here's pdf files of the comments section at Naked Pastor so they won't be lost.
Thought you might want a record of what was said.
Ken
brad/futuristguy October 1, 2014 at 12:57 pm
Jim Hebert (October 1, 2014 at 11:20 am) said: [["Because God is bigger I still
wait in hope for those men to step forward and say,
I m sorry, Julie. That
was wrong.
I will warmly forgive them." That's the thing, you should have for
given them already. For your own sake, for their sake and exactly because of the
point you made at the beginning of this statement: God is bigger.]]
I think I see your point, Jim
and from what follows, correct me if I m wro
ng
and I partially agree with you. Forgiveness is crucial for healing and fo
r turning things over to God. And I also believe there is more. The same Jesus w
ho in the Gospels mandates we forgive our enemies and pray for those who persecu
te us (Matthew 5:44, NIV), is the same Word who in the Epistles mandates that th
e Church hold leaders accountable. Forgive leaders who sin, yes. Trust and resto
re to leadership roles again
depends.
And, at least as I see it, Julie has sought to do both in this thread
work t
oward forgiveness and hold leaders accountable. Also, in the ongoing process her
e, she may have changed her view some on the paradox of forgiveness plus calling
to account as a part of seeking justice. The comment you quoted from was origin
ally posted on TallSkinnyKiwi's blog on June 25, 2014. She s the only one who
can speak to that and how she s grown in the meantime.
As far as this calling to account issue, I recently wrote about creating a list
of
must haves and can t haves
from key New Testament scriptures about wh
at is required of those who would be leaders in the church. Below are a lot of t
he
can t haves
on the list. They show us what level of Christlike charac
ter and life-skill development are necessary for elders, overseers, deacons. (Al
l verses from the *New International Version* via biblegateway.com.)
* 1 Timothy 3:1-13
Not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not
quarrelsome, not a lover of money
not indulging in much wine, and not pursui
ng dishonest gain
if there is nothing against them, let them serve.
* 1 Timothy 5:17-25
Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not
share in the sins of others.
* Titus 1:5-9
Not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient
no
t overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pu
rsuing dishonest gain.
* 1 Peter 5:1-4
Be shepherds of God s flock that is under your care, wa
tching over them not because you must
not pursuing dishonest gain
not
lording it over those entrusted to you.
I
d make the argument that just as elders-overseers-deacons are public figures

because they are leaders in the churches, so also those who present themselves
as leaders in the decentralized Church, such as through publishing, blogging, sp
eaking, and event hosting, are subject to those same "must have/can t have" ma
ndates. They re not off the hook for accountability simply because what they d
o isn t within the confines of a local church. And they're not necessarily off
the hook if those who have been harmed forgive them.
Anyway, we in the West live with the philosophical and theological tradition of
analyzing and then polarizing things that cultures with more holistic paradigms
would keep in paradox. There are good things within how we typically process inf
ormation in the West, but this problem of splitting is not one of them.
So instead of disconnecting the two, I see these two as a both/and rather than a
n either/or - BOTH forgive AND hold accountable. As a spiritual abuse survivor,
it s been my observation that splitting these two now inevitably leads to trou
ble later.
* A
forgive only
approach when those in leadership sin usually leaves in p
ositions of power those who may not be at all repentant and will continue to har
m others. It also leaves the forgiver in an accomplice role of some complicity i
f there is damage done to others in the future for failure to call out leaders'
patterns of toxic behavior now.
* A
hold accountable only
approach toward leaders who sin usually hardens
the non-forgiver in a revenge mode, and frequently sparks further hardness of he
art in leaders with patterns of sin.
Neither of those is healthy. As individuals and as church bodies, we need the bo
th/and of forgiveness with holding accountable.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Brad Cecil October 1, 2014 at 12:59 pm
Julie
I accept your apology.
Please understand - I don t want to be involved in this matter any longer. I
m sorry for your painful experiences in this matter and our past friendship, bu
t I m no longer willing to be involved.
As anticipated, more criticism and labels have been presented - so some points o
f clarifications are needed:
Our involvement in this matter came from Julie s request. I suspect Ju
lie had requested intervention from others and they declined to get involved. We
HEARD Julie - so we intervened.
Intervention is a risk
All pastors/professionals know this. You can
become involved in matters hoping to help out, but yourself can get thrown into
the mess. I think this happened in this case. I know the people libeled in this
thread - I don t know all the details of personal behavior, but I know the
Discernment Group
did nothing
evil
in this matter.
The Discernment Group
was only given this name so that Julie would
know that we took her request seriously, with prayer and a sense of urgency. Th
ere was no ongoing discussion of the matter of their marriage only discussion on
how we could resolve Julie s immediate request to end the tour and get Tony h
ome. Julie keeps mentioning the
discernment letter
she mentions it as
u
ngodly . She s offered to post the letter
I think she should do so!!! Th
e letter will demonstrate that we HEARD Julie, we INTERVENED on her behalf, and
we recommend specific LOCAL CARE, because we knew we could not be involved longterm. I remain unapologetic for what we did! We got involved because we cared fo
r Julie and Tony. I m actually SHOCKED that our action has been spun into a co
ver-up narrative.
No follow-up was given by the group because we resolved the matter the i
ntervention was requested for and nothing further was requested. In other words
we did exactly what Julie asked that we do!
I still am not convinced that an online thread is an appropriate venue t
o discuss such a painful family matter. Very few people commenting in this threa
d bear responsibility to the people in this thread or for the comments they make
. This is the issue I have with the
virtual community
- people add their c
ommentary, but have no responsibility for them or for the people they affect.
There is much misinformation on this thread:
o
The emergent movement is not a cult
o
emergent started as a conversation among people of various theological/p
hilosophical understandings and remains that way
o
The emergent conversation hasn t faded away at all
in fact - it
s now integrated in practically every Christian expression
o
Mars Hill and emergent have very little in common
o
Mark Driscoll and Tony Jones have very little in common
o
I don t know of the personal behavior of everyone involved in the conv
ersation, but because people have been involved - I m sure there has to be bad
behavior from some. I just don t know of all this overt evil people on this t
hread decry and claim a cover-up is involved - I remain unconvinced of any such
thing. I still view this as a very ugly private family matter and now with all
this commentary.
o
I haven t posted on my blog for years, but I am going to answer many o
f these claims on my blog in the near future. I will post a link when I do.
David Hayward October 1, 2014 at 1:04 pm
So the same complaints keep coming back that this blog is an inappropriate venue
to talk about something as personal as a divorce.
It gets very frustrating after a while when those who claim to be silenced are a
lso not heard when they do speak.

Brad, you say, "I still am not convinced that an online thread is an appropriate
venue to discuss such a painful family matter."
But the aggrieved keep saying it's not about the divorce but the way it was mana
ged by certain people.
Silent cries falling on deaf ears.
Brad, I didn't ask you to do anything but help as I knew there were major issues
. So, your version of help was to take someones spin and send Mark S. and then t
hey went right back on tour apparently "leaving the kids in grave danger in my c
are." I understand you bought the plane tickets. I am sorry you wasted your mone
y.
Again, why aren't you directing your rage at the appropriate source(s)?! That's
strange. Why are you dismissing what I am telling you happened after that night
in Dallas? This is NOT a private matter. It involved the entire Emergent, Christ
ianity 21, Solomon's Porch community as posters of the thread testified.I was pu
blicly smeared. I am sorry your good friends roped you into their diabolical pla
n....but that's what happened whether you care to acknowledge, accept it, or not
. Scrubbing of the EV website was admitted by Steve Knight who said Tony asked h
im to do it and then he did it himself. There are too many other verifications I
already laid out and witnesses corroborated. If you are innocent don't worry ab
out it....but I would be pissed at the appropriate sources JoPa. Again, if your
intent was genuine and you say it is then I apologize again however....you shoul
d never discern someone without the person present. I disagree as do many others
that the similarities to these people and Mars Hill personalities are frighteni
ngly similar. I think I would know. Also, are you really dismissing my account o
f physical, spiritual and emotional abuse....wow....some Pastor.
Brad Cecil October 1, 2014 at 1:25 pm
David
I don't doubt that you've convinced yourself that noble action is taking place o
n this thread - I am not convinced. I don't know you so I can't presume to know
anything about your motives.
This started as a post about Mark Driscoll s pathology in the Mars Hill situat
ion. I actually agree with your original point, but this thread has deviated so
far away from your original idea and has become defamatory to others that I had
to comment on the matter at hand.
This thread has so much misinformation, inference, innuendo and commentary that
I think it needs to be addressed and I will at a later date when I have time.
David Hayward October 1, 2014 at 1:43
Brad: My conscience is clear. But I do
right. However, I'm actually thrilled
a safe space for people to speak, one
pm
realize that doesn't necessarily mean I'm
by this comment thread. When one provides
must expect a mess.
Why can't this be a court of our peers? Everyone is free to join in.
We've actually seen where some people have come into the thread to give their si
de of the story, shed light on the other side, asked forgiveness where they were
wrong, and requested forgiveness for where they were misunderstood or even fals
ely accused, and forgiveness was forthcoming. What can be better than that?
I'm beginning to suspect that some people dismiss this process because it actual
ly works.
Tim October 1, 2014 at 2:35 pm
Hi Brad,
You don't know me, and as far as I can tell, I carry no particular authority or
significance in your world. You don't have to engage with me, or with this awkwa
rd, messy, emotional process. But clearly the conversation on this thread has im
pacted you.
I apologise to you in particular, if any of my comments have been inappropriate,
or if I've contributed negatively to the overall tone of this thread.
But through this process, we've come to understand that something went very terr
ibly wrong around 5 years ago, resulting in Julie and Tony's divorce, despite th
e efforts of many of those in the once-off discernment group to help.
We've had many of those involved at the time come and clarify, apologise, correc
t, and rebuke. As far as I can tell, the picture is much clearer for all involve
d, as a result of their contributions.
I hear very clearly your once-off involvement at the time of the discernment gro
up, and your desire not to be involved now.
You may not be interested in digging up the past, but some really concerning thi
ngs have happened since:
Julie and Tony have been involved in 5 years of court cases and custody battles.
I've seen those documents. I also have some experience with long-term engagemen
ts with the legal system. They're exhausting for all involved. This is a terribl
e and unfortunate situation.
Various changes have happened to various websites and blogs. Whatever the motiva
tions for the changes, the effect has been to conceal the events at the time, th
e relationships between the major parties, and any ongoing concerns. One side of
the story has been presented, and another has ended up being removed.
Apart from multiple testimonies, I don't have specific examples of the content t
hat was removed. But one way to verify these changes would be to use the wayback
machine to look up the sites around the dates in question. But that still won't
answer the crucial question: why?
Several people have raised concerns that there's some sort of a similar, wider p
attern of conflict, relational fallout, and information modification in various
organisations. I can't speak to that with any certainty. I'm not close enough to
know. But, if it were true, it would be of immense concern to the overall healt
h of the wider church.
I would hope that many of these issues would concern you, even if the method use
d to uncover them isn't one you're happy with.
Taylor Joy Young October 1, 2014 at 3:22 pm
I'm OVERJOYED right now that the church is waking up to the reality of narcissis
m, and how destructive it is. My father is a narcissist, my mother has BPD, and
the church gave me HELL for getting out of that relationship. Thank you so much
for waking people up to the mind-fuck that is personality disorders & untreated
mental illness in the church.
Brad [Cecil] ... Brad [Sargent] here. It's been a long, long time since we met a
t Young Leader events, and sorry that reconnecting is under some angst-filled ci
rcumstances.
I do have some thoughts myself on the kinds of questions and issues you raised t
oward the end of your comment a bit ago (October 1, 2014 at 12:59 pm), about eme
rging, Emergent, Mars Hill, etc. You've been an insider on the history of Young
Leaders to Terra Nova Project to Emergent Village and beyond, so I look forward
to reading what you have to say when you post your perspectives.
As it turned out, my point of departure from the "emerging ministry movement" to
ok me more into the missional wing of things, where I've been continuing to work
with several virtual, international teams on social transformation projects. I'
ve done a lot of research writing on both why/how things go wrong in organizatio
ns when we want to "do good" right, and how to do start-ups that are safe zones
at the beginning and sustainable to the end.
Since I spent 17 of the last 40 years in definitely sick non-profit systems, and
as many years in healthy ones, I feel I have a good based from which to compare
and contrast. So, my research work has included writing about 10 shorter case s
tudies or longer archives on toxic church and ministry situations since 2008. I'
ve put in at least 600 hours in writing, fact-checking, and editing them. The mo
st recent case has been an extensive research guide on legal/ethical issues rega
rding Mars Hill and Mark Driscoll.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/07/mark-driscoll-and-mars-hill-church-r
esearch-guide-part-2e/
I've also been keeping up on this thread as best I can, and I just last night po
sted an article about some issues I see with Emergent.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/mars-hill-emergent-movement-emergent
-meltdown/
And, FWIW, I do see some parallels between the kinds of behaviors going on in bo
th Mars Hill and the E.V./Emergent movement that have ended up in allegations of
misuse of spiritual authority - and also in what seems to me to be closed syste
ms or "interlocking directories" of connections in both. Obviously the theologie
s are quite different, but I would also suggest that at the deepest level, the e
pistemologies are similar enough of an either/or processing style to spark simil
ar "deep systems" despite radically different surface beliefs.
Each of those relatively short opinions require relatively large expansions. And
I've been posting my responses to general issues like that since 2008, and may
well be addressing more specifics of Mars Hill and Emergent in the near future a
s time allows. If interested, my FAQs post categorizes most of the articles I've
written on spiritual abuse issues. I just did that a few days ago, and hopefull
y it makes the material more accessible to locate partial answers to the E.V./Ma
rs Hill questions.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/spiritual-abuse-faqs/
And i can understand frustration over the exposure of details in this thread, if
one assumes that the core issue is about messy private family matters like divo
rce. That isn't my assumption, though. I'm looking at this gestalt through the l
ens of visible eruptions of what would otherwise be private matters if they did
not involve acknowledged leaders who are in the public eye. That's exactly what
I posted earlier, just minutes before your longer comment today.
To me, this means it's about character issues and behaviors that may disqualify
a leader from a role of public ministry, at least temporarily and perhaps perman
ently. And that's a serious matter for discernment by the churches and the Churc
h. And if the emergent conversation truly has been integrated into most expressi
ons of Christianity as you stated, then shouldn't that mean Tony Jones and other
Emergent leaders should be accountable to all their audiences, then and now, fo
r any points and patterns of alleged abuse? In my opinion, much could have been
cleared up five years ago when these issues came up, as did pressure to various
bloggers to edit or pull down posts and comments. It simmered under the surface
and now, the eruptions may seem worse but it appears that maybe the issues can c
ome to some closure.
Anyway, yes, this is all rather ugly in some very unpleasant ways, but I think t
he overall conversation here has been relatively civil - at least within the fra
mework I'm working from that all public leaders / figures / role-models who are
authors, speakers, event sponsors, etc., commit themselves to public scrutiny an
d accountability. Seems to me it was providence that this happens to have turned
out to be the public venue in which that is taking place.
Final thought: I reminded here of a quote from the movie *Gandhi*. I think it's
relevant to the entire thread and all of us who find clashing perspectives to th
ose we ourselves hold. After one of the last British Viceroys over India release
s Gandhi from jail following the Empire's inability to counter the 1930 "salt ma
rch" protest. According to interviews, this protest was apparently the first inc
ident of international protest committed to film and shown in theatres as part o
f newsreels. Thus, both the Indian protesters and the British regents had their
actions and responses shown before the watching world on the emerging media of t
heir era.
So - Gandhi is ushered into the Viceroy's office, and the first thing he says to
the Viceroy is, "I am aware that I must have given you much cause for irritatio
n, Your Excellency. I hope it will not stand between us as men."
Continuing conversation in the midst of irritation is difficult, no denying. I'v
e had some highly uncomfortable conversations both online and offline about all
this. But I hope we can stay engaged for the sake of a healthier future for all
of what was once known as the "emerging" ministry movement from which New Calvin
ism/Mars Hill, Emergent Village/Emergent, missional, post-evangelical, progressi
ve, and other movements sifted themselves out. Don't we owe that to the Church,
for the sake of the Kingdom?
Lost Voice October 1, 2014 at 4:32 pm
I came into the conversation now known as Emergent in the late 1990's. I was ver
y involved at The OOZE specifically in the forums. At the time the conversation
has no name or any leaders. To be honest there were no writers with books. The o
nly word used a lot was "postmodern " and/or PoMo. (This is one way I know who h
ung at The OOZE back then) We debated, deconstructed, and learned. No one had th
e intention of labeling it. It was what it was. It was the environment. Palmoliv
e, we were soaking in it.
There were Mars Hill people there. They did not last long. In my estimation now
I would put them in the Emergent label, but not OF the conversation.
Now there is where those of us who were at The OOZE and those who later a part o
f the Emergent Village happens. Those who came from the ooze saw the whole deal
as a conversation. There were no leaders. We were all a part of a larger communi
ty and trying to live out spirituality in a Postmodern climate. Emergents or Eme
rgent Village was and is a collection of people in specific ministry roles, chur
ch planters, and pastors. There are main leaders who develop and voice what the
Emergent people are about. Two VERY different ideas here.
I said this back in 2003 or so, that the label Emergent was the beginning of the
slow fall for the conversation. This thread is evidence of what I warned about.
People wanted to label it, put certain people up as leaders and then have no ac
countability. This is why there are stories like mine, Julie's, Pat's daughter a
nd many MANY more. Emergent Village even had a gathering of their elite around 2
009 or 2010, I believe??? They still deflected that this was a leadership meetin
g. In fact it was. They even post blogs about decisions made by them for Emergen
t. It is funny to me that when you try to confront the abuse to these people the
re are no rules and get over it attitudes. Yet, when silenced people finally go
public in a blog (which I did in my blog I no long have.) or in comments (such a
s here) there are suddenly RULES and obligations.
Emergent people want their cake and eat it too. Always have and always will. The
y will not admit it because they are blind to it. It is frustrating as hell. The
y feel they can live by a certain unknown set of rules. God help you if you brea
k one of these rules.
BTW: the rule I broke? I spoke out and said there needed to be more women of col
or speaking. I always challenged Emergent speakers to stop talking about LGBTQ.
To let LGBTQ take the platform. To use their power to help a minority. Yeah, pur
e evil I was.
Donna McDaniel October 1, 2014 at 5:49 pm
Thank you Brad. Thank you for what you are trying to do here. (I tip toe in to s
ay this.) This all needs to happen for God to heal his Church. I've been praying
for it for 12 years since my own marriage failed in much the same way as Julie'
s, though not on such a large public stage. (Mine was a small semi-private stage
, though it reached world wide.) But I'd begun to loose hope that God would ever
deal with it. It's still a cancer and still out there in the form of many unrep
entant "ministers" still being allowed to carry on as if their choices meant not
hing (as if their unrepentant lives don't affect everything they touch). And the
re are a lot of still hurting abuse survivors who's lives, callings, and ministr
ies were derailed....some of whom are trying to figure out how to find their way
back to where they should be....while most have probably given up altogether. I
know my Ex is still out there in the mix, still undetected for the lies he's to
ld in order to keep his place "ministering" to emerging church leaders. I think
you know him. Though I doubt you know his real story. I think I might have met y
ou in Austin Texas, February...was it 2000, or 2001? My last name was Fernandez
back then. I don't know if this is the place...but if not here, then where?
Still Cynical October 1, 2014 at 5:51 pm
"This thread has so much misinformation, inference, innuendo and commentary that
I think it needs to be addressed and I will at a later date when I have time."
_____________________________________________
TRANSLATION:
Everything in this thread is true and I hate it that it is coming out in a manne
r beyond my control. But I need more time to spin this to my favor and need to c
onsult with people of like mind to formulate a lawyered response.
Donna McDaniel! I know you messaged me and I want to write back but I'm writing
here because THIS is a safe place for you to tell your story and be supported. T
here is a toxic culture amongst the author/speaker/conference minor xian celebri
ty sect where they feel justified in bull dozing over people and discarding them
like they are disposable trash. It's wrong! And then to carry on in the mix lik
e nothing ever happened. Join me in The Lasting Supper on line community of post
church toxicity survivors. Or tell your story here...we're listening.
Donna, please do feel free to tell your story - here, or in whatever place is be
st (most comfortable, safe) for you.
There are forums like TLS where you can share in private, or sharing here will h
elp us all understand not only your story, but the bigger picture of destructive
church patterns.
We will listen. We will support you.
ReliStuPhD October 1, 2014 at 7:10 pm
Donna McDaniel, I'm curious which Brad you're referring to. I get the feeling th
at Brad Cecil would actually be the one defending your defending your husband, s
o is it safe to assume you mean brad/futuristguy?
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
1. Donna-I think you meant to address David Hayward the Pastor of this blog and
post? Not Brad(s) correct me if I'm wrong.
2. ReliStuPhD were you a part of AXXESS church in Texas? I'm beginning to connec
t dots.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Holly Roach October 1, 2014 at 9:16 pm
I just want to thank everyone here for making the women sharing their hurt in th
is thread feel heard. So much of that went down before my time in emergence but
I have borne witness to a lot of pain from women, people of color and other folk
s who sit far from the center of the movement. These voices inspire me and keep
me working to cultivate more equitable spaces within emergence. This thread has
been really impactful for the community. Here's my blog response. http://www.pat
heos.com/blogs/emergentvillage/2014/10/the-dark-side-of-emergent-christianity/
Likes(7)Dislikes(5)
Be careful. There are skeletons and many bumps under the rug of issues. It isn't
until you hit one of those secrets that the realization comes to you. I have fr
iends who said exactly what you have, Holly. Then the day came when they landed
on truths that were well hidden. These friends soon realized they were on the wr
ong side of justice in the emergent wings. We now proudly call ourselves post-em
ergent. Which is ironic because for years we were post-modern Christianity.
I now live in a weird world. No place to really call a spiritual home. I do not
fit in the modern christain world and I cannot, for my mental, physical, and fam
ily health be in the emergent conversation. I dared to stand up and speak out, I
found a skeleton and trip over a bump on the rugs. I sometimes wish I had not.
It was easier then. There is more than just a "dark side" to emergent. No amount
of "I know good people from it" hides it or makes it right. It means people are
enjoying a lies birthed on abuse of a lot of people. Once it happens to you, th
e little party looks like a house of horrors. There is no coming back once you i
t all for what it is.
Peace....
Pat Green October 1, 2014 at 10:37 pm
@Holly Roach
I love you, but I cannot get down with your blog. I'm sorry, but not really.
It was the current membership players who suggested (including Florin a (non)lea
der), when my daughter was 12, to come to the communion table served by a Bishop
that called her an abomination. They were not alone. Most of the rest were sile
nt and as Martin Luther King said, "In the End, we will remember not the words o
f our enemies, but the silence of our friends." The silence towards a little gir
l facing clergy abuse was deafening. It was so loud it drowned out my cries to h
er that I love her as acts of self harm were committed. It was then that I reali
zed that no matter how much I loved her I could not stop the pain in this world
and I needed help and we were alone. In another cry of financial justice when on
e of the old guard who writes so eloquently about justice and criticizes evangel
icals who do not tip was, by a twist of fate, in my cab. A man who's books I bou
ght, seminars I went to and when I brought up my hurt over that, the same two ch
aracters I listed earlier among others asked me weird questions. How many fares
did you have that day? Maybe he did not know you tip cab drivers despite the fac
t he is on the road all the time. Now, that one is a little one...a tiny one...c
ompared to the pain of my little girl that I am still repairing. No one held me
when I was broken and crying and too many asked too much of a child.
It was not the old guard that stood in deafening silence or even suggested she w
ere at fault, it was the current group. One lesson I learned in the taxi that I
never learned in emergent. The equitable spaces exist in the world. They don't n
eed emergence to bring that which is already there.
@lost voice knows damn well the pain my kid went through. She remembers the onli
ne tears of a father broken and helpless in a cruel world with emergent complici
ty. She's 14 now and an atheist who trust no person of faith. She sees the eleme
nts served at all tables to be moldy bread and poisoned wine.
One last thought....
One of my personal favorite quotes that came out of a meeting about me was this.
..."who is she anyway???? not like she is anyone in this conversation!" Funny, t
he conversation (emergent) was always about many voices. No voice more important
than another.
Another quote said to me personally and I have never forgotten it, "you have to
do be a part of (editing out the direct name) because it will give you credit in
the conversation. They (leaders and names were listed) will respect you and the
n listen."
And there ends the lesson.
I'm shaking right now. Crying too. Thank you again @david and @julie. I'm trying
not to make waves and I prefer to deal with my own crap and harm I have done in
this world, but I hurt for my kid. She's my life. She's one of the few things I
have not lost. To hurt a child is criminal and to stand idly by and make no sta
nd or even have empathy is a silent complicity to the harm.
I remember Pat. I hate that I was
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
The edit is gone. Anyway, Pat, I hate that I was still dealing with my mess that
I was not stronger with and for you. Know I have always loved you and have supp
orted you. Love ha brother.
You have nothing to apologize for. You were in hell. I knew you cared.
I don't know if emergent is dead or not. I don't care. It's dead to me.
It was a lie.
I was a good soldier who wanted to be liked and accepted. What I needed was ther
apy, Xanax and a hug, what I got was toxins.
Lost Voice October 2, 2014 at 12:43 am
For clarity, because it has been asked of me to do so. Not sure what it proves..
.
1. I was at Christanity 21. I attended. First thing I attended that was connecte
d to the other group of people known as Emergent. I had no clue of what Julie sh
ared. There was no way for me to have known. I was there on my own. Did not know
a lot of people. A handful would not even be accurate. All the people there, wi
th the exception of 2 guys I know from The OOZE were there. Not sure what this p
roves??? But it was asked and since I was asked, here it is.
2. Yes, Tony and I had a major run in. Not giving details because the fact is, h
e did apologize. It seemed sincere. It helped me heal and moved on from it. Not
sure what this has to do with anything either. I have not said any to slight him
because I do not have a personal bone with him. My bone is with covering up abu
ses that have been done. I have not mentioned the persons responsible because I'
m sure it is documented some where on the web. I could not say where but I know
for a long while I did publicly say what happened. I am not using their names no
t mine because I have that right and the right to relate to others who have simi
lar experiences.
So....there it is.
Julie, in a post I now can't find, you asked me if I was a member of AXXESS. No,
the church I was with was not in the emergent movement,* just flirting with it
(apparently quite literally for some). Tony came to speak to us and, as I said a
bove, came across as an arrogant prick. (It's actually a funny story because he
was swinging his academic bona fides around, trying to impress, apparently unawa
re that the group he was speaking had an unusually high ratio of M.Div/Th.M./PhD
members (over 50%)). He basically shot himself in the foot at the time, though
some continued to flirt with the man's ideas (in Perry's case, with the actual m
an). The church is now "emergent." :P
I hope you don't mind that I'm not actually revealing the name of the church. I
don't think we were close enough to the movement to actually have had a part in
this beyond simply being another place for Jones and Perry to have mingled, and
I need to maintain some anonymity since I occasionally encounter those folks.
Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
Tim October 2, 2014 at 1:57 am
ReliStuPhD, Lost Voice,
We will support you no matter how much or how little information you wish to rev
eal. (And there are quieter places to share with understanding people, if you wa
nt to share non-publicly.)
This is another human dignity often trampled by the church: the right to disclos
e as much or as little as you wish, and still be welcomed, encouraged, supported
.
I've lost track of the number of times I've looked back and thought "I wish I'd
said: 'No, you don't need to know that.'"
Many people ask out of cluelessness or curiosity. Or a mistaken idea it will hel
p.
But it's so easy for excess information to be turned into a rod to beat people w
ith...
Brad Cecil,
I went through each and every email from that time. I never called you first of
all, that was a lie. I do not have one email from you. Not one. I emailed you le
aders to tell you this thing was off rails. And, do you care? Your partner is of
f rails? You did not respond. No one responded but Mark saying I was "paranoid."
"Shouting into the hurricane." The response? Mark Scandrette walking into my be
droom while I napping with my 3 year old, and in only a robe directing me to "pa
ck a bag."
ReliStuPhD, yes I meant a thank you to brad/futuristguy for the research he's do
ing and what he's writing about spiritual abuse. I have no idea who he is other
than what I've read here, one of his last posts actually...I haven't read all 40
0 or so posts. I've skimmed through and read a lot, but not all. The Brad I thin
k I might have met, is Brad Sargent. I was understanding that brad/futuristguy w
as maybe the two Brads (Cecil and Sargent) working together? Have I got it all w
rong?
I didn't say it, but hanks also to David Hayward for allowing this to happen her
e.
Anyway, for my story: I was involved in working with church planters over seas f
or 20 years. I was the "wife", at home, with 5 kids. But I was invested in all w
e did, every bit as much as my husband (Wolfgang Fernandez). We were with DAWN M
inistries (which no longer exists as such).
He had an affair, long term. He was forced to stop all ministry and go with me t
hrough intensive counseling because I eventually kicked him out of the house. He
was denying the affair at this point, and our colleagues at DAWN were giving hi
m the benefit of the doubt. During the counseling was when he finally confessed
to the affair. He said he wanted to save our marriage. I "forgave" him and conti
nued on with counseling with him. He continued on with his affair, all the time
claiming that he was not seeing the woman anymore. This was a lie, He never stop
ped seeing her. After 3 years of waiting, I finally figured it out that he had n
o intention of stopping this relationship. I filed for divorce. He refused to fi
le, because it was not "biblical". He insisted I had the right to file for divor
ce because he was committing the adultery, but he did not have the biblical righ
t to file. Even then, I knew his reasoning behind this was so that he could late
r claim that I was the one who wanted a divorce, and he was really trying to sav
e the marriage all along. But at this point, I didn't care anymore. He had told
me to my face that the only way for us to save our marriage, was for me to accep
t that his mistress was his best friend. He would not end his "friendship" with
her. And IF he ever happened to "slip up" again and have sex with her, then I wo
uld just have to forgive him again and again, each time.
He was fired the moment the affair became public. The leadership at DAWN did the
ir best with the situation they had. There were a lot of lies we were all trying
to wade through, so mistakes were made, but intentions were good on the part of
the DAWN leadership.
I've worked through forgiveness, for my own sake. But I don't trust a single wor
d he says. Those are two different things.
I'm not here to vent, or to look for validation. This happened 12 years ago. I a
m very happily remarried to a wonderful man. (I had never really understood befo
re what marriage could be!)
I share my story here because of what I have watched happen since I walked away
from that marriage. I love the Church. I spent the first 20 years of my adult li
fe ministering to and with church planters and pastors. Miraculously, God has ke
pt that fire burning in me. But it kills me to see this cancer still growing. I
get so angry when I see men like this continue on in ministry. There was never a
ny repentance in my story. I don't see repentance in these other stories I've re
ad here. And yet after a little time goes by, these men are "welcomed back into
the fold" as if nothing ever happened. Of the hundreds of pastors and leaders we
worked with, only two ever came to me afterwards to ask if I ever saw repentanc
e. All the others just welcomed this liar back into their fellowship and let him
resume teaching because they wanted to believe his lies about his "repentance".
All his "repentance" ever was, was to admit he had an affair (after the fact of
being caught in it), and say the words that he was sorry. He never stopped, not
once. I tried to tell them this, but I was labeled the unforgiving, unstable ex
-wife seeking revenge. Not in so many words. Not many said this to my face (only
one), but their actions of welcoming him back while holding me off at a distanc
e, spoke loud enough. In their defense, he traveled the world, meeting with each
one face to face to tell his story of repentance, while I was a single mom stuc
k at home raising the 5 kids he left behind. So many of them never got to hear m
y side of the story, only his. But it's not much of a defense, since this all ha
ppened in the age of the internet, where any one of them could have contacted me
to find out the truth. For a few years I tried to get the truth out there, but
it's exhausting to not be believed, again and again. I could never figure this o
ut....why was I the one being labeled as the bad guy, when clearly (and everyone
knew) he had been lying for years? Why were they believing him and not me?
What hurts the most now, is not the failed marriage. I got over that. It's a pit
y I wasted so many years of my life on him, and I hate that my kids all suffered
so much, but I am happy to be out of that toxic relationship. What hurts tremen
dously still, is watching all those good people out there, whom I considered my
best friends (leaders in the Church, world wide), who are still under his decept
ion. Or maybe I'm naive....maybe it is all a big cover up and they are purposefu
lly protecting him? I honestly don't think so. I think they just all believed hi
m, because who doesn't want to believe that God can change a life dramatically?
After all, these are people who I walked alongside as we talked of love and forg
iveness and reconciliation...But what kind of reconciliation is it to choose one
side because they are more beneficial to you, having the skills you need to pro
mote your own agenda, while leaving the person on the other side lying in the di
rt? Oh wait, I was useful to them too I guess....I could stay at home and care f
or all his kids while he continues to travel the world. But none of them needed
the relationship with me anymore.
My story is long and complicated, like Julie's and all the rest. Yeah, I got the
line about having a spiritual wife, and I was only the legal wife. I could tell
of things that would make your toes curl. And I'll answer any questions honestl
y. But my point here is not to bring up a lot of old dirt from that marriage. It
just to say that it IS all dirt. It's lies built upon lies, and those who do th
eir thing of "forgiveness and grace", without looking hard at the facts, are per
petuation this cancer. That's what makes me sick to my stomach.
I think that's you, for one, Andrew Jones (perpetuating this cancer). I applaud
you that you have had the guts to apologize to Julie here. And it must have been
hard to cut off relationship with Doug Pagitt....but I can't help but wonder, w
hy do you do all that, yet it's okay to keep up the buddy buddy status with Wolf
gang Fernandez? Okay, forgive him for the past, but he's always been a liar, sti
ll is. Is that really the kind of guy you want to hang out with and promote? Do
you think that I'm the one lying when I say he never, not once, cut off the rela
tionship with Vivien? Do you believe I would make up a story about him telling m
e that I would basically need to accept Vivien as his mistress in order for me t
o save our marriage? Do you honestly think he repented from any of that? The onl
y "apology" I ever got from him was once as I was crying. He said he was "sorry"
, and it was good for him "to see me cry". I should "do it more often because it
would help to heal". (He never saw me cry agin. I made sure of that.) That happ
ened just a few days after his big "deliverance" session in Spain with Wolfgang
Simson and his friends. He had comeback to "re-build our marriage" but what no o
ne knew at the time, was that he still had no intention of stopping the relation
ship with Vivien, he was just going through the motions for all of you and me. H
e was calling her again, the moment the plane hit the ground in Colorado.
So, why can't you see that you are helping to spread this cancer by protecting p
eople like this and presenting them as repentant and reformed? Why do you want t
o believe the liar, rather than the angry wife? Is anger in a situation like thi
s wrong? I don't think so. I freely admit that I'm angry that he gets away with
lying to you all, and I am left with a pile of dead and defunct relationships. I
've forgiven you for that (and all the others) but it doesn't mean that the situ
ation is okay. I'm also angry at you Andrew, that you went behind my back a coup
le of years ago, to make the arrangements to take my daughter on a gypsy trip ac
ross Europe, even after I found out and I pleaded with you to encourage her to s
tay at home for a few more months to get her stable on her new medication. Inste
ad, you believed Wolfgang over me, again, (though he's never the one who takes a
ny of his kids to ANY doctor appointments), that there was nothing wrong with he
r, it was all just in my head. I'm also angry at you because I offered a place f
or your family to stay the last time you were in the states, weeks before you we
re going to be in my area. I told you to just let me know when. I never heard ba
ck from you...that is, until the morning of the day you wanted to come and crash
....the SAME morning, it so happened, that I got out of the hospital; And when I
told you it would be better if you continued on to Denver with your other frien
ds, because I was just back from the hospital and not feeling too well yet, I ne
ver even heard back from you. No "thanks for the offer, even though it didn't wo
rk out". No concern for my health or what had happened. Maybe none of this is ou
tright "abuse", but I have defiantly been marginalized by you (and many others),
because I'm obviously not as useful to you anymore. I keep holding out, I keep
waiting, hoping that one day everything will come to light, and maybe you and so
me of these other people will realize what you've done and apologize. I don't ha
te you. But I don't trust you either. I know you've just had the wool pulled ove
r your eyes....but I'm sure that if I was someone else, (other than "the angry e
x-wife") I wouldn't have been treated so badly. And I have a hard time believing
you can be so blind to it all. It's time to wake up Andrew....wake up to ALL of
it!
I am willing to answer your questions Andrew (privately if you want). That is, i
f you are ready to wake up and hear the truth.
Sorry -- had to be out a lot of yesterday and for the upcoming week, and just st
arting to do catch-up stuff.
@Donna - Hello (again) as we may indeed have met, as I was in Austin several tim
es between about 2000 and 2003 for trainings. (see below.) I read just the begin
ning of your post and thought I should clear up confusion about identity.
Brad Sargent = brad/futuristguy = me. I started blogging in 2003 and have pretty
much used the brad/futuristguy handle for most online stuff as "futuristguy" ha
s been my blog name since about 2004 or so. While it may be confusing sometimes
for others, it's also been helpful for me to relocate comments I've made, scatte
red across various blogs. Anyway, hopefully that clears up that mystery.
Glad that some of what I've written has been of help. Some back story on my pers
pective about abuse. I survived a very nasty church split/takeover when I was 23
and it was a crisis of faith moment. Back then, I couldn't find ANY Christian b
ooks on spiritual abuse -- the first main ones (like *The Subtle Power of Spirit
ual Abuse* and *Toxic Faith*) wouldn't even be published until a dozen years lat
er. So pretty much all I had to sort things out were the Scriptures, a few frien
ds to talk with (many were traumatized by the split and would get freaked out, s
o we didn't talk much), and trying to follow the leading of the Spirit to learn
and discern. Survived it, but it was rough. So that's part of the "well of wound
s" that hopefully has led to something redemptive, and why I'm particularly pass
ionate about creating system resources to help move toward healthiness and susta
inability.
Back to Austin: I remember a few details of events from back then, but these day
s the connections between names and faces escape me. Anyway, do any of these sou
nd familiar? In about 2000/2001 I was in Austin to dialogue about emerging minis
try, and facilitate a "culture clash" simulation game based on values and belief
s of people from the kinds of "postmodern cultures" that I'd been interacting wi
th since the early 1990s. And then maybe a year or so later to do a session on l
earning styles and how to use the different ways God "wired" us to create strong
er teams for doing cultural field work for missional stuff and/or church plants.
And then the intergenerational WabiSabi forum in early 2003.
Will plan to read your post, Donna, and catch up with other most recent comments
soon as I can.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Kachinska October 2, 2014 at 3:34 pm
Gosh, Donna, I'm so sorry you went through that. You and Julie must be made of i
ron. I'm so so SO sorry that people claiming to represent someone noble and kind
(Jesus) treated you worse than shit :(
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Brad, It was an emerging ministry thing. I had 3 of my kids with me and could on
ly pop in and out of meetings. I don't remember the culture clash thing, but the
n there may have been a part we didn't stay for. I do remember about 5 groups cr
eating a worship space, 5 different rooms, and inviting the public in to go thro
ugh it all. That's the one I was a part of. I don't really remember you at all,
or anyone particularly from that time. I just remember your name, and I've heard
it a lot since.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
For the "pastor" who said this was a private family matter, let me educate you.
"Cluster B" personality disorders, including narcisissm, borderline, histrionic,
and anti-social, make up NINE PERCENT of the population.
Dang, that's a lot of people. But let's get specific.
The current population of the US, according to our friend Google, is 317 million
people.
At 9%, that means roughly 28 million people have these relationship-destroying d
isorders.
Now, if every single one of these people have
-2 parents
-1 child
-1 relationship partner (ever!)
-1 boss
-1 close friend
-1 co-worker
Then that means 199 million people in the US have a CLOSE or DAILY RELATIONSHIP
with someone who has a personality disorder!!!
This is not a private family matter!!! This is a freaking cancer that destroys o
ur lives, infests our churches, and lies to people about the very nature of God!
!! ROOT THAT STUFF OUT, and find a way to communicate w/ the church laity about
it---or face the consequences.
Like this thread.
Taylor Joy Young,
I have been accused (and yes, accused is the right word) multiple times of havin
g a personality disorder (despite a complete lack of any diagnosis), by people w
ho were completely unqualified. It's an unpleasant process every time.
I understand your passion to protect and care for people, and I'm going to assum
e that you're speaking in good faith.
But we don't need a witch hunt, or even a surgical removal of the people with ge
nuine, severe, unmanaged personality disorders. (Some of your metaphors might su
ggest these responses.)
Can I suggest instead:
If a person has any kind of issues that prevent them from caring for people (or
lead them to damage people), they must be removed from leadership (broadly const
rued) as a way of caring for them. (This isn't a punishment.) The scriptures are
pretty clear that family issues fall within this category, as do sustained pers
onality issues.
They should be encouraged to continue to attend church, again as a way of caring
for them.
They should be encouraged to seek appropriate help (diagnosis, professional assi
stance) as needed, as a way of caring for them.
There must then be a period of reflection for the person and the church. Years,
perhaps. (A year, at least!)
Then, there can be moves to verify the management of the person's condition, and
work out if it could be managed in a church leadership context, and, if so, whe
ther the church is willing to do so. Many churches will, wisely, choose not to g
o there.
Of course, we would all hope that it would never come to this - that people woul
d (be encouraged to) seek help early and often. But this is clearly not the case
.
I think you're right though: you don't love anyone by ignoring the fact that lea
ders are hurting people. (You'd think the church would have worked that out by n
ow )
Taylor Joy Young-You really get it! It is a cancer. The destruction and ruined r
elationships is so far reaching. When you put two of them in co-leadership and i
n "Christian" business together....stand back. Nothing but scorched earth remain
ing. Anything and anyone in their way will be steamrollered over and or exploite
d to their benefit.
Tim, thank you for responding so kindly. I am SO sorry that you were falsely acc
used, and I apologize for anything I said that may have triggered you.
However, your (kind, empathetic, caring) response demonstrates an unfortunate na
ivete about PD's. :(
They manipulate. They are masters of false repentance. They know how to turn on
tears, and minutes later, lash out. They require intensive, long-term therapy to
recover (a minimum of FOUR YEARS). They have a firm, entrenched belief that *ev
eryone else* is the problem, not them, which means that type of intense therapy
is rare. There are no medications for such false belief systems, though often an
underlying biological issue is the cause of the crappy perceptions.
If I sound clinical and detached, it's because I AM. I was raised by the fun-lov
ing family known as a "narcissistic/borderline" couple.
Rarely is someone with a personality disorder able to take serious responsibilit
y for their own actions. You are right in that they DO NOT need to be in leaders
hip--yet cluster B's have a knack for being high-functioning and charismatic. I
did not intend for my metaphors to imply a purge. Rather, I ACHE for the day whe
n the church as a whole understands the destructive nature of these PD's for wha
t they are. :(
Thanks for responding.

matybigfro October 2, 2014 at 6:01 pm
reading up on some of Donna's comment's and the similarities in the way's their
stories has been silenced and marginalized and it reminded me of the piece Steph
anie Drury at SCCL wrote on misogyny within the progressive church. I have to ad
mit I'd read allot of the arguments (I find allot of these movement relationship
dynamics fascinating from a sociological and psychological perspective as well
as having endured my own share of toxic faith communities that have left me with
a perverse fascination with researching what is going on).
I remember allot of the online scuffles that have been mentioned above, particul
arly clear in my memory was Tony's Where are the Women post and Stephany Drury's
continued calling out of him at SCCL, Becky Garrison's calling out Emergent and
then Outlaw Preachers played across a thousand blog comments and FaceBook and I
only caught a little of the heat from Bill and Bro Manyard but picked up allot
of the Fallout from Andrew Jones blogg int he aftermath.
I remember reading and often thinking Stephanie and Becky's criticisms too harsh
, too personal and too emotional. What I recognize now was the ingrained misogyn
y which discounts the testimony and accounts of women and favors the arguments o
f the men in the mix. I've apologized elsewhere but I feel here is also as good
as anywhere for that. I remember disagreeing at times with both of them online (
although sometimes also agreeing) I'm no-one and not even in the conversation an
ymore I don't believe and just spectate allot of what goes on these day's but I
wanna own my own misogyny as I continue to try and unpick and leave it behind. T
o those who i didn't hear or listen to well enough, I'm truly sorry.
What I think is equally important as the discussion of abuse should be the recog
nition and discussion about the completely ingrained misogyny within Christina C
ulture that is often a help maid to those committing this abuse. If we listened
to and respect women's voices as much as we did men (Danica illustrated so clear
ly above) then some of this would never have gone on as long as it has.
If a Woman voice and opinion was valued as much as a man's then a 'discernment'
process would never have been entered into without the presence of the Woman's t
estimony.
A Woman's pain would have been valued and listened to more than a man's continue
d productivity and usefulness, follow would have been committed to rather than l
eft up to others.
A Woman's continued cry's for redress, for recognition of her abuse and situatio
n would not have been repeatedly ignored or simply written off as 'crazyness'
This misogyny was clearly as present in EV as it was in MH and probably has been
here, only be naming and accepting that is the case can we hope to move on in a
way that is free from it's odious influence.
Julie--yes, I get it, and I'm so sorry for what you went through. :(
My mother: http://taylorjoyrecovers.wordpress.com/2014/04/15/dear-sheldon-a-stor
y-of-maternal-abuse/
My father: http://www.bpdcentral.com/blog/?The-Day-I-Realized-My-Father-Was-a-Na
rcissist-39
Likes(3)Dislikes(1)
Tim and Taylor-I too have compassion for this mental illness as it must be a liv
ing hell to be devoid of empathy. To have to live a life with a false persona be
cause deep down you have irreconcilable feelings of inadequacy. However, If one
is presented with the reality of such a condition and denies it, there is not a
lot bystanders can do. That is why I foolishly thought those is leadership would
do the right thing but instead they turned on me.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
AnImpartialObserver October 2, 2014 at 6:08 pm
Long-time lurker, first time poster here. I just wanted thank Julie for being so
forthright in sharing so many painful personal experiences with a blog full of
perfect strangers. I'm sure it can't be easy. I also want to thank you for bring
ing into the light so much that has remained obscure over the years. I followed
all this closely back 5-6 years ago when it first happened, but not being direct
ly connected to any of the significant players, and with only whispered rumors c
irculating on blogs, there was so much that just remained vague and uncertain. A
s an outside internet observer, it was hard to piece together what exactly had g
one on and no one seemed to know the full story.
To be honest, I'm still finding it a little difficult to put all the pieces toge
ther though. Much of what you've said so far here has come only in snippets and
scattered comments, without the whole narrative laid out in order, so I'm having
trouble piecing together the timeline of events. (Have you considered starting
your own blog where you could tell the whole thing in order? That would be so he
lpful!) Anyhow I'm so grateful to you for being willing to put it all out there.
Now perhaps we can finally get the full story! Would you mind if I asked you a
few questions to help us sort out the details, sequence, etc.?
1) When I was digging into this whole thing 4 or 5 years ago I ended up coming a
cross a copy of the email you sent to a few dozen emergent leaders back in July
of 2008 asking for their help in getting Tony home from the Rolling Roadshow. (T
he one Darren King above mentioned receiving I believe. Don't know if you still
have a copy, but I'd be happy to post a copy here of the text I've obtained if y
ou think it would be helpful!) In that letter or perhaps a follow up to it, you
mentioned that you and Tony had already been living separately for four years by
that point. You have also mentioned in this thread that Tony met with a divorce
lawyer sometime around that same time (i.e. summer of 2008). I guess what I'm w
ondering is at what point you or he actually filed for divorce? I am I correct t
o assume that from 2004-2008 you were separated but both still had hopes of rest
oring the marriage? At what point did you and/or he give up on that hope and dec
ide to actively pursue divorce instead? I'm especially wondering about this in r
elation to the timeline of Tony's relationship with Courtney. At what point did
he meet her and at what point do you suspect that an affair began? What, for ins
tance, was the date on the flirtatious emails between them that you've mentioned
? To the best of your knowledge, at what point did people like Doug or any of th
e people on the "discernment group" become aware of their relationship (and did
everyone know at first, or just Doug)? And at what point in this whole process d
id Doug make that "spiritual wife" comment to you? Was it before or after the di
vorce proceedings began? Any specifics you can give would be so very helpful in
making sense of the conflicting accounts of all this that I've found out there for instance, the folks who insist that Tony and Courtney's relationship didn't
begin until after the divorce was final, or at least already in process. Any li
ght you can shed would be very helpful, especially in piecing together who knew
what, when, and who, if anyone, was possibly involved in covering things up. Tha
t's a serious charge and I think it's important for all of us to know more. Than
ks!
2) In that same email that you sent to the emergent leaders in 2008, you said "I
need a goodwill offering from [Tony] by an ACTION. I have had 11 years of empty
words. the only way I am not going to throw in the marriage towel is if he cuts
bait NOW inconveniences his sponsors, publisher, groupies, the ego of Doug and
get home to fix his family in a state of shear devastation." This seems to match
what Brad Cecil said about the request for intervention coming directly from yo
u, and the only request on your part at the time being to get Tony to leave the
tour early and come home to Minnesota. I can understand why you would be dismaye
d about not being included in the meeting where he and the others met with Tony
to convince him to do exactly that. After they responded to this initial email d
id you specifically ask to be included in their conversation with Tony or were t
hey under the impression that all you wanted from them was to talk to Tony and g
et him to come home?
3) In that same email you also said "I was never invited in the [Emergent] club
and my children and I attend Catholic church and I am their spiritual educator a
t home." Forgive me if I'm misreading you here, but that makes it sound like you
weren't ever really a part of the emergent movement yourself and that you atten
ded a different church than Tony at the time. Am I reading that wrong? In this t
hread you have repeatedly referred to Doug Pagitt as your pastor. Since much of
your obvious hurt seems to stem from Doug's actions too, I was hoping you could
clarify when exactly you attended Solomon's Porch? At what point was he your pas
tor and when did that relationship end? Was it before you and Tony separated in
2004, or were you still a part of Doug's church after that?
4) In this thread you've both said that Tony has threatened to take the kids awa
y from you and also said that he didn't want custody and that you had to force h
im into a standard visitation schedule. Was that a change over time? Did he star
t out not wanting the kids but then change his mind later and demanded to have t
hem exclusively? Forgive me if all that is too painful for you to recount, but i
f you could lay out more clearly how all that fits together, I think we would al
l be grateful.
5) I definitely agree that the main issue in this thread is not the details of y
our divorce (so please forgive me for wanting to get some of those facts straigh
t first), but rather what you've seen as the intentional cover-up of Tony's affa
ir and gaslighting campaign by Emergent leadership. That's a really big deal! I
guess what I'm not clear on is what exactly is the evidence that there was a "de
liberate and coordinated" campaign to that effect. We've already seen Brad Cecil
, Brian McLaren, and Danielle Shroyer explicitly say here that there was no such
intent or campaign on their part. I've really appreciated the effort here at th
is blog to not dismiss the direct testimony of people when speaking their truth
(yourself foremost among them!) so I'm inclined to take them at their word. Todd
Hiestand and Mike Morrell did confess to having used the "bat shit crazy" term,
but I don't recall them saying that they did it as part of any deliberate campa
ign - just that they were passing on hearsay or perhaps reflecting their own opi
nions at the time. So could you clarify who exactly was involved in this deliber
ate campaign and how you heard that it was a coordinated effort and not just the
usual spread of gossip and hearsay? I think this is probably the most important
issue under discussion at this blog, so I'd like for all of us to be on the sam
e page about what the facts and evidence are for this conspiracy. Thank you in a
dvance for clearing this up!
I hope that's not too many questions to barrage you with. These were just the th
ings I've been wondering about as I try to piece together all the various things
I've read here and around the blogosphere over the years. As a concerned and cu
rious observer I am very glad for the opportunity to clear up all the misunderst
anding and confusion that has surrounded these events for the past six years. Ag
ain, thank you for being so open and honest about all of this. It has been refre
shing!
Bam! matybigfro! Thank you for seeing what is so obvious and yet so utterly deni
ed.
"If a Woman voice and opinion was valued as much as a man's then a 'discernment'
process would never have been entered into without the presence of the Woman's
testimony.
A Woman's pain would have been valued and listened to more than a man's continue
d productivity and usefulness, follow would have been committed to rather than l
eft up to others.
A Woman's continued cry's for redress, for recognition of her abuse and situatio
n would not have been repeatedly ignored or simply written off as 'crazyness'
This misogyny was clearly as present in EV as it was in MH and probably has been
here, only be naming and accepting that is the case can we hope to move on in a
way that is free from it's odious influence."
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Oh, one more thing. You've mentioned having a copy
nment group sent you, and Brad Cecil has suggested
ul for you to post that here. Would you be willing
t would help us all understand better what exactly
s. Thanks!
of the letter that the discer

that it would be really helpf
to do that for us? I'm sure i
was going on behind the scene
Likes(7)Dislikes(9)
AnImpartialObserver-I think writing my story would be the best way to get all of
the details accurate and would need to go back and refer to emails. Who are you
? If you have that detail I guess I would like to know who I am answering to. Or
are you not so impartial? I can tell you that we were never separated. He was p
olice escorted out of the home. right before Labor day and the first day of scho
ol for the kids. (Nice, I know). Our divorce was November 16, 2009. Doug WAS my
Pastor but I had begin to realize this was all becoming bullshit and began atten
ding mass with my parents as support as he was mostly an absent father and husba
nd at that point. I sought Doug as my Pastor not knowing he would use what I kne
w to cover his own ass. I told him about the EV website and then Steve Knight wa
s asked to scrub it and the HE did it himself. I do think Brad Cecil was played
and maybe the others but I am 100% confident Doug Pagitt sat on information and
needed me to check in to a hospital to make the affair, divorce rationalized. HE
knew fully. The previous December 2007 there was an on line exchange between th
e two about her new website...."Your opinion is the one I care most about." "It
is beautiful like you." I was told I was "insecure, paranoid, just good friends.
" Then the frequent trips to Dallas and the new persona...."they" say when your
husband is having an affair there are the top ten signs....he had every one. Sud
den change in music taste, started dressing like a cowboy (seriously), locked hi
s cell phone, slammed the laptop down when I came in the room, started locking h
is laptop in the car. He admitted it in the psych eval and custody eval, "I'm ca
sually dating a couple women." So, my attorney sopoened her in Dallas, Texas dur
ing Discovery to find out information and about assets. A lawyer for HER was hir
ed and an Injunction to have it stopped. Someone didn't want anyone to be asking
questions down in Dallas. But the cell phone records confirmed daily contact be
tween the two beginning May 2008. The canceled check I have made out to Suzanne
Gradnchamp his lawyer was dated June. So, her lied to the 6 about "doing everyth
ing in his power to save his marriage." They were played. I'd be pissed too. But
not at ME at the person who played me. When his lawyer called my lawyer to sett
le he was spending a large amount of time in Dallas. So he said he would give me
sole physical and sole legal. I actually said NO because I wanted to keep him o
n the hook for being a dad. Then to get at me anyway he possibly can he launched
multiple runs at flipping custody. Claiming me an unfit mother. Those were all
denied. Then his latest launch is I am a criminal. His pathology makes him relen
tless! I think he should focus on his spiritual mate. If I were her I would so c
learly see his inability to let me go. I have big reasons to distrust his world
so I wonder strongly of you may be one cleverly disguised to probe. Who are you?
Obviously close enough to be privy to an email.
Impartial? David Hayward has the discernment letter and all supporting evidences
. This comment section doesn't take attachments. You sound like you don't believ
e me or that I have lied in some way. That is perfectly fine with me because I k
now that I have not. The people I respect and care about have been given copies
of supporting evidences. Since you are not even willing to introduce yourself as
a real person, I distrust your probes. My instincts have become pretty good.
"Living separately" metaphorically because his ridiculous travel as a minor cele
brity xian speaker author. We were never separated. He was police escorted out b
efore school 2008. Is this Courtney? Carla? See, what I DO know is that he is ve
ry good at getting others to do things for him while sitting back and seeming bl
ameless. I will go over each line item for you but I need time to answer each an
d every question. I'm afraid your un-impartial is showing.
Bill Kinnon October 2, 2014 at 7:09 pm
You sound anything but impartial, Animpartialobserver. Perhaps if you reveal who
you actually are, rather than pretend impartiality, your questions might be wor
th a response.
philosophicalpastor October 2, 2014 at 7:22 pm
AnImpartialObserver... my ass. As I read your lengthy deposition-style post I fe
lt like vomiting. What royal "we" are you referring to who would so "appreciate"
Julie getting on the defensive and offering fact-check details ? Good grief. I
get that all are welcome here, so whatever....but I wouldn't trust you with my p
hone number.
Actually I prefer Philosophical Pastor's response more than mine! :)
Becky Garrison October 2, 2014 at 7:35 pm
@impartialobserver is employing the same tactics the emergent boys used to cyber
bully me. Nothing new. It's how they roll. SNAFU. :)
@matybigfro Apology accepted. A major factor in my admitted outbursts was incred
ulity that people I thought were friends kept pulling Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde moves
after they got a taste of the media spotlight. As I had covered Xn carnage for t
he Door from 1994 till the rag shut down the website in 2008, I "thought" (silly
me) that they'd welcome my critique so they could avoid becoming like those bra
nded Christian celebrities/religious rock stars we had both satirized only to be
come that which they once despised once they hit the author/speaker circuit. Als
o, as noted, I apologized for those times when my anger got the better of me but
in hindsight, I see I was exhibiting signs of prologued trauma and abuse not si
gns of mental illness (like most of NYC I got tested post 9/11 and there's no si
gns of mental illness though my childhood growing up with two alcoholic parents
who died before I was 18 does produce some triggers that I now know how to manag
e so I don't let my anger get the better of me).
I would ask though that I not be lumped with Stephanie/SCCL - while her critique
s of Tony are spot on, she has gone gonzo on those women who dared to also criti
que Pete and Jay especially during the whole Phyllis Tickle debacle - these thre
e boys' history of on and offline bullying is godawful. You can't separate one f
rom the other - it all needs to be exposed and called on the carpet. I know all
too well how difficult it is to realize that someone who was once a peer and per
haps even a friend is now part of this bully brigade. It truly is akin to watchi
ng someone succumb to drugs/alcohol as the person you once knew simply isn't the
re anymore. And if you don't see what I'm referencing, it's because they're putt
ing on their Dr. Jekyll face hoping you'll continue to endorse and support them.
But watch because the moment you critique their Xn crapola Mr. Hyde comes out w
ith a vengeance.
Speaking of coming out, notice all the US emergent players and those who ply the
ir wares who are silent during this debate. Also, be sure to check out the fundi
ng streams of those offering half-ass apologies, non-apologies and gaslighting J
ulie (and a few others on this thread). That speaks volumes.
Nate October 2, 2014 at 7:47 pm
Nate is not my name. I don't want to use my name because I'm afraid of being sue
d. I can't afford it. I have been observing this thread for awhile. I live in th
e Twin Cities and know several of the parties involved. I am very familiar with
this situation and I believe Julie. Her name has been smeared by people who need
to discredit her at all costs in order to preserve their status as "religious"
leaders and to protect their livelihoods. She has every right to be angry. She h
as been treated horribly by folks who claim to be followers of Christ. It is sic
k and wrong. I finally decided to weigh in after seeing the post by AnimpartialO
bserver. His post points to how evil these people are and the lengths to which t
hey will go in order to perpetuate the lies. AnimprtialObsever is one of them. H
ow do I know? I know because his questions are grounded in a false narrative I h
ave heard repeated over and over again ever since Julie was identified as one wh
o might cause them trouble. These people are sick. They have maintained control
over the story through intimidation and threats and leveraged their platforms an
d status to lend credibility to the lies. I'm glad Julie has finally found a pla
ce where her side of the story can be told. I believe her.
Thank you, Nate. I truly appreciate your support. It is the good an decent peopl
e that can smell the stink a mile away. Ironically, the ones who refuse to belie
ve this....I could not care less about because I have absolutely zero respect fo
r them or their theology. Where is the fruit? It's not there. Again, the litmus
test for a narcissist or a highly dysfunctional interlocked system (xian author/
speaker/conference circuit minor celebrities) is the ability to admit wrong, apo
logize and move forward. They. Can't. Do. It.
Andrew Jones October 2, 2014 at 8:24 pm
MatyBigFro? Haven't heard that in a while. How's the fro?
Hi Donna, thanks for putting your story out. There's a few issues here but let m
e try to tackle the main ones.
Firstly, Denver. Thanks for your generous offer to stay at your home in 2010. I
am sorry I am such a bad communicator. I just looked up those (unanswered) Faceb
ook messages and they are there in my box, although they say Facebook and not Do
nna so i can see why i might have not noticed them - esp. since we were driving
across USA with Debbie and the 4 kids in a station wagon and were struggling for
wifi and electricity. As you know, we had accepted an offer from someone else a
nd chose to stay there rather than

ch wears Debbie thin. And since we
, we were pretty exhausted and not
I am afraid I am still not good at
rea. Pray for me.
doing the rounds among the Denver crowd - whi

were living out of our backpacks for 7 months
functioning well on the road.
communications and still mess it up in this a
Secondly, Your daughter. Like other missionary kids we have taken and sponsored
to travel with us, we do not take them unless they are 18 and have their parents
permission. We felt from email correspondence that we had this from both of you
. And she was 18. If you remember, I advised going slower and later, and also ad
vised the postponement of her trip which is why she did not come to Germany but
rather to Hungary some months later. We chose Hungary because I promised Wolf th
at we would pick her up in a safe city and safe country - which is why the whole
team was hanging out in Budapest. The possible medical emergencies you outlined
were helpful and Debbie (who was an RN and high-risk child specialist) felt she
could handle it. Thankfully, no such emergencies arose and she had a wonderful
time. It was a joy to have her. Actually she FB ed us a few minutes ago and wa
nts to spend time with us next week in Portland. She and our daughter Liz are su
ch good friends. We thank God for her.
Thirdly, Wolf. Yes, the bastard cheated on you and then lied to his mission acco
untability group and then went back to his vomit. Cant tell you what a disappoin
tment that was to us all. No excuse. He called me on the phone to confess and to
ld me everything. Not only did he break up his family, but he also really screwe
d up some projects we were working with and gave our organization a BIG BLACK EY
E!
Of course this is not on the same level as your own painful process and the fami
ly break-up and the kids. I only add it to say that Wolf messed things up for a
lot of us, not just your family.
We were aware of his repentance and restoration process including time away from
ministry and intense counseling in Spain, etc. A few years later, when the rest
oration process was more complete, he offered the full story to both Debbie and
I and spoke for an hour. Debbie says he offered
too much
but you should kn
ow that he took full responsibility and never ever EVER hinted it was your fault
. He never even said anything bad about you or negative in any way. We never eve
n heard an excuse for his sin, only brokenness and shame. He never said anything
about spiritual wife or legal wife - I would have hit the roof and slapped him
silly if he said that in the same way I exploded at Tony and Doug when I heard i
t. The spiritual wife heresy is what split one of the emerging groups in Europe
and is a sore point for me.
Yes, Wolf is back to ministry now and in my opinion he is less of an asshole, mo
re broken, more humble, and still shamed at how he destroyed his family, but als
o happy to have his hand to the plow. i believe his repentance was genuine and h
ave observed godly behavior in his life. I stand by him. My wife believes him an
d trusts him and she is a better judge of character than I. [When she met Mark D
riscoll in 1997 she said he was a
future cult-leader
and she was never hap
py about me hanging out with the Young Leaders Group.]
So, even if it is still a bit messy, there is a place for fallen broken men to g
et up again and make something of their crappy lives, even for them to enter int
o God s service once more, albeit on a different level or with a different pos
ture. I see Wolf as one of those people.
But Donna if you have more information that you feel I should look at, please em
ail it or just post it below, I am sure David has more space on this long thread
which is proving to be a safe place for so many to tell their stories.
My apologies for not responding sooner. Was out taking my kids to sports practic
es. I didn't introduce myself because frankly I'm not really anyone... I mean no
t anyone important in these circles. Not a blogger. Not a pastor. Barely even a
churchgoer anymore. My name is Alex though, and I have been an observer and part
icipant in emergent stuff for a long time, but never in a central way, just some
one who reads and watches and shows up at events occasionally. I casually know o
ne of the people you sent that email to back in 2008 (was in a cohort with him a
t the time), so when all of this stuff started to come out around then I asked h
im if he knew anything. He forwarded that email to me but said that since he had
never met you and you had just emailed him out of the blue, that that was all h
e really knew about the situation. Like I said before, at the time I read as muc
h as I could find on blogs and such, but all I could find out about it all was f
rom vague online comments and that email. Pretty much forgot about it until I sa
w this thread, so I went back and dug up all that old information. It was hard t
o reconcile some of what I saw in those other sources with what you were saying
here, so I figured I'd just ask for your version of events directly. I'm sorry i
f that came across as threatening or intrusive. You've been so open thus far abo
ut everything that I didn't think you'd mind shedding a little more light for th
ose of us who are still confused. My apologies.
But thank you for answering some of those questions already! It is helpful to ge
t a little more details about the timeline of events. I agree, it definitely see
ms like the two of them had some kind of flirtation going on for most of 2008. I
still do wonder who else knew about it and when.
And thanks for clarifying about the living separately for four years thing. I di
dn't realize from the email I saw that you were speaking metaphorically. I guess
I had wondered if the people who defended Tony and Courtney's relationship were
working with an earlier date of when you and he had split, so your clarificatio
n is immensely helpful. Thank you for that.
If you do still feel like answering any of my other questions, I'm most interest
ed in #5. Like I said (and I think most here would agree with me) the possibilit
y of a deliberate conspiracy/cover-up by Emergent leaders is the most troubling
thing that I've heard here so far. Any specific evidence you can point to for th
at would be very appreciated!
-Alex
Likes(5)Dislikes(2)
AndrewThis reply reminds me why you have always had a special place in my heart. My bi
ggest regret is that we have never met over these long years.
Blessings!!!
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Alex, Thank you for being transparent. Those involved did a really shitty job ha
ndling it when I reached out. It appears they cannot even offer the smallest apo
logy for the mishandling of a "discernment" without me present. They keep saying
I asked for one. Who would do that without myself present or on a conference ca
ll. Which was my first red flag. If someone reached out to me I would respond...
.I certainly would not give them the silent treatment or a one line email, "I am
concerned by your level of paranoia." "We are gravely concerned about your abil
ity to care for your children." Did they conspire to cover up? They can only ans
wer that for themselves. Either Danielle Shroyer is the worlds most unobservant
person ever, or she's lying about what went on under her nose, in her church wit
h those two. Journey church was his dissertation church. Many visits. Lots of wi
ning and dining and poker nights. They met in 2004. She came to a BBQ at my home
. She commented on his now deleted old blog...flirty about the "sassy new friend
s I met in Dallas at Journey church." She is written about on page 198 of the Di
spatches from the Emergent Frontier. Doug knew. He accidentally spilled the bean
s that he knew. I don't know about Brian McLaren, Mike King or Brad Cecil but I
can tell you one of those men was also accused of having an affair with a woman
in his congregation. I can also tell you about a widely known Emergent-type auth
or speaker who it is rumored spoke at Mars Hill Seminary and slept with a semina
ry student in his down time. So, why would these people want this shut down too?
Seems obvious to me. The letter said, "We want you to immediately and voluntari
ly check into a hospital." Isn't that a weird response to help, I think there is
something seriously wrong going on with my husband! Whether it was knowing or u
nknowing....I'll never know. Danielle, Doug and said subject....absolutely.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
I love Andrew Jones. He makes me believe again.
Thank you for those details. Feel free to share more specifics about those other
folks you mentioned too if you can. I don't know a whole lot about the behind t
he scenes of emergent stuff so all of this is still a little vague for me. My ap
ologies - maybe it's already common knowledge for the rest of ya'll. Who else ha
d an affair with a woman in his congregation? Who was sleeping with a seminary s
tudent? If you're going to bring stuff like that up, you might as well name name
s, right? :)
Likes(4)Dislikes(8)
Oh, and David Hayward, since Julie said she can't post the discernment letter he
re but that you had a copy of it, would be willing to copy and paste the text of
it here? I still think it would be helpful to have all the data we have here in
front of us. Whatever you can do. Thanks!
Likes(6)Dislikes(3)
What happens to us is our story, it isn't gossip. But Julie, for what it's worth
, my gut tells me that the two rumors you mentioned several comments ago probabl
y stepped over the line UNLESS something about those other stories directly conn
ects with and affects you and your story ...
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Animpartial Alex....I don't feel comfortable, as I don't trust you. You seem a l
ittle too eager and interested if you know what I mean? I emailed last week the
letter to all of the 6 Emergent leaders. Ask your friend to post it. Or, you can
ask one of them to post it.
The people whose opinion I care most about have it.
I am writing my story and will have it in there as well as other corroborating e
vidences. Wait for the self published ebook. Not that I would expect anyone to b
uy it, but because I want my kids to have it when they are older and asked what
happened. All emails, hospital records, doctors follow up notes, the discernment
letter, the saved Emergent Village Bio page and posts and cross posts before th
ey were deleted, the sex emails, the psych eval and the custody evaluation.
Do I need to post it for you? No.

You can choose to believe me or not. I really don't care. This has been catharti
c and I feel truly supported by amazing people who recognize the truth and stand
up for it....but I grow weary and this has been about a month and I got shit to
do.
Donna, I feel your pain. If Andrew and Debbie state that there really was an hon
est come clean full and detailed account with genuine remorse, that says somethi
ng. I know God can redeem the ones courageous enough to be broken and fall on th
eir knees and ask for forgiveness. It's the sick ones that can't I have low tole
rance for. Of course, he should ask for forgiveness from you and your children.
I understand all too well. Peace to us both for surviving that crap! And peace f
or our kids who never asked for any of this.
I also have an unsettled feeling, Alex/AnImpartialObserver, about see a smiley f
ace after asking for such details. You seem informed on a lot of things, but tha
t emoticon doesn't help my sense of trust about the what and why ...
Brad-Yes, they may have crossed over the line my mentioning the two other instan
ces of Emergent leaders behaving badly, but it is all related as this culture ha
s accepted this as okay. They have looked the other way. I do have more info on
both of those instances, that I will not get into. There is a much larger story
here. It is about this culture that grew out of Leadership Network, Emergent, Ou
tlaw Preacher, JoPa Productions, Cana Initiative...same leadership at the top aw
are of mental illness, improprieties, spiritual wife garbage and people treated
like crap, and they just keep right on selling those books, taking the $200 per
person conference fee, and sweep it all under the rug hoping nobody asks about t
he large lumps.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Rick October 2, 2014 at 10:00 pm
Also bit uneasy about AnImpartialObserver's request. Not something most would re
quest in a public forum like this -- an certainly not a request that one should
fulfill.
kate willette October 2, 2014 at 10:03 pm
Animpartial Observer @ 6:21 pm reads like it was written by Eddie Haskell from L
eave It to Beaver.
" Typically, Eddie would greet his friends' parents with overdone good manners a
nd often a compliment such as, "That's a lovely dress you're wearing, Mrs. Cleav
er." However, when no parents were around, Eddie was always up to no good . . .
"
David Hayward October 2, 2014 at 10:11 pm
Animpartial Observer: You, like so many, fail to understand the nature of this p
ost and comments. I have stated repeatedly that this is simply a safe space for
people to share their stories. It's not a courtroom. It's not a deposition. It's
just a room where people's voices are neither censored or censured. Simple as t
hat! Nakedpastor isn't here to take one person's side over another. It is here a
s a place for people to meet and converse and together arrive at truth and recon
ciliation. What I find fascinating, though, is that as people tell their stories
, discerning eyes can detect the thread of truth that is weaving its way through
the stories and making itself more evident.
So, no, I will not publish any documents or personal correspondences people shar
e with me outside this blog. They are not the point. That the silenced are givin
g voice to their stories is the greatest reward for me, and it should be for you
.
I hope that helps you get an idea of what's happening here.
Andrew,
Denver: Since it had only been that morning that you had asked to "crash" at our
house, I would have expected you to look for an answer to your question. I appr
eciate the apology, but I don't think you would have been so flippant about answ
ering Wolfgang or others of your closer friends. I so looked forward to being ab
le to spend time with you, then I was sick, then you ignored me...after being ma
rginalized by so many already, that hurt. I accept your apology. (But please sto
p using the "poor communication" excuse, and do something to change this. It's a
sorry excuse for someone who is connecting with people all over the world.)
My daughter: She LOVES your family. She loved spending time with you all. But sh
e HAD hoped to get more out of her time with you. She had hoped she could learn
more from you personally about what you did. She was disappointed in that. I do
remember that in the end I was able to send Debbie info on her condition and I a
m glad for that, but what a stressful thing to do, when I never agreed that she
should go in the first place. Yes she had reached the magic age of 18. Otherwise
I would have absolutely refused. I'm glad she didn't have a breakdown. I still
disagree that it was the right thing to do at that point in time. I was left out
of the conversation until 3 days before she left. That was wrong. She avoided a
catastrophe and I was glad for that, but I do believe she might be better off t
oday if she had stayed put for a while and worked through some things at home fi
rst. By the way, check your messages from her. She lives in the San Fransisco Ba
y Area, not Portland. Michael Lives in Portland though....did you mean him? Or m
aybe she wants to travel with you up this way to see YOUR daughter. Just CHECK s
ince you're not so good at communication.
Wolfgang: Yes he seems better. Sometimes, in someways. But if you believe you've
heard his full restoration story....you are sadly mistaken I am sure. What make
s you think you can trust the story of a liar? If he had truly repented, and tru
ly been restored, wouldn't I have been a part of that restoration? Even if it wa
s just him writing me a letter to apologize and confess to all the lies? Are you
thinking that his "repentance and restoration" started in Spain? Because if tha
t's what you believe, it is a load of bunk. You believe him now. You also believ
ed him before it all hit the fan. I believed him too. I believed him for a year
and a half each time he told me he had cut all ties with Vivien. Each time he to
ld me that, it was a lie. I would LOVE to hear his restoration story. But I bet
I never will because it's probably full of lies and he knows I'd see right throu
gh them.
What IS restoration to you anyway? Of course I don't want the marriage restored.
But it sure would have been nice to be able to have a dad to help raise my kids
. He's never been that. He's been the santa clause who takes Zak a couple of tim
es a year. The last two summers I have asked him to keep him all summer and give
me a rest. No. He never has time for that. He still breaks promises to his kids
. A lot. My Daughter, the one who loves you guys a lot, did you know she's homel
ess right now? Did you know Wolfgang kicked her out of his house two weeks after
she moved in with him, because she hadn't found a job in those first two weeks?
You know, she was just 20 years old and had just moved across the country to be
with him. She hasn't been able to make it. She's need help, all year but he's t
oo busy with his new family and his new wife wants nothing to do with her. Oh ye
ah, you might have heard his version of the story, but he's a liar. He covers hi
s tracks. Yes, I'd say you are right to say it's still messy.
He may not be as bad as he once was, it's not that I don't believe someone can b
e restored to ministry. He's just not that person. Not now, maybe never. He's be
en a terrible father. Yet he pretends to be a "father to the fatherless". That's
why the church as a whole is in such a mess, you let guys like him back into th
e pulpit thinking it's all okay. It's not. God wants this stuff cleaned up.
Andrew, I appreciate you. I say these things because you are probably in a posit
ion to make changes that matter and I believe you want to do what's right. But y
ou've been so wrapped up in this shit for so long, I don't think that you can sm
ell it when it's right under your nose.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Fair enough. I guess I misunderstood. There's still so much about all this that
is unclear to me. So many of these comments seem to make vague allusions to inci
dents that I know nothing about, and yet they are offered as examples in some la
rger narrative. I guess I'm just confused because I don't understand the referen
ces and thus don't know exactly what narrative I'm being asked to accept. In the
work I do I'm required to always verify my sources, so that's all I was asking
for here. I'd like to be able to see for myself the things of which Julie and ot
hers have spoken. I apologize if that offends.
Likes(6)Dislikes(6)
I'm also not sure why it's okay for Julie and others to mention these other scan
dals, but it's not okay for me to ask them to be more specific. If this thread r
eally is only about letting people speak their own truth, and not about exposing
the bad behavior of the emergent leadership more broadly, then why even bring t
hose stories up in the first place? That she and other have done so must have mi
sled me into thinking this thread's purpose was something other than what you've
said it is David. I thought it was a place where I could finally get some answe
rs about all this shadowy, behind the scenes stuff that apparently has been goin
g on for years. I'm disappointed to see that it's not. But again my apologies fo
r my misunderstanding.
Likes(8)Dislikes(9)
AnImpartialObserver / Alex, some specific hints on this kind of conversation:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
nd
People own their own story, and get to make decisions on their own privacy.
Ask once, then leave it the person to answer.
If someone declines, don't keep mentioning it!
Don't ask others to do what someone else has refused to do.
This is an ongoing conversation and story. Incomplete information is normal a
expected.
6. The repetition of rumours is gossip. A collection of stories can help show a

pattern. The difference is subtle, and often unclear, but it's important. (And n
ames aren't needed to demonstrate a pattern.)
7. When you're hanging out with deconstructing people, any claim to be "impartia
l" tends to land somewhere between confronting and silly. (Or were you being iro
nic?)
8. Finally, while apologies are nice, if you can see what you're doing is annoyi
ng people, it's best just to stop. Then no apologies will be needed.
This isn't an attempt at setting the rules for everyone in this conversation - I
'm just trying to help clarify for you what some of the existing conventions are
.
P.S. You have come across to me as being quite demanding. I have no desire to ma
ke someone adopt a particular tone before I'll listen to them. But please consid
er whether your expectations are realistic, particularly given that Julie has be
en more than forthcoming, with a multitude of details, especially for a public f
orum.
Accept whatever narrative you want. No one is asking you to choose a narrative.
There has been a narrative proliferated by the ones with the microphone and the
audiences and now Donna, Julie, LostVoice, Chuck, Andrew, Mike, Nate, Darren, Pa
t, Jenell and many others are sharing in this safe space their stories if what t
hey experienced and heard and witnessed. You are doing a really lousy job at bei
ng an impartial observer FYI. Ask my son about the night dad threw mom across th
e room. Ask my daughter how she ran and hid under her bed and for months when I
could not find her she was in her room under her bed. Ask my youngest about thin
king his dad was dead because he went MIA for months in Texas without a word or
penny for his family he abandoned. "Mom, did Daddy die?" Kinda done with you She
lley Pagitt or whomever you really are. Do you live in Minneapolis? Come over an
d I'll give you 10 minutes to look at my corroborating evidence. But there is no
evidence for the deep emotional scars my children bare.
"Alex",
(Quotes as I doubt it's your real name), why do you personally have a need to "g
et some answers"?
This is not about you... unless, of course, it is.
Thanks for the advice Tim. And no "impartial" was not meant to be ironic. It was
just a reference to the fact that since I have no direct connections to any of
these people, I really have no skin in the game - no side to take. I am a journa
list by trade (though NOT doing a story on this... please don't assume that!), s
o I was just doing what I do in hopes of piecing together a more coherent story.
Even after 600+ comments I still don't feel like I have a clear picture of what
exactly happened. But I suppose I'll just have to wait for Julie's e-book. I lo
ok forward to buying/reading it!
Likes(6)Dislikes(7)
That's a fair question Bill. To be honest, I'm not really sure why I want to kno
w more. Probably just a personality quirk - when I get interested in a topic I c
an get a little obsessive about pursuing it, want to know everything I can about
it. Comes in handy for my work but obviously can be quite annoying in other set
tings. Sorry about that. Don't mind me. I was honestly just curious. I'll do my
best to let it go now.
Likes(6)Dislikes(5)

You just said you were in an Emergent co-hort and that email you quoted was only
sent to the 6....not buying it. Hell, you could be Doug Pagitt. I just invited
you to interview me. What more do you want other than to just be insensitive and
harassing and use gas lighting tactics? So familiar.
Since we are fully transparent, Alex. What is your last name? I provided mine. A
nd, since you are a journalist I am curious what type of stuff you write and for
whom? Thanks for answering my question.
Likes(8)Dislikes(3)
Julie - I was in a cohort off and on for a few years around 2007-2009. I think y
ou must have emailed the guy I knew, the cohort leader, at some point because he
had a copy of that email which he passed on to me. Not sure if it's the same on
e you're thinking of because there were more than six names attached to it - 14
names to be precise. If you want I could copy the full text here so we can deter
mine if it's the same email or a different one. But I really don't want to keep
being a pest about this. More than willing to just let it drop.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Sorry, I didn't catch your last name?
Likes(7)Dislikes(2)
Ah, yes, I see. Now it's my turn to be lumped in with all the "villains" on this
thread too. Sorry, but when you put it that way, it doesn't really make me incl
ined to want to share more about myself with you. No, I'm not any of those other
people you named (I don't even know who some of them are... Carla?). And no I'm
not out to get you. I am sympathetic to everything you've shared. But I can tel
l I've offended and angered you, so I'll respectfully bow out now. I'm very sorr
y to have caused any more discomfort for you.
Likes(5)Dislikes(6)
Then why not share your last name? I'm open. Are you? I'm not angry. I asked wha
t your last name is. What is it?
Likes(5)Dislikes(2)
Alex. I asked for your last name. You said you are a journalist and I am curious
. I invited you to come over and I'll give you ten minutes to have your doubts a
ssuaged perusing my laptop. So, if I am opening my home I think it is wise to as
k your last name. Mine is McMahon. What is yours?
Likes(7)Dislikes(2)
Your inability to offer your last name seems really fishy. Message it to me thro
ugh Facebook if you want to remain more private. Alex the journalist who is an I
mpartial Observer. I'll be waiting for that.
Likes(7)Dislikes(5)
AnImpartialObserver October 3, 2014 at 12:07 am
Why not? Because your recent responses, and those of several others here, have m
ade it clear to me that this blog is not quite the safe space that I thought it
was. I posted with sincere intentions and a sympathetic inclination towards you,
and yet almost every response I've gotten from folks here so far has been fille
d with suspicion, assumption, and insult. I'm a bit slow on the uptake, and clea
rly not the best with my own use of proper blog etiquette (I really am quite gra
teful Tim for your advice on that), but I finally figured out that my questions
were not really welcome here. I see now how they may have been deemed inappropri
ate, and for that I apologize, though I still don't think they warranted quite t
he level of hostility I've received. So, even though I fully realize that at thi
s point declining to give my full name will be interpreted as actually having so
mething to hide (I really do not), I guess I just don't feel safe enough with th
ose of you here to risk it anymore.
Cop out. Man, you really know how to twist and spin. I did welcome and actually
answered your questions Alex. Don't be a martyr. I asked your last name and invi
ted you to my home so what exactly is your problem? Most people are transparent
with their names so yea....that's suspect. So, if you want transparency then be
transparent.
Jen October 3, 2014 at 12:18 am
Animpartial Observer - By saying " If this thread really is only about letting p
eople speak their own truth, and not about exposing the bad behavior of the emer
gent leadership more broadly, then why even bring those stories up in the first
place?" is just one more way of saying "shut up if you aren't going to do what I
want".
Likes(4)Dislikes(3)
Twist and spin? This is what I was just saying. Case in point. I offered you my
sincere and honest reason for choosing to stay anonymous and you're refusing to
accept it at face value. Instead you're making assumptions about me and imputing
other motives (and identities!) beyond what I've clearly stated. I'm sorry, but
that's the kind of response that definitely makes me not want to pursue things
any further with you or trust you with any more information about myself. Please
, forget I even asked you anything. I'm sorry I did.
So you won't share your last name or private message it to me? That's strange. B
ut you want me to post information and share specific answers to questions you h
ave pertaining to my divorce? Hmmm...and now I'm asking for your last name even
in a private message you're a victim. Okay, got it. Goodnight, Alex.
So you won't share your last name or private message it to me? That's strange. B
ut you want me to post information and share specific answers to questions you h
ave pertaining to my divorce? Hmmm...and now I'm asking for your last name even
in a private message you're a victim. Okay, got it. Goodnight, Alex.
Likes(5)Dislikes(1)
No Jen, that's not really what I meant at all. However, I do recognize that I ha
ve been communicating very poorly tonight and failing miserably at making my int
entions or my meanings clear at all. That is on me. I'm sorry to have disturbed
this blog with my ineptitude. And I am especially sorry to have caused Julie any
further distress. I'm not sure who she thinks I actually am, but all I really a
m just someone who was concerned about her plight and wanted to know more about
the circumstances. I hope she finds the healing she needs and I'm glad the rest
of you are here to help her with that. I apologize for detracting from that proc
ess with my questions. I really do think the best thing I can do right now is to
just back out and let you all continue with the conversation you were having be
fore I apparently derailed it.
Likes(2)Dislikes(4)
At the risk of interjecting where it may not be my place...
I agree with the initial observation that AnImpartialObserver was not so imparti
al. That initial thread was overly demanding and a bit too suggestive. However,
his/her subsequent responses have appeared to me as something of a genuine new c
ulpa. Perhaps something of a reset is in order? (Or perhaps I'm just being a bit
too na ve here)
Ug. "Mea culpa." :P
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Just one last comment, I promise: I just want to say that I agree with you ReliS
tuPhD. I was far too demanding in my first post. My first inclination was to ask
Julie first whether she would be willing to field some questions before actuall
y asking them and not just hit her with them all up front. For some stupid reaso
n I opted for the latter approach. I wish I had gone with my gut and been more p
atient and respectful. I'm deeply sorry for that. I can see why you all would ha
ve been suspicious of my intentions because of that error in judgment.
Likes(9)Dislikes(2)
Brother Maynard October 3, 2014 at 1:21 am
I've really behaved myself and said nothing for the past couple hundred comments
. That was really hard to do when Danielle chimed in, and certain others. But.
Let's just clear a few things up, shall we?
@Partially-Alex and other challengers of Julie's narrative:
* If an unnamed person who received a help request from Julie has forwarded it t
o you, this is a breach of a pastoral confidence, and does not exhibit good past
oral care in any way, shape, or form. There might possibly be reason for the ema
il to be forwarded to you if it's part of your story as well as Julie's... but e
ven then, that's highly suspect. Remember, it's third-party correspondence being
shared here. Am I the only one noticing that even the half-apologies and critic
isms of Julie or of this forum generally are tending to prove the point and prov
ide additional evidence about what was going on and the character of those invol
ved? Anyone?
* If you're concerned about about naming names with accusations, have the forthr
ightness to provide your own name. Your real one. (And for the record, when Tony
went off on me in '08-9 about things said on my blog, part of the vitriol he sp
ewed had to do with me being an "anonymous" blogger. In point of fact, I blog un
der a pseudonym, which is a different thing, and I've used it for more than a de
cade. Those who know my blog know me, and they know my real name, which has not
been hidden. If you need to know, follow the link.)
* If you're so concerned to get all the facts, please show it by scanning at lea
st Julie's comments here and perhaps a few others. Julie's side of the story has
been presented here, it's just spread through several comments. A painful perso
nal account typically comes out that way. Deal with it.
* If you insist on reviewing evidence, you're turning this into a legal affair.
It is not, as has been stated multiple times. If you want this to take legal for
m, the response is "asked and answered", see previous point. You're also showing
an inclination to make this about a divorce case. Again, see above: you've miss
ed the point.
* Documentation for Julie's claims does exist. Some of it is public, and some of
it has been provided to specific individuals who have weighed in on this thread
. In short, other people in this conversation have reviewed this evidence as wel
l as the public court documents and verified that these are consistent with her
claims here. Given that much of it is private, most people here can rest assured
in the knowledge that if her claims did not hold up against this evidence, thes
e people would speak out publicly here and/or privately to Julie. This is a safe
space, but I believe it's also one where clear falsehood would be called out...
isn't that part of making it safe in the first place?
* If you don't feel a blog is the "right" place for this kind of conversation, t
hen you don't really understand this space, this conversation, or the nature of
the wrongs that have been perpetrated. Your discomfort stems from the fact you d
on't feel this forum is controllable enough, and as has been pointed out, silenc
e or threatened silence is another way to attempt to control the narrative.
Now, if you still have an objection, share it - but PLEASE come up with somethin
g new. I for one am getting tired of the same old pattern.
It seems to me that by the time we're approaching 900 comments, it seems general
ly accepted that TJ is an a** diagnosed with NPD, he had an affair, and he attem
pted to cover it up with a smear campaign against Julie, and involved Doug Pagit
t and others. Some of the people he enlisted were duped or manipulated into unwi
tting participation. (And guess what? If you knew those rumours were out there b
ut you weren't part of a campaign, you just witnessed/testified to the fact that
it was actually happening. If you repeated it even unwittingly, you became part
of the campaign. That's how it works.) In the mix, it seems pretty clear that t
here's a lot of pain caused by Emergent abuse, whether directly within EV or not
, just like the Industrial Church Complex they were supposedly reforming. There
were affairs and rumours of affairs involving leaders, broken marriages, spiritu
al abuse, the whole gamut.
C.S. Lewis said that friendship was born of the moment when one person says to a
nother, "What, you too? I thought I was the only one!" On that basis, it seems t
here are many budding friendships here, and by the grace of God, I hope these be
gin to lead to healing.
Because *that's* what this is about.
Rob Grayson October 3, 2014 at 4:10 am
The saga continues. I'm very thankful to David for hosting this conversation, an
d for everyone who has demonstrated a commitment to truth. And I believe truth w
ill *always* win out over lies and deceit in the end.
FWIW, I was highly suspicious of "Impartial Observer" right from his/her first c
omment. Not saying he/she was or is involved with the EV group, but certainly th
ere was enough there to suggest that trust should not be extended.
There
se it
be it
r and
is another thing that's been bugging me in all this. I've hesitated to rai
because (a) I didn't want to derail the conversation and (b) I thought may
would be considered a naive question. It has to do with the whole TJ affai
"spiritual wife" bullshit.
Basically, my question is this: how has this been so widely accepted and tolerat
ed? Or, to ask it the other way around, why have more Christian leaders, outside
the emergent crowd as well as inside it, not called this lying, God-dishonourin
g garbage out for what it is? Andrew Jones is the only person so far that I've h
eard use the word "heresy", which as far as I'm concerned is by no means too str
ong a word.
I get that someone who has messed up their marriage might be your friend and min
istry associate, and that you might want to give them the benefit of the doubt a
nd believe them
But when they invent a false doctrine of spiritual versus leg
al marriage, surely some kind of red flag has to go up? I just don't understand
why no one made more noise about this.
Again, apologies if this is off-topic and/or a naive question.
Nakedpastor David Hayward October 3, 2014 at 6:57 am
AnImpartialObserver:
I would like to respond to your comments because I think they shed light on a cr
ucial misunderstanding on what this conversation is about.
1. You're not being asked to accept any narrative. You're just being invited to
listen to the narrative of others and share yours.
2. Your desire to see proof has a way of dismissing their narrative and derailin
g the conversation to a fact-finding venture.
3. It's not a place where you can get answers to historical questions. Although
some people are sharing those, it's only because it is a part of their story tha
t has been silenced or marginalized or dismissed for so long.
4. I've seen this so many times before that I recognize it immediately. I talk a
lot about authenticity with accountability. I claim to provide safe spaces for
people to be authentically themselves. But some unwell people understand this to
mean that they are unaccountable, free to hurt other people, make demands, be r
ude, be demeaning and even be abusive. When they are challenged on it, they imme
diately reply, "You said this was a safe space but obviously you were lying beca
use you're trying to control and change me! I don't feel safe here!" In fact, so
me people test the space's safety by doing things they know will hurt people jus
t to prove there is no safe haven on earth for anyone and that if we just give t
hem one minute inside that space with these people, they will swiftly destroy th
eir illusion of safety.
5. When a room of people react to some things you've said, shouldn't our first i
nclination be to examine ourselves and see if we did hurt them? Several people h
ave responded to you but you persisted in your hurtful behavior. Then, when you
started to realize your defense wasn't holding up, you became a victim, persecut
ed, a martyr. But it's not about you. The others wanted you to understand that t
his was a safe space to share and hear stories while you were demanding proof. R
ather than apologize and change your behavior, you changed your strategy from "I
want to see documents!" to "Poor me!" It's just another way of derailing the co
nversation to your own agenda rather than the democratic narrative process that
is already occurring.
6. I'm thinking of an analogy. Let's say we are in a room listening to the harro
wing stories of war rape victims. But someone in the room keeps demanding pap te
sts results, police reports, photos, documented rapist's confessions, and an obj
ective, unemotional, orderly account of the events, etc
can you see how destr
uctive that would be to the conversation, but also to the spirits of those victi
ms? Plus, can't you see how people might even suspect that person was some kind
of an official plant, sent there to disrupt the narrative, infuse insecurity, do
ubt, and fear in the victims, maybe even arouse sympathy for the rapists, and so
mehow dismiss their experience? In most cases like this the victims, more than w
anting justice (which is often impossible), just want to be heard so they can in
tegrate their trauma into their lives and move on.
You've shown your hand I think. I'm not sure how you can recover this. Can you g
et your mind around this? Or do you have other intentions? We're still here, tal
king and listening.
Alex,
I think your part in this conversation may be recoverable. I may be wrong. Much
of it will depend on what you do next. Much will depend on how others react. (I
have no desire to control either of these.)
I have some suggestions to share with you and others in the conversation. They'r
e for discussion - again, not rules, just some starting points.
I'm not here to embarrass you, but what I suggest may well leave you feeling awk
ward, confronted, or out of your depth. If so, it will pass - as you work throug
h it. Or you can take a break whenever you want.
Disclosure:
Either you have a document you really shouldn't have, or you have a connection y
ou're concealing, or both.
You seem to be operating on the basis of journalistic ethics: never disclose a s
ource.
But in this context, it looks less than transparent.
It may restore trust if you cede control of this document to Julie, it's author.
I don't know exactly what this looks like (that's up to Julie).
But I just can't see how you posting it, after she has clearly expressed her ref
usal to post her copy, could be anything but a very, very bad move.
It may restore trust if you name your connection, or how you received the docume
nt.
But, again, best to confirm with Julie how she wants this communicated.
And finally, my own disclosure: I also operate on a first name basis publicly, o
ut of a desire to preserve a safe space for me and for others. (I need a little
breathing room around my spaces. Trust me on this.)
Presentation:
It may help to restore trust if you share a little of your story. Whatever you'r
e comfortable with. But it's about this context, and your experiences. Contribut
e to the conversation. Make it personal. Listen. Sympathise.
It can be genuinely difficult at first, but it does get easier.
Oh, and if you're tempted to post anything even remotely demanding or inquisitiv
e - give us a few days to recover, please.
P.S. If you shorten the length of your posts, you'll get early feedback, before
you overwhelm people with content. The responses will likely be less intense. Bu
t, again, I may be wrong.

P.P.S. Oh, and whenever I see the word "impartial", I can't help but see someone
suffering under the delusion of rationalism. Do you understand postmodern theor
y or deconstructionist critiques? (In your industry, I think the closest equival
ents would be witness/source bias, or journalistic bias. You could be subject to
both.)
Whatever your metanarrative, the fact remains that you've pretty convincingly ou
ted yourself as being close enough to events to receive far more information tha
n most on this thread. (In comparison: I live a long way away, I've read some bo
oks, been around a bit, and I inflicted and had inflicted on me some poor patter
ns. And despite this disconnection, I would never dare claim to be impartial.)
Given both epistemology and recent posts, I would personally react better if you
dropped the pseudonym. But please do it in a transparent way. (If it was me, I'
d make a self-deprecating reference in my first post under a new name )
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Lydia October 3, 2014 at 10:18 am
"I'm also not sure why it's okay for Julie and others to mention these other sca
ndals, but it's not okay for me to ask them to be more specific. "
It is not about proving anything to you. That
for the emergent apologists like Brad Cecil,
ue for people to tell their stories when they
e is that many don't want the other side told
is where all this is breaking down

etc. So what is an appropriate ven
have been silenced? The bottom lin
at all. Even in snippets.
Another problem with stories like Julie's is they involve a very clever narcissi
st and people do not understand how an NPD operates. They want a rational chrono
logy of events that make rational sense and there is an obvious pattern of one p
erson being the wrong doer. That is not how dealing with a narcissist works at a
ll. In fact, before it is all done, the narcissist has used many people who don'
t even know they were used! And if they figure it out they don't want it outed f
or various reasons. The narcissist can do hundreds of covert bad things but if t
he other party does one stupid thing it is heralded to the roof tops and "proves
" their point. That is just how it works. They are deceivers and quite good at i
t. And they use other people's goodness, justice and transparency against them.
This just feeds right into ministry celebrity stuff. The good guy on stage sayin
g the right things and people believe that is who they really are when they real
ly have no clue who they are at all. Cult of personality is a huge problem in Ch
ristendom. And growing daily.
Yes David, as I admitted above, I did indeed misunderstand the nature of this co
nversation, and for that I have apologized. My original thought was that since n
umerous serious accusations had been made against a wide group of public figures
, that this forum would be an appropriate venue for discovering more of the fact
s and details around those accusations. You have since made it clear that it is
not and I accept that. I do, however, still believe that discovering those facts
and details would be very important thing for all of us to do at some point bef
ore passing any final judgments. So if not here, then in what forum would you re
commend?
Likes(5)Dislikes(8)
What's your last name? Let's start there. Thank you, Alex for providing your las
t name as the vast majority of us have. Thank you.
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
Alex the Inept October 3, 2014 at 10:43 am
Thank you again for your advice Tim. I do find it very helpful.
This is Alex (AnImpartialObserver), and I am dropping the psuedonym, though no,
I'm still not comfortable enough with the folks in this forum to tell you my las
t name. Like you Tim (and others here who have maintained their relative anonymi
ty) I like my personal space.
I don't really have much more to say though, since I'm not really interested in
rejoining this conversation at this point. David and others have made it clear t
o me that I misunderstood the nature of the thread. I don't have any personal st
ories of trauma to share and I was never hurt by any emergent people, so I'm not
really sure what else is left to say then. I misinterpreted what was going on h
ere and asked unwelcome questions, and I have apologized for that. This wasn't t
he place to get the answers I was seeking. I would still like to have that other
conversation somewhere at some point, but I'm not really sure where would be th
e best place for that anymore. Perhaps it's not time for it yet anyway. I don't
know.
Anyhow, again, I'm sorry for disturbing the peace. Feel free to ignore my inepti
tude and return to what you all were doing before.
Likes(7)Dislikes(4)
Alex,
This is a narrative, not a judiciary.
It's messy by design.
Facts and details will always be incomplete.
No-one will control it.
There will be no conclusions, and no final judgements.
But the stories of the silenced will be told.
This is enough for me. Perhaps, even, for most of us.
Please examine your expectations.
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
Again AnImpartialObserver, you fail to understand, so again I will repeat myself
. You seem to be in the business of collecting evidence and demanding a verdict.
You are obviously more concerned about guilt and innocence than the sharing of
stories or the voicing of the silenced. I am not interested in discovering the f
acts, and I'm certainly not interested in making a final judgment. I am convince
d, however, that as we allow everyone to tell their stories without censor or ce
nsure we will learn how to live more truthfully and compassionately.
Alex? Do you need a hug? We give those virtually and freely in the TLS community
(The Lasting Supper) it might be a great place for you to feel safe sharing you
r identity.
Otherwise, I'm kinda done with this strange cat and mouse, push pull dysfunction
al dynamic. Of course you are not inept, but that's attention seeking behavior.
My kids said dads in Italy so you remind me a lot if his communication style alw
ays switching up the stance to appear a victim. So if he's not enjoying Italy bu
t commenting here...how sad.
Either share your name or go away because this is just annoying.
Donna gets to speak and we listen so...step aside or join The Lasting Supper and
we can safely get your discovery questions answered in there. Peace, but goodby
e now.
Lydia...you get this on a visceral level!! Thank you for detailing my experience
so perfectly. He was 3 chess moves ahead and I never knew I was playing!
Rane October 3, 2014 at 10:56 am
@AnImpartialObserver "discovering those facts and details would be very importan
t thing for all of us to do at some point before passing any final judgments."
May I say, your comment thread is a study in passive-aggressive behavior. Not su
re if anyone here is looking to "pass final judgment". If anything, I think most
of us just want to see redemption. The stories here speak for themselves. They
are data points. And, as David notes, this is a slow, complex, open-ended, catha
rtic healing process, not a courtroom. If you don't get that, then maybe (please
) just keep observing from the sidelines.
Chris Hill October 3, 2014 at 11:02 am
Alex,
I second Julie's request for your last name. I really think it will go a long wa
ys toward establishing trust in the conversation. I wouldn't worry about anythin
g "bad" happening if you venture the risk in doing so. I was misunderstood above
and called on it, and it all worked out. I was a bit hurt initially, but I was
also able to see why a couple of people may have thought I was up to no good. Of
course, if you have something to hide, that's another story. Otherwise, it's re
ally not a big deal, right?
Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
Alex,
Please share how you received the document you've been quoting.
Please share as much as you can about your source.
We've already flagged the release of that private info as an abuse of those who
trusted emergent leaders.
It's a story worth telling. (And regardless of whether you tell it or not, we ha
ve already found it very telling.)
And I'm sure we can take your transparency in good faith. (Unless you use your s
tory as a platform to expect more.)
Tim who uses a surname in TLS and other forums, but not in web-indexable places
(Please don't use my choice as an excuse, Alex - it was intended as an empatheti
c gesture)
Likes(2)Dislikes(2)

No, I got it David. This is not the place for evidence and verdicts. I've agreed
with you on that point several times now and apologized for misunderstanding. I
'm not sure what else you want me to say.
Likes(4)Dislikes(4)
I did consider telling you who I got the email from, but since they haven't
n up here yet (as far as I can tell), I don't think it would be appropriate
rag him into the conversation unwillingly. Protecting sources actually is a
ly big deal, both in journalism and elsewhere. Besides, I haven't talked to
in years. For all I know maybe he's moved on from this whole emergent thing
since then.
show
to d
real
him
too
I've already said above how I got the information and as much as I can say about
who I got it from. I will say however, that re-reading what he wrote to me when
he forwarded the email at the time, I don't think he thought it was a private c
orrespondence. His exact words were, "The whole thing bothers me too. Unfortunat
ely I don't know much but I did get a strange email from Tony's ex-wife a while
back. Not sure why since I've never met her. But since she seems to have sent it
to a lot of different people, including folks she doesn't know, I'm guessing th
ere's nothing in it that needs to be kept especially private."
Maybe he was wrong about that or wrong to send it to me, but at any rate, I cert
ainly wouldn't publish the whole thing on a blog without Julie's consent. Which
is precisely why I asked her whether she'd like me to do that before doing actua
lly doing so.
Likes(5)Dislikes(5)
Alex, please listen to our suggestions, and do something to (re-)establish trust
.
Alternately, politely take your leave, self-reflect*, and engage later, when you
have some perspective.
* Suggestions coming.
Likes(2)Dislikes(1)
Alex:
I know this must be difficult for you because you don't seem to be getting it. I
'm not interested in publishing documents or correspondences from outside this b
log post from either side. You seem obsessed with either us giving them or you p
roviding them. It gives the feel that you're up to no good.
Likes(9)Dislikes(4)
What's your last name? Unless you have something to hide or an alternative motiv
e then there should be absolutely zero issue with doing so. So, you have a blog?
What is the name of your blog that you would like to exploit my story onto? I t
hink that is a pretty valid and fairly simple request. Thank you AGAIN for simpl
y providing your last name and or blog. Mine is McMahon and yours is? Maybe we c
an chat and I can share my story in detail with you. BUT I need a name first....
otherwise you can say, "I'm not safe" BUT ACTUALLY I am not safe until you share
your last name.
Likes(9)Dislikes(5)
Back in 2008 when I reached out to the Emergent people to help because one of th
ere own had gone off the deep end the strangest thing happened. I don't know if
a mass memo went out or if the cult-like culture was so conditioned they just fo
llowed along like lemmings but when I sent that email instead of an empathetic r
esponse to me I received stonewalling and silence and the Pastors sent what they
received from me directly to Tony. I just re-read a legal document in which Tri
pp Fuller says, "Sorry dude you have to deal with this....a friend got this so I
am forwarding it to you....hope you have a great year and let's have a cigar."
That was the empathetic response to a victim when sharing her story. This happen
ed over and over and over. Then HE used them all in the courtroom to try and win
a case that I ruined his career and parental alienation. It was denied but I th
ink this illustrates the enmeshed, interlocked cult-like culture. Stonewall the
victim and prop up the abuser.
brad/futuristguy October 3, 2014 at 11:34 am
Rob Grayson (October 3, 2014 at 4:10 am) said the following:
There
se it
be it
r and
is another thing that's been bugging me in all this. I've hesitated to rai
because (a) I didn't want to derail the conversation and (b) I thought may
would be considered a naive question. It has to do with the whole TJ affai
"spiritual wife" bullshit.
Basically, my question is this: how has this been so widely accepted and tolerat
ed? Or, to ask it the other way around, why have more Christian leaders, outside
the emergent crowd as well as inside it, not called this lying, God-dishonourin
g garbage out for what it is? Andrew Jones is the only person so far that I've h
eard use the word "heresy", which as far as I'm concerned is by no means too str
ong a word.
I get that someone who has messed up their marriage might be your friend and min
istry associate, and that you might want to give them the benefit of the doubt a
nd believe them
But when they invent a false doctrine of spiritual versus leg
al marriage, surely some kind of red flag has to go up? I just don't understand
why no one made more noise about this.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
I pondered that a while this morning while silently dialoguing with Mr Coffee. (
We always have productive morning-time conversations.) I came up with a few thou
ghts, for what it's worth. Not fully formed, so this is still rough, but it seem
s relevant, so here it is.
I went back to the original topic of this thread, which is about the interconnec
tions between pathology and theology. I'd suggest there is a third element that
needs to go into that mix, and that's *authority*. Recently, I've been in some f
orum discussions about current events unfolding at Mars Hill Church, and this is
part of what I wrote in a recent comment there:
*It seems that anyone with deep pathology can pervert any type of theology to pr
op up his authority."
It's intriguing to me that as the dialog in that Mars Hill discussion group has
moved through sharing personal stories, and considering some of the "culture of
fear" at Mars Hill, the overall emphasis now includes far more about interpretat
ion of events and their meanings, plus -- as with here -- questions about the un
derlying theological issues that went wonky. And a lot of what has come up is ab
out how Mark Driscoll manipulated theology to support his authority.
For instance, there was an entire thread there about his misuse of the "first am
ong equals" idea of leadership boards to give the *appearance* that he was on pa
r with other elders but the *reality* was that he was CEO and gaming the process
to plant supposed "peers" who were really in his pocket. And there was a teachi
ng that infused its way into Mars Hill about Prophet and Priest and King in the
Executive Elders in three-fold roles over their flock. And guess where that gem
came from? No way to know the exact route for sure, but it is noteworthy that a
lot of that exact Prophet-Priest-King teaching comes right from the theology of
Derek Prince -- one of the four originators of the heretical Shepherding Movemen
t -- but amping up his hyper-authority structure for fathers in the family and a
pplying it to the elders in the spiritual family.
Point is, authority to get/do what we want will find a pathological way to manip
ulate the theology to justify it.
So, I absolutely do NOT think Rob's question about the "spiritual marriage/legal
marriage" heresy is na ve. I also think it showing up now is perhaps because i
t's just the natural progression in a conversation to explore the power dynamics
of authority misuse in the Emergent movement. Okay, actually, let me alter that
from "natural progression" to "supernatural progression." I suspect this is Spi
rit-led to consider some deep examination of perversion of theology. Maybe this
was always meant to be a part of communal discernment process, but we rarely see
m to get this far because it gets pre-empted.
And actually, I would make a case that wonky theology -- like the reductionist s
plitting off of legal marriage from "spiritual" marriage -- pre-empts any examin
ation of potential pathology surrounding it. And how did that happen? By creatin
g a false authority/authorization for the aberration. And what was the tool used
to do that
?
Back to Mars Hill discussions. Another whole line of inquiry has arisen on the u
se of sob stories to capture people's compassion so that they give permission to
someone to do something bad that they'd never otherwise do. Wenatchee The Hatch
et has paid enough attention to the meta-narrative of Mark Driscoll s sympathy
pleas to tell it like it is:
http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com/2014/09/mark-driscoll-and-power-of-sob-s
tory_9.html
From books like *The Sociopath Next Door* by Martha Stout, I recalled that one o
f the key ways a manipulator hooks people is by sharing stories that make themse
lves look like they've been misunderstood, bullied, attacked, suffering ... in s
hort, The Victim. It's all acting and they're quite convincing and with a lot of
people in The Victim s audience, the tactic works.
So, ex-Mars Hillites have recounted many places how a sob story about Mark s b
urn-out, his wife, his family, his needing to be present for them more, etc. The
se sympathy-raising issues were a key way in 2007 especially that Mark Driscoll
seemed to shift the emotional consensus in his favor to restructure the eldershi
p. Before, he was subject to them; after the 2007 by-laws changes, they were all
hand-picked by him. He misused personal authority of his story to alter the org
anizational authority to his liking, and tweaked the theology of authority along
the way with more Prophert-Priest-King gobbledeegoo.
Okay, back to the Emergent movement. Vastly different spot on the theological sp
ectrum, but not-so-different in apparent sympathy techniques. As Julie herself h
as suggested in a few comments on this thread, it's the sob storyline of "the su
ffering spouse" whose wife has become mentally ill, and the marriage has long si
nce declined, but she is still grasping to keep it alive or alternatively to tak
e revenge, and et cetera, et cetera. [Enter

spiritual wife
understudy from
stage left, and need to move the old recalcitrant former/legal wife off, stage
right. Or perhaps lock her up? Shades of *Jane Eyre*!] And isn't it all just so
sad, and if only we didn't have this American political/legal system of marriage
it wouldn't be working out in such a devastating way for "the suffering spouse,
" would it? And, hey, isn't that just in so many ways similar to the situation i
n the LGBT communities with not being able to legally marry the one they are tru
ly spiritually partnered with? And so ministers should not conduct political/leg
al marriages because of the travesty it is to the suffering LGBT community, shou
ld we?
Gradually, what was a personal issue of an individual Victim gets hidden and jus
tified behind a social-political
justice
issue of a community. But politic
al pimping for a purpose is okay, isn t it? All attention feeds the cause, rig
ht?
I guess when there is no truly reasoned and doctrinal authority to back up what
we desire to do, we shift to create emotional authorization. That's the ultimate
base of our pathology that motivates twists in theology.
And, uhh, ALL OF US DO THIS, DON'T WE?
But it looks like anything goes when an entire movement has seemingly so deconst
ructed its theology that there is no God-grounded authority left. Then the Bible
is no longer our guide-source, the bible is just our bitch.
Et cetera, et cetera ...
I'm sorry David, I still don't understand what you want from me. I haven't asked
you for any documents for some time now, apologized for previously doing so, an
d have just stated that I won't publish that I regrettably happen to have. I'm a
greeing with you about everything, but I guess I must be thick because I'm just
not understanding what else I'm still doing wrong.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. I decided to post here because I was curious.
Because I had pieced together one version of the events based on the evidence I
had gathered at the time, and was hoping the people here could help me see where
that version was faulty or inaccurate. But after all these interactions, I'm de
finitely not curious anymore. It's not that important to me. I don't need to kno
w this badly.
Likes(7)Dislikes(4)
so I don't miss quote here it is...
hey dude i got this message on facebook from a friend. she said she thought you
should know. sorry you are
still dealing with this....
let me know if you need copies of the messages.
hope have a kick ass new years kiss and cigar.
tripp
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Wow. I ve finally gotten to the end of all the comments and I am in awe of wha
t has happened here. The strength and courage on display by so man stands in dir
ect contrast to the cowardice displayed by a few so-called
leaders.
Julie
s story obviously stands out, but each story of pain and suffering at the hand
s of men and women who claim to be
called by God
contributes to a narrativ
e whole that must never be forgotten.
A few thoughts, in no particular order of importance:
1. Progressive Christians will, I hope, learn from this thread that the personal
ity cults that give us the Jimmy Swaggerts and Mark Driscolls of the world also
give us the Tony Jones and Doug Pagitts. Confirmation bias can be a blinding for
ce, and progressives would do all to remember this. Wickedness is not solely the
domain of
conservatives."
2. The reaction of Danielle Shroyer (and Brad Cecil s
I don t care
chi
ldishness, to a lesser extent) is as a clear a sign as any to me of the corrupti
on that runs trough the entire movement. As someone who at one time flirted with
the movement, I am saddened to see my suspicions confirmed: the emergent moveme
nt really just served as a way of getting out from under the strictures of perso
nal accountability. Shroyer s immediately combative response just shows me how
little of actual value there is in her words about understanding, communication
, and reconciliation outside this forum. Even if she feels wronged, there are wa
ys to approach this issue that respect the psi and suffering of those who hav be
en silenced. She knows this, and I have even heard her pontificate at both Journ
ey and on the "DART Stations of the Cross
to this effect. To see such arrogan
ce here completely undermines her as a leader. I think this is a sign of a large
r sickness within a movement that has questioned tradition to the point that it
has lost any sort of moral grounding. After all, when you look to yourself and y
our friends for your moral compass, you re likely to never see yourself as hav
ing gone astray.
3. While I understand the move by some to seek forgiveness and ultimately reconc
iliation, I hope the notion that all can be redeemed is not pushed to the point
that it protects the abuser at the expense of the abused. For the sake of future
victims, perhaps there should come a point when efforts at reconciliation give
way to clear denunciation of not just the acts but the person him/herself. I kno
w this is not the thread for it, but let me go on record as saying that sometime
s an
I do not consider him to be a brother/sister in Christ
does more good
for those who have been abused than a
judge not.
(It s also worth notin
g that I am a self-identified apostate, so I don t exactly feel bound by the s
trictures of Christian practice.)
4. (With semi-apologies for the harsh words ) Suggestions from some here that
the abused and the abuser settle things face-to-face are absolute bullshit. It i
s neither Christian nor humane to do so. The abused must settle things however t
hey can. So to those cowards who have responded in this thread to the effect of
I really think we need to settle this in a private forum,
fuck you.
5.Regardless of my harsh words or anti-Christian intimations, this thread does g
ive me hope for the future of Christianity. You are some good people, and if mor
e Christians behaved as you do, there would be much less pain in the world.
One last point that I don t want to get lost in the bullets: Julie, I have a d
aughter and I hope she never has to go through what you have. If, however, she d
oes, I hope (dare I say pray) that she has the strength you have displayed here.
Even as the father in me bristles at the thought of some asshole like Tony Jone
s ever being that close to her, there is definitely hope in thinking that she mi
ght show the intelligence, wisdom, courage, and motherly love that you have. You
are an inspiration.
Peace to you all. I will continue to follow the thread and post where it seems a
ppropriate. You are some very strong people and I am privileged to have heard yo
ur stories.
"psi and suffering" should be "pain and suffering," and "settle things face-to-f
ace" was meant in the sense of that being the only "appropriate" way. Face-to-fa
ce is good, but it is not the only appropriate way to do things.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
@brad/futuristguy, thanks for responding to my question. And thanks for validati
ng that I'm not hopelessly naive.
(BTW, any time before 9am, Mr Coffee is my best and only friend.)
I think what you're saying, in summary, is that where clear scriptural/doctrinal
authority is lacking, individuals with agendas will do anything and everything
in their power to create "emotional authority" to justify their desired behaviou
r.
OK, I get that. A narcissist like TJ will do whatever it takes to achieve the de
sired goal.
Bu my question remains: why are so many taken in by this? Why don't more people
speak up and shine a light on this blatant heresy? What a sad indictment of the
spiritual maturity (or lack thereof) of vast numbers of western Christians.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Alex,
We want a real person.
Not an inquisitor. Or an agenda. (You keep bringing these up, by the way.)
We don't exist to satisfy your need for sources. (And we won't be used by you, o
r anyone.)
But if you listen, you will learn
and learn more than from any documents!
Just be genuine. Have a conversation.
Talk on someone else's terms.
Engage with their interests.
Be part of the thread, rather than attempting to direct it.
Let go of your preconceptions.
Take others' statements on faith.
Please, please, Alex, just drop certain subjects. Stop using certain words.
They're leaving a very bad taste in our mouths.
In short:
Create a post that is about someone else and what they want to talk about.
Don't talk about anything you expect from the thread.
Drop all your previous topics.
Apologise by acting different.
Likes(5)Dislikes(6)
Brad-thank you for your analysis. It was mind blowing watching the theology over
the years parallel the life choices. They were displayed pathologically and in
an effort to rationalize actions publicly and seeking affirmation from the refle
ction of his audience.
RelistPhD-Thank you. Just, thank you.
In light of the smoke screen created by Partial-Lex, intentionally or otherwise,
I think it's important to highlight @MatyBigFro's comment. He was an important
part of the Emerging Church conversation back in its North American heyday.
Some of his words:
"I remember reading and often thinking Stephanie and Becky's criticisms too hars
h, too personal and too emotional. What I recognize now was the ingrained misogy
ny which discounts the testimony and accounts of women and favors the arguments
of the men in the mix. I've apologized elsewhere but I feel here is also as good
as anywhere for that. I remember disagreeing at times with both of them online
(although sometimes also agreeing) I'm no-one and not even in the conversation a
nymore I don't believe and just spectate allot of what goes on these day's but I
wanna own my own misogyny as I continue to try and unpick and leave it behind.
To those who i didn't hear or listen to well enough, I'm truly sorry."
Dear Referee McGrath,
I hate to trouble the court again, but I feel that you must be made aware of Ms.
Jones s continued
destruction of my reputation. As you will see in the attached emails and Faceboo
k messages,
Ms. Jones has contacted persons as recently as yesterday (December 30, 2009) who
m I do not
even know and I
that I had an
m assuming that she does not know, either
and telling them
affair. It seems that she has found these people by searching the Internet for p
ersons who post
reflections about my books.
As you can imagine, this kind of behavior is extremely deleterious to my writing
and speaking
career (which is difficult to understand, since Ms. Jones and our children are r
eliant upon that
income). Further, you specifically told Ms. Jones to discontinue this behavior i
n court on
October 7, 2008 (Ms. Grandchamp produced a similar document that day).
I ask that you take this behavior into consideration when ruling on the recent m
otions in which I
asked the court for more protection from this harassment. Since our hearings in
November, Ms.
Jones has again contacted Ms. Courtney Perry and her former husband, Christopher
Hamilton
and written messages to me on Our Family Wizard that have been antagonistic and
offensive. I
have included my correspondence with Mr. Ahlvers regarding these incidents.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Anthony H. Jones
Oh, Julie, I just felt sick reading that letter. It gave me the creeps.
Likes(6)Dislikes(3)
Ah, brad/futuristguy, pass the bucket, I'm going to hurl again - don't anyone da
re use our people to justify your affair/divorce/stance on marriage/progressive
credentials!
(The LGBT community is also pretty sensitive to being used. Far more than Christ
ians, by the way. You can tell an LGBT-ally/affirming/abusive organisation by th
e fact that they have no, or only token, visible LGBT people. People learn prett
y quickly when they're not wanted. And Christians are damn good at communicating
*that* to LGBT people!)
"And, hey, isn't that just in so many ways similar to the situation in the LGBT
communities with not being able to legally marry the one they are truly spiritua
lly partnered with? And so ministers should not conduct political/legal marriage
s because of the travesty it is to the suffering LGBT community, should we?
...
But it looks like anything goes when an entire movement has seemingly so deconst
ructed its theology that there is no God-grounded authority left. Then the Bible
is no longer our guide-source, the bible is just our bitch."
On another, less nauseating note, you assume here that if the Bible was used (pe
rfectly?) as a guide-source, then everything would be ok (perfect?). #justsaying
I've inserted the "perfect?" hyperbole because it makes the deconstruction easie
r :-)
Likes(3)Dislikes(1)
Linda October 3, 2014 at 12:11 pm
Alex, disappointing that your curiosity and interest conveniently end exactly at
the point of a request for some type of relational accountability. You obviousl
y understand that there are a multitude of ways for you to simply verify your id
entity and establish trust with Julie or David behind the scenes. Choosing to di
sengage at that point speaks volumes.
Likes(7)Dislikes(3)
Lydia October 3, 2014 at 12:14 pm
"3. While I understand the move by some to seek forgiveness and ultimately recon
ciliation, I hope the notion that all can be redeemed is not pushed to the point
that it protects the abuser at the expense of the abused"
Yeah, I get where you are coming from. I have the same concerns. In fact, I thin
k people should tell their stories so people can decide if they are in a healthy
place or can avoid unhealthy places. I often think of Diotrephes. I mean here i
s a guy who wanted control yet John wrote about him in a letter for people to pa
ss around and would eventually be read by zillions for 2000 years. Correct venue
?
One thing I noticed about the book of Timothy is that Paul (if that is correct a
uthor) named names in certain circumstances which would become public knowledge.
He is careful as in those not naming those deceived out of ignorance yet naming
those who deceive on purpose like Hy and Al. Correct venue?
There are some things that should be made public for the sake of spiritual healt
h, truth, etc. I had a woman tell me not long ago that after her horrific abuse
at the hands of her husband (she had to have 6 operations because the abuse was
so extensive) she went for counseling with a current mega church pastor who back
then was an associate pastor who still did that sort of thing.
He told her she had to take half the blame for the abuse and he would not condon
e her remarrying if she did not do so. Now if that is not bad enough, this woman
went on to tell me she totally forgives him and supports him now. I asked her i
f she has told anyone else of his counsel at that church and she said no because
she has "forgiven" him. So why bring it up? He is now the mega church pastor.
That is not forgiveness. That is affirming lies and sweeping them under a rug. W
hat other sort of counsel has he given over the last 18 years to other abused wo
men? What he counseled her is just another form of abuse. Does he really not kno
w better? Or is staying married to an abuser more important? It is a very comple
mentarian church.
That is why people should tell their stories when they are strong enough in a sa
fe environment. It also acts as a protection for others.
^So many times. Thanks for a concrete example of what I was trying to say, Lydia
. :)
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Tim that is what made me really chaffed. This person had no care for advocacy fo
r the LGBT UNTIL it became the hot topic of the day. I really bristle at how the
y were exploited to give credence to their diversity act.
Yeah, well if I wanted someone to put me on a stick, and mount me like a flag
I would have done my best to attract the attention of the Ancient Romans!
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Brad and Rob, I have come to the conclusion that an improper understanding of sp
iritual authority is the common root of all spiritual abuse. I agree with a frie
nd who said that the aftereffects of the Shepherding Movement continue to this d
ay. Methodology and doctrine from the shepherding movement plus a strong dose of
Watchman Nee s "Spiritual Authority" were the toxic weapons of my spiritual a
buse experience.
Rob said:
Why are so many taken in by this? Why don't more people speak up an
d shine a light on this blatant heresy? What a sad indictment of the spiritual m
aturity (or lack thereof) of vast numbers of western Christians.
The followers
improper understanding of spiritual authority is based in the u
nexamined acceptance of the teaching of the person they follow. I agree that it
is a sad indictment on a lack of spiritual maturity. However, most people have n
o need to question until their status quo is disrupted.
The leaders
improper understanding of spiritual authority is either inherited
or created. There are many leaders with wrong beliefs about authority who are s
imply repeating what they have learned. There is also an element of inherent pat
hology, as Brad said,
Authority to get/do what we want will find a pathologic
al way to manipulate the theology to justify it."
kate willette October 3, 2014 at 12:54 pm
I don't want this to be lost, because it feels close to the heart of things:
" . . .it looks like anything goes when an entire movement has seemingly so deco
nstructed its theology that there is no God-grounded authority left. Then the Bi
ble is no longer our guide-source, the bible is just our bitch."
The bible as a guide-source has never really worked for me, in spite of an entir
e childhood under Catholic authority and 25 years of my adulthood inside a liber
al congregation. I mean, it's okay & even lovely in a few passages, but not more
so than other poetry & literature.
And it's been obvious to me for some time that once you give up the "Literal Wor
d of God" trope, it's going to be pretty tough to have the bible be anything BUT
your bitch. Meaning, you're going to use it for what your situation & personali
ty requires if you use it at all. (Of course, that's exactly what the "Literal W
ord of God" folks are doing, too, but they carry the burden of having to reconci
le all those unfortunate lines about slaves, murder, rape, and so on with spirit
ual wholeness.)
One of the things I'm taking away from this epic conversation is the level of pe
rsonal damage that can be inflicted when people start making their living by mak
ing the bible their bitch.
Rob (October 3, 2014 at 11:55 am) said "@brad/futuristguy, thanks for responding
[...] Bu my question remains: why are so many taken in by this? Why don't more
people speak up and shine a light on this blatant heresy? What a sad indictment
of the spiritual maturity (or lack thereof) of vast numbers of western Christian
s."
Yup, I didn't really get to that part. Sorry. Some things did cross my mind but
didn't jump the gap to the keyboard. Let me try to recapture some of that, reel
it in, get it down.
It's no one single thing, but I suspect a combination of influences in the entir
e social system that Emergentism became, plus individual influences.
I think the basic systems problem is that once everything's open to deconstructi
on, well, *everything* is open. [If you're familiar with Myers-Briggs Temperamen
t Indicator, it's the difference between "J" judging, being closure-oriented ver
sus "P" perceiving, being open-ended.] Which means that potentially *anything* e
lse can show up to fill in the gap.
In the case of the Emergent movement, I wonder if some of the additional cogniti
ve dissonance comes from it moving away from Young Leaders, which (in my underst
anding) was primarily a group that was evangelical and relatively conservative t
heologically, and moving toward progressive Emergentism.

How much of what happened is parallel to the modernist split between liberal and
conservative that occurred from about 1880-1920? One of the biggest fallouts (t
o oversimplify) then was that conservatives cared about personal morality and no
t involvement in social ethics/issues of evil, while liberals cared about social
ethics/issues but were seen as lax about morality.
Only this was the postmodernist split -- including New Calvinism hyper-authorita
rianism from Emergent Village progressivism. Could it be that while Emergentism
moved ever farther away from conventional theological roots, maybe it still need
ed to be "seen as" hook in with some kind of biblical base? Not foundationalism
with a rigid set of doctrines and closure-oriented (i.e., who's in/who's out), b
ut a centered-set gathering around common interests with a generous orthodoxy an
d open-ended (i.e., come dialog as much as you'd like).
Who was publishing E.V. stuff back then? Baker Book House was a major one. Were
they known for deconstruction in the mid-2000s? Or as theologically open-ended?
Or ... We could find out the other publishers, events, etc., and see whether the
ir paradigm is more judging or perceiving. Anyway, start looking at where things
were pulling away from the established speaking-publishing-events system, and y
ou start seeing a new interlocking directory for "non-traditionals" emerging to
take its place. JoPa Productions. Jericho Books. CANA Initiative. etc.
Anyway, those were some of the bigger-picture possibilities that were flowing th
rough my mind. They deal more with issues like group solidarity, maybe financial
benefits of holding to the new party line, passionate commitment to a movement
to the point of overlooking aberrancy in the chaos that typically accompanies em
ergence.
Also, on the theological level, **I'm not exactly convinced that endless deconst
ruction gives you the base for discernment** -- in fact, never landing and recon
structing means your systems are always in flux. And it surely seems that discer
nment got lost along the way on this issue of spiritual/legal marriage. And if i
t happened with influential people/celebrities, that gets transferred along to c
onsumers. And if Emergentism truly had become a celebrity culture, then that rep
lication makes sense. People bought into the storyline (personal and doctrinal)
and reflected it back.
But there were also potentially smaller-scale, more personal kinds of possibilit
ies for why people often don't speak up (or do, but get quickly silenced) about
what seems clearly off-base.
* When "The Sympathy Card" gets played, there's a tendency to silence anyone who
blurts out, "Hey, whaddyuh mean by this [executive elders / troublesome congreg
ants / spiritual wife/legal wife] stuff?" Shhh ... can't you see he's needing hi
s rest. He's all burned out from having to deal with [the elders / the congregat
ion / the wench]. Have you no compassion for his nerves? Emo trumps oh-no.
* When "The Generous Friend Card" gets played with "The Freedom of Conscience Ca
rd," it's like, "Well, it's not something I'd believe/do, and I suggested to the
m that it wasn't really wise, but you know, everyone's got to decide for themsel
ves." The sort of pseudo-libertarian individual freedom of choice that is answer
able to no one approach. Makes each person autonomous and leaves God as an/the a
uthority out of the picture.
* Not thinking through unintended consequences and how bad actions lead to damag
ing others. Maybe that has something to do with object relations theory? [Anyone
?]
So, such as they are, there they are.

Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Mike Clawson October 3, 2014 at 1:19 pm
Greetings all,
Just dropping in here to offer Julie an apology. I was the cohort leader who sha
red her email from 2008 with Alex. He emailed me this morning to let me know tha
t he had brought it up here and that he had mentioned my involvement with it. I
just want to let you know that I am very sorry for passing it around. It was not
my place to share it with others and for that I am sincerely sorry.
I hope you will understand that I have always been concerned for you and your si
tuation and thus my decision to share the email with Alex when he asked me what
I knew (around 5 years ago now) was purely in the interest of keeping everything
about the situation out in the open and not look as if I was trying to cover up
any dirty laundry or protect Tony in any way. I'm sorry if that was a breach of
your trust, but at the time I genuinely thought it was the best way to serve yo
u - by not hiding anything I knew from anyone who asked. I want you to know that
I have never personally witnessed any campaign by emergent folks to silence you
or label you as crazy, nor would I have participated or supported it if I had.
If you recall, Julie, even though we had never met, I did reply to that email of
yours with compassion and concern, though I wasn't sure what I could do for you
since I wasn't part of any Emergent inner circles and had only even met Tony a
few times myself. I did email Tony too at the time to encourage him to do whatev
er was necessary to reconcile with you, including canceling the book tour and st
epping down from Emergent Village. I haven't had time to read through the hundre
ds of comments here, but from what I have gleaned from the little bits I've skim
med, I have to say that I'm sorry I didn't follow up on that any further at the
time, as it seems to have turned out very badly for you. Though like I said, not
having a relationship with you or with Tony, nor being in the inner circles of
Emergent at the time, I'm not really sure what else I could have done then. Rega
rdless, I am sorry for not pursuing it further or helping you more. Please forgi
ve me for anything I may have unintentionally done to make things harder for you
.
Regards,
Mike
@Tim (October 3, 2014 at 12:09 pm). It sounds like I didn't communicate as clear
ly as hoped ... sorry. I was trying to give what I perceive an internal script w
ould be like for what I gather the overall storyline was in how the spiritual/le
gal marriage issues went down, as best I could track them, and how LGBT communit
ies were brought into it. And also a whole lot of other things about ministers o
fficiating weddings, and etc etc.
My core point is that all kinds of people, symbols, and things got co-opted to l
egitimize the (apparent) storyline. The legal wife, the spiritual wife, the LGBT
community, ministers performing wedding ceremonies, churches using their facili
ties for weddings, the Bible/bible ... anything to make an emotionally compellin
g sob story for the story-tellers.
And to respond some to your take on what I said and what @kate willette (October
3, 2014 at 12:54 pm) said, FWIW, here's the thinking behind how I've developed
my own theology. It sifts out into four arenas: personal morality, wisdom decisi
ons, social ethics, mystery/paradoxes of the faith.
For me, personal morality and social ethics are the things I understand God want
s me either to do, or not to do. Failure to follow is sin/evil. [Sidenote: Best
description of "evil" I ever heard came from a 5-year-old who was asked the diff
erence between sin and evil. She said, "Evil is when you're doin' something that
looks good, but you're thinkin' something bad."]
Wisdom decisions are where there is no clear mandate and so I'm free to discern
and decide for myself what to do. These end up being about wise/not so wise -- n
ot right/wrong, righteous/sinful-evil.
Mysteries are those things we reflect on that are multi-leveled with no easy ans
wer but more insight found in the realm of analogy. Jesus being God and human. W
e being both sinners and saints. Christians as members of the Body of Christ and
also simultaneously being members of society, with obligations in both. Split a
ny such paradox, and troubles ensue.
I don't think of these as four separate codex stones, but four items on a wire m
obile, seeking to keep them in balance and if you switch the elements around or
drop one or more off, the whole thing goes off.
Actually, I think everyone in every culture in every era is "wired" by God's des
ign to seek a workable system for understanding the world around us and interpre
ting our experiences in it. I feel drawn to fill in where there are gaps in my p
aradigm, and file off what turns out to be excesses. If that's looking for a *pe
rfect* system, I don't know that it's all that different from what anyone else d
oes.
But I don't believe there's an "inerrant theology" -- and that's a major trap th
at I see a lot of Christian leaders fall into. Hence, making the bible conform t
o their personal norms.
And I don't think any individual can apply the Bible perfectly -- each of us nee
ds community precisely so that our unique front-on perceptions help cover the bl
ind spots and peripheral vision distortions of others.
And no one community gets it on their own perfectly either.
We really do need each other ...
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Thank you, Mike Clawson. Yes, there were a few like Andrew Jones, Mark Ostreiche
r, Dan Kimball, Jenell Paris and yourself who were kind, caring and compassionat
e. As Jenell detailed above in her post when she did confront she was attacked.
So, I don't think any help could have been done except by the inner circle and t
hey either failed or were unwilling. If I missed anyone else, I am sorry. I don'
t think there were or are ears willing to hear at that point or this, anyway, bu
t I really do appreciate you sharing this and Alex if you would like to talk to
me personally, I am very open to that and I will answer all of your questions.
Billy Madison October 3, 2014 at 1:47 pm
Since when is it fair and reasonable for people to throw out accusations that ru
ins the integrity of others without providing proof. Julie continues to share he
r "story" and everyone buys into it without the requirement of proof. Yes people
, when someone smears another person's name, proof should be required. She has p
osted speculative comments that others in EV are having affairs, conspired to co
ver up her story, etc. How is that right or fair? If she can do that, then why c
an't I speculate here that David Hayward likes masturbating to pictures of clown
s (let's see if David still believes in his stance on freedom of speech).
This forum has truly turned into what it originally was denouncing. Those with t
he podium abuse it, now Julie has the podium and clearly it is not possible for
her (and many others) to be abusing it. Quite ironic. As famously quoted in Bill
y Madison, "everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it". http
s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNHuqHWefU.
Looking forward to the responses.
BTW - as exciting as it would be for everyone here, I have nothing to do with th
e Emergent church.
Nakedpastor David Hayward October 3, 2014 at 2:16 pm
Billy:
I do love clowns and it's none of your business what I do with them for it is a
very private matter.
However, what's being shared here are stories that apparently aren't private, bu
t very public ones that some tried to make private. Anyone can share here. Inclu
ding anonymous people like you.
As you can see from all the comments, generally they are coursing along a theme
of silenced people finding a safe space to share their stories of what happened
to them. These are their stories and no one else has a greater right to share th
em than the ones who lived them. They are their experiences, and we don't have t
o wait for a court to verify them or CNN to report them.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but the most angry comments are those responding to c
omments like yours trying to put a lid on it.
Otherwise there is sharing, caring, and even forgiveness and reconciliation.
The goal is to take care of the past and move on. I see this happening for those
who want it and are willing to work for it.
Hello Billy. I have provided proof. You clearly have not read the 900 comments w
ith posts from other commentees who say they also were told the same narrative t
hat was proliferated amongst the Emergent circles, conferences, and amongst coho
rts. I do apologize because I do not have first hand proof of the affair that ha
ppened with an Emergent Pastor and the woman in his congregation nor the Mars Hi
ll seminary student situation but it was told to me by a very reliable ground ze
ro source and from the same source about both. So, I will apologize for lumping
that in. Thank you for calling me out. I am aware of the sketchy behaviors and h
ot tub parties and that is first hand knowledge. I am not even sure that David H
ayward even likes clowns so that I cannot attest to.
Patrice October 3, 2014 at 2:49 pm
I thank every one of you for writing this wonderful thread (even those who are a
ngry about it). I am outside of the emergent scene, but it has helped me put a f
ew things to rest in my own story, a different scenario with similar underlying
destructiveness.
IMO, what makes this particular situation so brilliant for examination is that t
here is destruction in both forks of the emergent movement, which was itself a r
esponse to destructiveness inside the Evangelical community. Three different the
ology streams and three different versions of failure and suffering.

Brad is exactly right to point out the potential weaknesses for abuse in any sys
tem of theology (in any human system at all, really). ISTM, that while we must d
o our best to shore up our own systems as much as we can, the underlying fact is
that, everywhere, there are a few people who will deceive/destroy. It is this p
ractical fact that we need to understand better. It is lack of this understandin
g that confuses many on the outside, and has left many inside either deceived/co
mplicit or deceived/victim.
We need to know how to spot and de-claw destructive people in our communities. H
ow do we learn this, make it practice, and then teach it? What kind of particula
r perspective/offering does Christianity have to bring? IMO, these lessons need
to be fundamental in our knowledge base, IMO. Without them, we cannot grow in wi
sdom.
(Brad Sargent's site is a wonderful resource towards this.)
Brad Sargeant (futuristguy) really is the go to person on how to deal with spiri
tual abuse in the church context. Thank you for your wisdom and insight. I have
felt held by God over these trying and turbulent years. God would show me truths
in small ways. One such instance, I was a was reading a Dr. Seuss book to my ki
ds called If I Ran the Rainforest and it was explaining the Emergent trees, "the
y shoot up quickly higher than any other tree in the Amazon rainforest, to get t
o the sun but they topple over because of the shallow root system." Holy metapho
r.
David - glad to hear you don't have a thing for clowns and sorry to use you as a
n example, but I feel like it makes a reasonable point. It is very easy to throw
out accusations and claims here without the burden of proof. Clearly no one is
considering the broader ramifications of speculation. My posting only suggests t
hat we silence those that make accusations without fact as I would hope that all
of us should stand for that.
Julie - sadly I have read all 900+ posts and it represents speculation of a "con
spiracy" or a "cover up". Aren't we talking about a group of pastors that had an
aggregate congregation count of like 500 people? I just can't imagine that an e
laborate "cover-up" was necessary or worth the energy to save book deals, speaki
ng gigs that only a few hundred people would read or attend. Especially, when so
me of them like Brad C. and others were financially viable on their own. By the
way, thanks for apologizing about the rumors you propagated here. That did not g
el with your comments about others spreading rumors/falsehoods about you.
Oh and ReliStuPhD - fuck you too.
Rob Grayson October 3, 2014 at 5:33 pm
@Linda October 3, 2014 at 12:49 pm
You said:
"The followers
improper understanding of spiritual authority is based in the
unexamined acceptance of the teaching of the person they follow. I agree that it
is a sad indictment on a lack of spiritual maturity. However, most people have
no need to question until their status quo is disrupted."
Yep, I reckon you nailed it right there. "Unexamined acceptance." Most people (o
r maybe, to be fair, I should limit it to "many people"), it seems, are less int
erested in actual truth and more interested in finding a status quo that works f
or them relationally, spiritually, financially or whatever and then doing whatev
er it takes (or covering up whatever it takes) to protect it.
Thanks also Brad/futuristguy for your further response. Lots to process there.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Andrew Jones, can you tell me when this alleged repentance and restoration took
place? (and maybe you could add, restoration to what, or whom?) I understand he'
s done this with you, and apparently everyone else on the planet BUT me. I under
stand you and everyone he worked with suffered major consequences to his actions
. But it didn't change the entire trajectory of your life, as it did mine. I don
't understand why no one involved with him now has considered his attempt to con
fess/repent/make amends to me, important to his return to ministry.
Brad Sargent, with the case studies and research you've done, do you have a sort
of guideline for a good restoration process? My main concern is that too many o
f these "leaders" are restored just with the passing of time and no concern as t
o what has really taken place in the heart. Not that anyone can ever know anothe
r person's heart fully. But what about guidelines; things to look for? Surely it
would include a real attempt to restore relationship to the abused parties, wou
ldn't it? At the bare minimum, repent to the abused?
Billy, you have been heard. You think this is terrible and you are "dumber for h
aving read it." Then please don't continue. You think my account is a lie. Okay.
So, Todd Hielstad, Jenell Paris, Andrew Jones, Chuck....yada, yada, yada are al
l liars too? I already apologized to Brad Cecil. I though you said you read all
900 comments on this? I don't want you to get "dumber" so you better not continu
e to read or post here. You just want to scold me for telling my story? Okay. Yo
u can read this and form your own opinion. It's still my Emergent Cult Story and
My Survival of Life with a Narcissist Story, whether you think it's horrible or
not. I own it.
Doug NOT-Pagitt October 3, 2014 at 5:40 pm
Lurker - until now.
Having followed all 900+ posts, I say - wow - and I relate.
Julie: You are very brave and I am glad to have read your story, but not glad yo
u had to go through that and are still going though it. My heart aches for you a
nd your children, who as you say, did not sign up for any of this.
David, thanks for protecting the dialog. You too are brave to put up with all of
the garbage.
Others: Having been sexually abused by a man in our church myself at the age of
12, and having had to endure the consequences for the last 42 years, and having
been the target of several righteous/religious attacks over the last few years,
the abused have a right to speak and be heard even if it makes you uncomfortable
. I have never had that opportunity. Ever. It is the one thing I would change if
I could, but now everyone is dead, so...
One last comment on language. Words mean things. When you direct profanity at so
meone else, it wounds others who hear it (read it). I can not censor anyone, but
wish you (all) would think just a little more before posting. The world is viol
ent enough, and it is not cool or God honoring regardless of what you have been
taught, Billy Madison.
In spite of that, I will continue reading and praying for the abused. Be blessed
.
Linda, Re: Spiritual Authority / Spiritual Abuse
So much so - I have seen pastors who demanded submission, and
e until they complied. Then they would subtly and continually
o keep them in their place. They allowed discussion, but only
d if you challenged their authority, or stepped outside these
unity would enforce it for them.
would berate peopl

criticise people t
on their terms. An
bounds
the comm
Why did I become involved? There was a lot of good with the bad. I thought I cou
ld manage the toxicity. I thought I could keep my distance. But as soon as I sta
rted to really struggle, I became an easy target, who couldn't push back.
At the core of many people's thinking is a misunderstanding of leadership: "the
greatest among you will be your servant, and the slave of all" (Jesus), but we w
ant to be kings. Or be led by them.
And you know what the prophet said about kings:
'So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. They
said to him,
appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations ha
ve.
But when they said,
Give us a king to lead us,
this displeased Samuel; so
he prayed to the Lord. And the Lord told him:
Listen to all that the people a
re saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me [G
od] as their king. As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt
until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you.
Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who w
ill reign over them will claim as his rights.
Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a ki
ng. He said,
This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his
rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses,
and they will run in front of his chariots. Some he will assign to be commander
s of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap
his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his char
iots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will
take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his
attendants. He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it
to his officials and attendants. Your male and female servants and the best of y
our cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of you
r flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you wi
ll cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answe
r you in that day.
But the people refused to listen to Samuel.
No!
they said.
We want a ki
ng over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us a
nd to go out before us and fight our battles. '
-- Samuel in 1 Samuel 8 (NIV), emphasis mine
And for much of the church, it is so.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Oops, my emphasis was lost by the blog software:
Israel: "appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have"
God/The Prophet Samuel:

"they have rejected me [God] as their king"
"warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them wil
l claim as his rights"
"He will take your sons and make them serve"
"He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers"
"He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his offic
ials and attendants"
"you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out fo
r relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that
day"
We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a ki
ng to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.
This looks so much like Mars Hill (and many others), it's creeping me out.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Tim Seitz-Brown October 3, 2014 at 6:16 pm
Listening....
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Billy Madison, it speaks *volumes* that you took personally a comment aimed at t
hose who would provide the abuser with yet another opportunity to continue their
abuse. I can only express deep satisfaction that you've taken offense. I'm happ
y to be targeted for standing with the powerless.
P.S. Even Israel's "good" kings did some pretty terrible things.
David's adultery, and David and Solomon's harems come to mind, particularly in t
he context of this conversation.
That's just greed, pure and simple.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@Donna McDaniel (October 3, 2014 at 5:34 pm) said: [[Brad Sargent, with the case
studies and research you've done, do you have a sort of guideline for a good re
storation process? My main concern is that too many of these "leaders" are resto
red just with the passing of time and no concern as to what has really taken pla
ce in the heart. Not that anyone can ever know another person's heart fully. But
what about guidelines; things to look for? Surely it would include a real attem
pt to restore relationship to the abused parties, wouldn't it? At the bare minim
um, repent to the abused?]]
I think the most recent series I finished would help. "Responsibility for Spirit
ual Abuse" sets up a holistic framework for building a
remediation
plan. I
used that word because I like how it ties in with
remedy,
and also "remed
ial work" for filling in the gaps in our paradigms and the holes in our soul. It
can also encompass more than personal repentance by leaders, and include organi
zational repair/renovation with its systems are toxic.
Anyway, that series includes stuff dealing with both the individual and corporat
e levels of peace-making actions, plus a continuum of how toxic the person or or
ganization is, links to related material on restitution, etc. (Several people ha
ve messaged me that the material and continuum chart in Step 3 was especially he
lpful -- Step 3
Injuries and Illnesses: Slight or Severe? Temporary or Chron
ic? Superficial or Systemic?) This was designed as the overall framework, so it
may be short on specific details for any given topic, like potential restoration
. But it does have a lot of "indicators" along the way -- concrete things to wat
ch for that demonstrate illness, healthiness, or healing underway. In other word
s, potential "fruit of repentance."
This is from a curriculum I've been writing. I've tried to make it as accessible
as possible, through use of charts and illustrations and such. It's broken into
about a dozen articles, and works to build up gradually from core topics to mor
e complexity. (As we've perhaps experienced at various times, it doesn't help to
reduce complex processes to "best tips" and checklists of Top 10 points .) Anyw
ay, it includes these topics and more:
* Core questions about responsibility, culpability, complicity and recovery -- a
nd different roles people play in toxic systems and what that means in terms of
their level of responsibility.
* Differences between BEING responsible for damage and TAKING responsibility for
it.
* Attitudes and actions it takes from both sides to build a positive, balanced
remediation
plan for potential reconciliation.
* Leaders who inflicted abuse need to deal with (1) personal growth issues and (
2) interpersonal restoration issues.
* The group/organization affected needs to deal with (1) toxic leaders and (2) s
ick organizational systems.
Here's the link to the first post in the series, and there's links to all 11 pos
ts at the bottom of each article.
http://futuristguy.wordpress.com/2014/08/24/responsibility-for-spiritual-abuse-p
art-1/
Hope you'll find this of help, Donna ... If you (or other readers) have question
s, I'll try to follow up as best I can, when I can. (I'll be offline quite a bit
the rest of October with various obligations.)
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Kate,
I think the biggest burden the "Literal Word of God" folks carry, is the burden
of pretending that the Word goes straight from God to the Bible to them. (Or str
aight from God to them, if they're of the charismatic bent - why not just cut ou
t the middleman entirely?)
Even with the most generously conservative assumptions, the process is more like
:
God, to people/culture, to memory/perception, to words/language, to scribes/lang
uage, to documents, to copies, to translators/culture, to words/language, to peo
ple/culture, to community/leaders,
While many would argue the details, the core elements of this process are undeni
able, and many of them are attested within the scriptures themselves.
Maintaining this facade, in the light of overwhelming evidence to the contrary,
must be a terrible strain.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)

Just a word about "fuck you!" I'm not offended by it. I'm sure it's the same wit
h so many others here. It is strong language and is often effective in making a
point. I use it at times, usually on myself. But there are some in this conversa
tion that will be discouraged from participating because of it. It's like a movi
e rating... the stronger the language the smaller the audience. Just thought I m
ight say that because the conversation is too important to inadvertently exclude
some.
Actually, @brad/futuristguy (October 3, 2014 at 1:36 pm), I think it's my commun
ication that was at fault. I'm really sorry about being ambiguous and flippant.
To clarify:
I wanted to hurl at the behaviour you were describing, not the way you were spea
king about the issues.
I wanted to inject an ironic counterpoint to your assertions about scripture, fo
r those who have non-theist/non-religious-text tendencies.
I seem to have failed at one or both, and instead caused you concern about being
misinterpreted.
I'm glad we can talk this through.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
DougNOTPagitt. I am so sorry that 12 year old you was sexually abused. That a ma
n in your church did that to you makes me want to swear! But I won't and I apolo
gize for doing so in this thread. It is just so wrong for those who hold the pow
er and the ear of the audience to abuse it. You said you never had an opportunit
y to tell your story. This opportunity is offered to you here or more privately
inside the Lasting Supper community. It is a very healing space where you are al
lowed to be raw and real and supported. I am so sorry some weak, weak man did th
at to you.
DougNOTPagitt. I am so sorry that 12 year old you was sexually abused. That a ma
n in your church did that to you makes me want to swear! But I won't and I apolo
gize for doing so in this thread. It is just so wrong for those who hold the pow
er and the ear of the audience to abuse it. You said you never had an opportunit
y to tell your story. This opportunity is offered to you here or more privately
inside the Lasting Supper community. It is a very healing space where you are al
lowed to be raw and real and supported. I am so sorry some weak, weak man did th
at to you.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Mike Clawson/Alex,
Thanks for being a part of this conversation.
Everyone who offers their story, adds to the wider narrative, and shines light o
n things that have been shoved into the dark for far too long.
I respect you both:
Alex, for being transparent: for handling your concerns about source confidentia
lity in a way that worked for you, your source, and for us; and
Mike for your clear explanation of your part in the events, and your engagement
with Julie in a spirit of reconciliation.

Please feel welcome to stick around, if you'd like.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
@Tim (October 3, 2014 at 6:55 pm). Dood! no worries ... plus any time I can shar
e my five-year-old friend's definition of evil, makes it all worth it ...
Communicating face to face is hard enough. Take away tone of voice, body languag
e, facial expressions, and wowzers ... lots harder. But I appreciate greatly tha
t people here are trying, and sticking with it. Rock.On.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Jen October 3, 2014 at 7:04 pm
Why did I become involved? There was a lot of good with the bad. I thought I cou
ld manage the toxicity. I thought I could keep my distance. But as soon as I sta
rted to really struggle, I became an easy target, who couldn t push back.
NAILED IT! And that is one reason it was so hard to leave. That and the guilt tr
ips about abandoning my"purpose" or "mission".
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Thanks Brad. I'll be reading that.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Jen,
'the guilt trips about abandoning my"purpose" or "mission".'
NAILED IT! (TOO!)
Yeah, the desire for a purpose was what got me involved. I desperately needed so
mething structured to recover from a difficult pervious experience.
And then I felt really guilty when I had recovered, and grown, and the purpose b
ecame constricting, rather than liberating.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Rob, very true. The need to belong is a common reason that people tend to overlo
ok things that should raise red flags; the social cost of "seeing" is too high.
Tim, in addition to criticism to control, flattery is also used. As you suggeste
d, the social pecking order then kicks in so that the group enforces the leader'
s control.
In a high-control system, especially if there is a narcissist involved, asking q
uestions or disagreeing will automatically make you a target for the leader and
a scapegoat for the community.
The leadership idol is alive and well in the church. It is a mutual pathology, p
eople who want a king and those who want to be king.
Good insights Tim.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Linda (October 3, 2014 at 7:22 pm) said: "The leadership idol is alive and well
in the church. It is a mutual pathology, people who want a king and those who wa
nt to be king."
Reminds me of what a college friend of mine, also named Linda, said 40 years ago
and it's stuck with me all that time: "Manipulators and martyrs go together in
matched pairs."
Not saying that as a blame-the-victim formula, but to go back to the question of
, "What made me susceptible to being taken in ...?"
Every serial abuse perpetrator knows how to identify and groom his/her victims .
.. and once they're snagged/converted to his/her system, how to condition them t
o keep them there.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Yes, Linda!
Flattery, yes, as long as you're doing what you're told.
And then I've been the scapegoat a few times, in religious and non-religious con
texts.
The transition in itself is damaging, and often leaves the target thinking they'
ve done something wrong, or are something wrong. When it's actually the system t
hat is broken.
As an engineer and reluctant manager, I think the church would benefit from an e
ducation in systems theory and organisational behaviour. Many liberal/progressiv
e/emergent types claim to focus on broken social structures, but are woefully un
prepared for the task.
Systemantics/The Systems Bible by John Gall (1975):
"New Systems mean new problems"
"Systems in general work poorly or not at all"
"Complicated systems produce unexpected outcomes"
"Systems tend to oppose their own proper function"
"People in systems do not actually do what the system says they are doing"
"The system itself does not actually do what it says it is doing"
"Systems develop goals of their own the instant they come into being"
"Intrasystem goals [the system's own goals] come first"
"As systems grow in size, they tend to lose basic functions"
"The larger the system, the less the variety in the product"
"The crucial variables are discovered by accident"
"The real world is what it is reported to the system [The Fundamental Law of Adm
inistrative Workings (F.L.A.W.)]"
"The Functional Indeterminacy Theorem (F.I.T.): In complex systems, malfunction
and even total non-function may not be detectable for long periods, if ever"
"The Newtonian Law of Systems Inertia: A system that performs a certain way will
continue to operate in that way regardless of the need or of changed conditions
"
"The Fundamental Failure-Mode Theorem (F.F.T.): Complex systems usually operate
in failure mode"
"The mode of failure of a complex system cannot ordinarily be predicted from its
structure"
"The larger the system, the greater the probability of unexpected failure"
"'Success' or 'Function' in any system, may be 'Failure' in the larger or smalle
r systems to which the system is connected"
"Systems attract systems-people"
"Control of a system is exercised by the element with the greatest variety of be
havioral responses"
"Complex systems tend to produce complex responses (not solutions) to problems"
"Great advances are not produced by systems designed to produce great advances"
"Choose your systems with care"
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Julie - if you read my post, you would find that I said that your's and other's
comments "represents speculation of a "conspiracy" or a "cover up". Not once hav
e I said you or others are lying. What has been said about the "Discernment Grou
p" being a part of a massive cover-up includes no fact. That is what I am callin
g out, nothing else.
Doug NOT-Pagitt - if you are offended by the use of profanity, certainly your th
ing to deal with, but clearly something that has been used throughout this threa
d. I am not a man of God so I don't feel like I have to honor him with my commen
ts.
I realize my comments are coming across as brash, especially among a group of pe
ople with some serious pain. Despite what some may believe, it is not my goal to
step on the toes of these genuine issues. Though, hopefully you will see that I
am asking for some accountability for direct comments aimed at others that are
based on rumor and speculation. There should not be room anywhere - blogs, forum
s, or otherwise for any of that.
ReliStuPhD - I encourage you to stand with the powerless, though you might want
to look to your left and right to see who you are actually standing with. Instea
d you are acting no differently than those you disparage in this forum.
Billy, get a grip on reality!
It's a public forum. That alone is a huge difference!
Everyone close to the situation has been invited to comment, and most of the pla
yers have.
Anyone is free to share.
Everything is public and remains on permanent record.
No-one is excluded.
No-one's responses are edited.
No-one exercises power and control over the content or direction of the discussi
on.
If you really can't see the difference between this context, and the events desc
ribed on this thread... I'm genuinely concerned for your ability to comprehend a
nd analyse what you're reading here. (Have you read the whole thread?)
Or is it your ability to assume honesty and good faith that's lacking?
Oh, and please Google "concern trolling". It will be an education for you, and a
relief for us.
Tim, fascinating information on systems theory! It took five years unraveling of
what happened to us before I got to the point that I could name what went wrong
, take responsibility for my part and identify the behaviors toward us that were
clearly wrong and abusive. After that, I spent another two years in graduate sc
hool learning about organizational behavior. During that time I read much of the
existing academic material on leadership. I feel clear now about healthy and un
healthy leadership. I agree that almost all of the leadership teaching in the ch
urch world is crap! Organizational leadership and spiritual leadership cannot be
lumped together as if they are the same thing. The church world needs to trash
their business leadership manuals and pay attention to what someone like Brad/fu
turistguy has to say about healthy church systems.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Linda, an even more obscure reference for our amusement:
The Company Savage by Martin Page (1972) takes an amusing look at US society thr
ough the lens of an anthropologist studying a primitive, superstitious society.
Organisational Behaviour:
"I had known for a long time that many so-called savage communities were arguabl
y far more socially sophisticated than our's (sic)."
"Few companies are as much as a century old, while many
tribes have had two t
housand years or more in which to move towards organisational perfection, and to
learn not merely how to live together, but to flourish as a group."
"[I have changed the names of some of the tribes] so as not to cause
offence to the chiefs and members of the courts who said generously
time and knowledge. As an institution, such people regard the tribe
nce and would be deeply offended to find it publicly compared with a
mpany."
unnecessary
gave me the
with revere
business co
Treatment of Outsiders:
"The mystery of the !Kuk is why the productive tribes off which they live as par
asites tolerate them at all. This is also, one might think, the mystery that the
advertising industry presents."
"The Bantus tolerate !Kuks because of the emotional outlet they provide. A !Kuk'
s basic role in Bantu Life is as someone who is there to be kicked around on occ
asions when it would be inappropriate to kick a fellow Bantu. For one Bantu to c
heat another out of a fair profit in a business deal is unethical. To do so to a
!Kuk is regarded as treating the fellow the way he deserves."
Affairs:
"If a Bantu chief relieves his dyspepsia too often by bawling out his subordinat
es, they will leave and join another. But he can call in some !Kuks and be as me
an as he likes to them with impunity. Indeed, the !Kuk's stock response is offer
their persecutor the services of a woman."
Entertainment:
"Similarly, a Bantu chief who feels friendless or bored will go to a !Kuk settle
ment and foist his company on them there. Fearing economic reprisals if they don
't, the !Kuks affect delight and amusement, and see that his drinking gourd is c
onstantly filled. !Kuks, in brief, are the steam valve through which Bantu chief
s blow off the exercise is inside them without harming their own organisations."
Dependency & Exclusivity:

"Advertising services can indeed be run from within most corporations. But it is
the essence of !Kuks that while they be constantly within reach, and be depende
nt on the productive tribes good will to earn their livings, they be kept strict
ly outside the tribal organisation."
I am both disturbed and amused by the parallels to this narrative - particularly
given western Christianity's insistence on "civilising" "primitive" tribes.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Doug Not-Pagit October 3, 2014 at 9:09 pm
@Julie: Thank for hearing. Not need to apologize to me. Your "Irish" was complet
ely in context and understandable.
Re: language: something people might want to consider regarding the "f-u" phrase
. It is an expression of violence. To a woman it means that I think so little of
you that I would rape you and discard you. We know that rape is about control,
so...
To a man it says essentially the same thing. You have no value except as a home
for my.... Oh wait. Someone already said that a while back elsewhere.
The language we use in discourse with those with whom we disagree speaks volumes
, especially when it evokes violence.
How will we ever find common ground and reconciliation if our language remains v
iolent?
Just something to think about.
Not offended. Still listening & praying for the abused. Julie, I may take you up
on your offer, when I find my voice. Be blessed!
Billy Madison, I have no reservations about the side I've chosen here. That you
think I am "acting no differently than those you disparage in this forum" tells
me you've either not read all of the comments, despite your claim to the contrar
y, or you've not understood them. Either way, your advice rings hollow.
David Hayward and Doug NOT-Pagitt, you've made a fair point on the profanity. Wh
ile I'm not particularly concerned about the language itself, I certainly do not
wish to narrow the conversation. As such, my apologies if my word-choice has cr
eated an atmosphere that is less conducive to a multitude of voices. I'll keep i
t PG-13 going forward. (They still had it comin', tho ;) )
Tim, it's nice to meet someone else peculiarly interested in the psychological a
nd social dynamics of power and leadership. I am glad that awareness of these is
sues is growing through many avenues including places like this comment thread w
here people are able to share their experiences and gain understanding from one
another.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
DougNotPagitt I would say you have already begun to find your voice. Talking abo
ut it in a supportive community and in therapy heals and helps. You are not alon
e. Maybe you have already done work to release that off of you and put it back w
here it belongs...back on the abuser. Even though he is dead you can still do he
aling work to reclaim what was taken. I am so sorry that happened to you. I can'
t say that enough to all of the people here (and including myself) who have expe
rienced abuse: physical, emotional, sexual or spiritual.
@Doug Not-Pagit, I just saw the comment "To a man it says essentially the same t
hing. You have no value except as a home for my ," and I have to disagree some
what. For some, it might, but not others. But to be sure before posting, I did a
quick survey of my close-ish group of male and female friends. Of 9 surveyed, n
ot a single one thought of it in that context (when used in that particular cons
truction). All of us know what the words literally mean, but when used as an ins
ult, we both give and take it as something like "Wow, he/she just one-upped 'Go
to Hell.'" This is not to undermine your point, but simply to note that not all
men or women mean or take it that way. Whether it's a good thing or not, it has
been used enough to not be taken as a reference to sexual violence in all cases.
That having been said, we agreed to a person that just because we see it in a mo
re innocuous manner doesn't mean we should expect expect others to take it that
way, especially by someone who might have suffered abuse. (On the other hand, wh
en I explained I was talking about those who shelter abusers, the more or less u
nanimous phrase was "f 'em." We are such a low-brow group, my friends and I.)
But this is not meant to detract from the larger conversation. Just thought I'd
offer a bit of insight from the uncouth side of the tracks. ;)
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Matybigfro October 4, 2014 at 10:04 am
Just as a point of clarification to Bill's post above, while I welcome what I th
inkis a imporant point we should al keep in mind I would in no way ever see myse
lf as an important part of the conversation more a present somewhat comenting by
stander although my ego was very flattered when I read Bill's comment :-)
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Matybigfro October 4, 2014 at 10:17 am
Another coment to say I think Linda's comment about the Shepperading movement st
ruck me as intiutivly genius. Growing up in an independant 2nd wave Charismative
-House/Free Church with roots in the Shepherding movement there was allot in the
EC and MC that connected to my background. I think it's Phylis T who has most c
learly drawn links form pentecostalism/Charismatic Movements thorugh the Jesus m
ovement to the Emerging Church/Emergence Christinaity with a strong statement ab
out the role of the Vineyard Movement's role in putting certain things in motion
that lead to EV/EC/Emergence. I think it was some of Robby Mac's work on Post-C
harismaticism and Sheperding as an element or Charismaticiscm that is where I fi
rst read deeply on that subject and I think there has been allot around the SGM/
MHC/EV story's that has reminded me of allot of what I read about that previousl
y. In some way's in the Emergent Village the Studied replaced the annoited or th
e titled as the unquestioned.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Thanks Tim, but I think it's probably best for everyone if I'm just done.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Alex, I am sorry you feel that way. I apologize for being defensive but I have b
een on edge for years, and I have PTSD because of my experience with abuse. That
was unfair of me to jump on you. I think you are genuinely interested in detail
s, and like I said, just message me and I will answer them all.
wanderer October 4, 2014 at 12:30 pm
Julie, I don't think you need to apologize. Alex's questions were intrusive and
inappropriate.
Don't discount your intuition.

Likes(8)Dislikes(5)
Hey!
Been watching the last couple of days. Someone mentioned the person who came aft
er me and I just needed to stay away as to not say something I would better be s
ilent about.
It is important for those, like Alex, to know that those of us that have been ma
nipulated and broken by leaders in this ring use a lot of tactics that do ringer
s on you. You find that something that seems innocent was actually a way to corn
er you and twist things. It is hard for people who have not encountered this beh
avior to understand. I know I have become less trusting. As you can see, here I
do not use my name. I did not realize my personal pic was going to show up. Had
I known I would have done something to make that go away. I do not trust like I
used to. I have had people call my family to inform them of some wrong doing. Us
e things to make me look crazy.
The ability to see someone's intintions as sincere is not so clear to us (those
have been abused). In think it is important to keep that in mind.
Brother Maynard October 4, 2014 at 4:16 pm
@Mike,
Thanks for chiming in - very helpful in fact. From what Alex had said, I thought
that the source was someone much closer to the epicenter, but given your explan
ation, I would likely not have assumed the communication was especially private
at the time either. I'm curious though, what you remember from 4-5 years ago abo
ut the rumors surrounding the Jones' divorce... had you heard the story alleging
Julie's mental illness? Just wondering what you and Julie (Clawson) recall from
that time that might help shed light on what was happening.
@Alex,
It helps your cause that Mike has commented now... I'm less concerned about your
last name especially after having him appear and verify (or at least imply) tha
t you're not an "unseen hand" masquerading as something else here. Can I ask som
ething though? It sounds like you were part of the Emerging/ent movement 5 years
ago but perhaps aren't now. You said that you hadn't been hurt by anyone there,
but why did you leave? Was it theological or something else?
@FuturistBrad,
"...making the bible our bitch." I love that phrase.
@Matybigfro @FuturistBrad @Linda et al
Appreciate the connection to Shepherding Movement in praxis here. It was 10 yeas
ago this month I bailed on my CLB ("Church I Left Behind") after my "pastor" fo
llowed me home from church with his wife and kids in the van so he could blow a
gasket it in my driveway yelling at me until my wife (doing shiftwork) woke up.
This in a church that was heavily influenced by the Shepherding Movement despite
the fact that Robbymac quotes Barney Coombs (their itinerant apostle) as saying
his churches were unaffected by it. The movement had crashed before I started a
t that church, but I should have taken closer note when despite Bob Mumford sayi
ng "we were wrong", they kept saying things like, "There was a lot of good stuff
there, they just took it too far." Which I should have noticed was just another
way of saying "We like the theology despite what people keep doing with it." I
think I've got most of the dust off my feet now.
(Disclosure: Robbymac is a good personal friend, and I was privileged to help hi
m edit and discuss ideas that became his first book, Post-Charismatic.) Anyone i
nterested in the history of theological error and abuse in the charismatic churc
h should pick up his new/revised edition of Post-Charismatic. Reading through it
, you can quickly see that each error began with a reaction to another one an at
tempt to correct something that probably did need correcting... but each new thi
ng kept going off the rails in a different spot.
This is what makes what was said above about deconstruction so important. You ha
ve to know ahead of time what you need to keep in place, and at some point you n
eed to start reconstructing. Otherwise you'll eventually be sitting all alone on
a pile of dung. (Congratulations on your deconstruction.)
@BillyMadison,
If you had read all the comments, you would have known that the question of evid
ence has already been addressed. It has been confirmed outside of this thread, a
nd some who are here (including yours truly) looked into it in a more evidentiar
y way back in '08-9, and have been satisfied. Every new bit of information in th
is thread supports Julie's story, and where clarifications have indicated that s
omeone has been tarred with the wrong brush, she has been very quick to apologiz
e and move on. The picture is pretty clear to those that have actually been read
ing. And that's really more than enough said about it.
ps. - Personally, as an introvert, I find clowns somewhat disturbing. Why are th
ey always pretending to be so happy? Why do they always pull out random people f
rom crowds and make fun of them?
matybigfro, I agree that there is much about the SGM/MH/EV stories that is remin
iscent of the charismatic flavor of shepherding abuse. Interesting parallel abou
t where the authority lies, "Touch not the Lord's PhDs!"
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Tim Seitz-Brown October 4, 2014 at 5:09 pm
The NFL
Sexual assault on college campuses
The girls kidnapped in Nigeria
Abuse in the church
Abuse at Penn State under the leadership of a beloved coach
MLK, a hero of mine, being unfaithful
John Howard Yoder, a theologian whose work I've appreciated, revealed to be abus
ive
The emerging church folks, a movement I resonate with, revealed to have a dark s
ide
I ponder my own complicity-- and-- my own (relatively small) wounding as a child
I think about the anger some have against Catholic abuse scandals while not reco
gnizing our own
I see how people are scapegoated and demonized-- such as dominating others, call
ing them mentally ill, a duel attack on both the accused and the ill
Through a mimetic theory lens, I see how scapegaoting multiplies
My week
Unlearn
Unlearn
Unlearn
Unlearn
at the Duke Summer Institute taught me lament

innocence
speed (fixing things)
distance
easy consolation
Attending to wounds, listening

Going to Ramah, presence
I am part of the problem
Not despair, not whining, but crying into the void
It should not be like this!
I'm certainly tempted to cheap grace, an easy reconciliation
That is where I am
So I'm offering my lament, my listening, my longing desire for survivors to rece
ive a healing justice
Tim Seitz-Brown-Thank you for sharing your lament.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Neo October 4, 2014 at 6:01 pm
Tim. That was strange.
Likes(0)Dislikes(7)
I liked it. A lament for humanity. There is so much yuck in the world, can't we
be good to one another?
http://krillco.hubpages.com/hub/Understanding-Identifying-and-Coping-With-Narcis
sistic-Personalities
What have we learned? What can we do with the Thugs, Pathology and their bad The
ology? Educate and eradicate where need be. As Becky Garrison said, don't buy in
to the Christian Industrial Complex. Don't feed the narcissistic supply that the
y crave. I am at my happiest in years because I have no contact. My children hav
e cell phones and they communicate directly. There is an iron clad schedule and
it will never vary until the youngest is 18. I recommend this. Go no contact. Th
at linked article is very insightful to identifying and how to cope with an NPD.
Julie, that article on NPDs is so scarily accurate. I've experienced the "'Narci
ssistic Supply' (NS)" people both first hand in a church situation and then also
when I began to write about your situation in January of 2010.
"They are in constant search for 'Narcissistic Supply' (NS) ; people who are wil
ling to be mirrors to them and give them the adulation that they feel they deser
ve. Or, they 'seduce' people with charm, compliments, and intense attention in o
rder to trick a person into being their NS.
Narcissistic
close group
ion, but can
es to defame
Personalities often develop many NS sources, and will have a small,

of NS individuals around them that not only supply them with adulat
also be used as 'minions' to sic on those that the narcissist desir
or damage."
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
matybigfro,
The "studied" being unquestioned (particularly on "theological essentials" or ta
boo topics) is a big thing in many Evangelical and academic/theological Pentecos

tal/Charismatic churches as well.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Brother Maynard,
I think most of us deconstruct because we can smell the pile of poo, but we just
can't see it that clearly. (Or, alternately, we can see the poo leaking out aro
und the edges of supposedly "good" circumstances. I think I'll drop the analogy
here.)
If there is something really stinky going on, many people try to ignore it, but
some would rather pull things to pieces until they are able to see it clearly. H
ence, deconstruction.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Linda/matybigfro,
"Touch not those who can read the scriptures in the original languages" (but are
disconnected from the culture by millennia, btw).
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Julie - re: an ironclad schedule,
I know of parents who have separated and lost the ability to negotiate with each
other (or, more likely, it started when they lost the ability to negotiate!)
I think an ironclad schedule would have improved their circumstances considerabl
y - no need to negotiate with each other, and no attempts to control the situati
on through their children. Just set dates and times. And the cell phones are con
venient, too.
However, I wonder how that level of rigidity works in practice.
I am curious, but I completely understand if you don't want to indulge my curios
ity publicly, or at all:
What if the kids don't want to go?
What if the non-custodial parent can't, won't, or just doesn't arrive?
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
I imagine a blunt answer may be: "Far, far better than any of the alternatives
"
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Bill Kinnon. Yes, to the "minion" part. I believe that is what took place with e
ager minions forwarding emails and creating this united front of silent treatmen
t and the proliferation of the crazy campaign to help in the attack. Scary.
Tim for years...for far too many years I hoped and looked for the good for my ki
ds sake. There was not an ounce of goodwill to be found anywhere. I tried for to
o long to be civil, to make it "normal." Every word, every action twisted, spun
and taken out of context to try and build the next legal motion. I was video tap
ed and recorded. Set up and lied about.
Not too long ago the depth of the pathology FINALLY sunk in.
I answered my land line home phone and said hello. He said, "Because you just sa
id hello to me...I can have you arrested." At that moment I can tell you I sense
d pure evil. I canceled my land line that day and have not spoken a word to him
since. It is evil. He can't let it go, and the obsession with trying to "get me"
scares me.
So, to answer your question....no, this is the best option when dealing with and
NPD and when you are the Narcissistic Target. No contact is the peaceful soluti
on. It is the best place for me and my kids. I have neighbors, friends and famil
y who will help if I ever need to somehow vary my schedule, but I have not neede
d. It is my priority not to. I live my life by that constant schedule and having
no contact while parallel parenting for 8 more years.
Julie, I didn't intend to criticise your ability to interact in a civil manner w
ith purple in general. And with the person you describe, such a reaction seems l
ike the only workable option.
(I'm just trying to understand - and I'm pretty sure you get where I'm coming fr
om.)
I have also seen parents use flexibility as a rod to beat each other with many t
imes, so I can acknowledge the practicality of a fixed schedule.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Yes, and I have been advised this really is the only sane path. I get where you
are coming from completely as a caring person. I think you picked up on my frust
ration for the inability to provide my kids a "normal" childhood. THAT is the pa
rt that pisses me off the very most. How this has and continues to cause them st
ress and anxiety. Totally unfair but I can't male unilateral peace and I can onl
y control my side of the street. Divorce sucks! Don't have kids if cheating is i
n your DNA or if you're too weak to face your sh&% and deal with life. Amen.
*make unilateral peace
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Males have shown themselves far better at making unilateral war :-)
"Divorce sucks! Don t have kids if cheating is in your DNA or if you
weak to face your sh&% and deal with life. Amen."
re too
Indeed. I totally agree!

I'll fill you in on some of my own story privately at some stage.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
"They are in constant search for 'Narcissistic Supply' (NS) ; people who are wil
ling to be mirrors to them and give them the adulation that they feel they deser
ve."
This raises an interesting question. In this thread, Julie has been talking abou
t someone who appears to be an extreme narcissist, to the extent that this is ve
rified by a psychiatric evaluation. I don't have any direct experience of such p
eople. But I have had direct experience of Christian leaders who appear to do wh
at is referenced in the above quote
subtly surround themselves with people w
ho tickle their ears and flatter their egos. This often seems to lead to unhealt
hy and opaque power structures in churches.
I would posit, then, that even someone who is perhaps not "clinically" a narciss
ist can fall prey to the temptation to engage in narcissistic behaviours; and fu
rther, that once they fall into this cycle, it's so alluring to the ego that it
can very hard to break.
Rob,
I don't have formal training to back this up, but my understanding is that narci
ssism is a spectrum; that it's neither entirely inborn nor determined by upbring
ing (though influenced by both); and most certainly influenced by both long-term
experience and short-term context.
The implications of this is that churches (and companies, and cultures/countries
) can breed, rear, train, install, and revere narcissists; or, alternately, we c
an intervene, ideally early and often.
There's a saying in my industry: that we like software to fail early, and fail o
ften. This gives us the best chance of fixing it early, when changes are far les
s costly. Because the alternate is failing late and large, when millions or bill
ions are invested.
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
My abuser went to the police yesterday to demand another arrest for my sharing m
y abuse story. This is a safe haven and I will not be silenced by fear and intim
idation tactics. I explained this is a place for people to talk about their abus
ive experiences. Apparently, when he said he would never visit this site again..
.he visited again. I will keep you all posted but I will not be silenced and I w
ill exercise my freedom of speech in telling my story with the Emergent Cult and
my Marriage to a Narcissist.
Oh, Julie, I am so, so sorry
however
predictable this was.
And surely the police, and the courts, have better things to do - ones that woul
d bring more justice to the world, perhaps?
For an apparently tech- and legally-savvy blogger, Tony Jones seems unable to Go
ogle phrases like "limited public figure", or even, perhaps, "first amendment".
Or even realise the irony of attempting to limit speech here, when he's spoken b
oth guardedly on his blog, and (apparently) freely to many others
judging by
the number of people dropping by on his behalf.
Fortunately, many of us (including David) are in non-US jurisdictions. So that m
akes pursuing us a little more difficult.
I realise, however, that none of these factors matter at all. I am beginning to
see the severity of the lack of perspective (or is it a delusion? - I don't know
the right terms).
It's so unfortunate that you are a preferred and nearby target.
Best hopes and prayers for resolving this latest mess. I'm sad to see your six m
onths of legal peace end.
May the police, and, althought I hope not, the courts, listen, see clearly, and
treat you fairly.
The reason these personality disordered individuals are allowed to continue abus
ing is because they are common school yard bullies at their core. Many people wr
ote me and said I believe you and I'm sorry but I can't get involved because of
the legal ramifications. Fear and intimidation. Abuse of power. Wouldn't it be s
o much easier if they could simply cough up an I'm sorry. I am in talks about a
Defamation of Character lawsuit and would use testimony here from Individuaks th
at heard through the Emergent circles that about me. If you heard that or were t
old that please share that with me. That was wrong and an abuse of power and pos
ition to discredit an individual, rationalize a divorce and cover up an affair.
Thank you. Post here or private message me through FB.
Gordon Schneider October 5, 2014 at 11:29 am
Julie - I'm so sorry to hear this!. Don't be afraid, don't give up. Remember all
those who have heard your voice here and will lift you up! Becoming involved wi
th the Sanctuary Movement I'm seeing parallels with your story. God be with you!
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Gordon Schneider October 5, 2014 at 11:29 am
Julie - I'm so sorry to hear this!. Don't be afraid, don't give up. Remember all
those who have heard your voice here and will lift you up! Becoming involved wi
th the Sanctuary Movement I'm seeing parallels with your story. God be with you!
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
@Tim,
Thanks for your thoughts.
I wonder whether most (or at least many) people have a latent capacity for narci
ssism to some degree (some more than others), and whether being placed into a po
sition of great influence can actuate this capacity and then cause it to swell t
o damaging proportions.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Rob from my personal experience as the "fame" money and notoriety grew, so did t
he abuse. They believe they are untouchable. I think that is also what happened
at Mars Hill. But these circling enablers perpetuate the dysfunctional system. T
hey have chosen to look the other way. "Don't send that to me....I don't want to
know."
Becky Garrison October 5, 2014 at 12:15 pm
@RobGrayson My observation interviewing most of the US emergent players from 200
0-2007 and those who knew Driscoll in the early days concur with Julie's assessm
ent. Therein lies a major disconnect - those who were there in the beginning oft
en cilng to the memories of the good old days and don't realize how the glare of
the media spotlight made them massive goldfish in an itty-bitty bowl. Having sa
id that, there ae signs some sought the spotlight (those with narcissistic tende
ncies which describes EVERY US emergent figure on the stage today) and those who
decided to keep it grassroots-y and real (those who were part of the global sce
ne and did't move to the US fit this bill). IOW - these guys were addicts seekin
g a fame fix and the Xn industrial complex was the pusher.
@Becky and Julie: I hear you, and I don't disagree.
I guess I'm also trying to account for how similar patterns get played out on a
much, much smaller scale in local churches the world over. I don't think every p
astor who succumbs to abuse of power on a relatively small scale is a clinical n
arcissist; and yet I do see very similar behaviour patterns playing out, albeit
on a much smaller scale.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Well I'm going to be the 1,000th commenter. I'm amazed at the quality of this co
nversation, which points to the quality of those involved. Even where there is d
isagreement and conflict, included with emotion, they have, for the most part, t
urned out well.
I'm glad that this has become known as a space for the silenced to speak out and
speak up without fear. My hope is that more and more communities providing this
basic privilege and right will emerge.
It is remarkable to me that most of those who try to silence have been men, whil
e most of the silenced have been women.
I think we can take a huge lesson from this conversation.
For me, this is what I've learned so far:
1. I hope that those from all sides of this incredible story will come to an agr
eement that each individual person is more important than any reputation, minist
ry or movement.
2. If we cannot love the least of these then we cannot love the world. If we can
not change our own hearts then we cannot hope to change the hearts of others.
3. The gravitational pull of all organizations, gatherings and movements is towa
rds the dehumanization of people. We must practice diligence at every moment to
ensure this doesn't happen.
Thanks everyone!
@David: your point 3 perfectly sums up what I've been trying to get at in my las
t few comments. Excellently stated!
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
:)
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Susan J October 5, 2014 at 2:07 pm
@Becky. In 1984 a new organization was formed. By 1986 the influences were being
felt at the church where I was a member. Though we left for another church in t
he mid 1990s, it was not until 2000 that I began to connect some dots. This year
in promotional materials for a book written by the co-founder of this organizat
ion I saw a picture from 1986 of about 33 men who had been picked to be influenc
ers and to bring about change in the mega church world. Sitting on the front row
was the man who was my pastor at that time. And the author of the book, Drucker
and Me.
It seems to me that Leadership Network has played a significant role in the Xn i

ndustrial complex from before the time of the Emergent Church. Becky, have you s
een evidence of this earlier influence?
I know of this from the impact in my life for almost 30 years.
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
Oops, to be clear. My pastor was sitting on the front row in the picture from 19
86. Another man on the front row was the author of Drucker & Me.
Likes(0)Dislikes(0)
Mike Clawson October 5, 2014 at 3:21 pm
Brother Maynard asked me to share what I remember about any rumors surrounding T
ony and Julie's divorce, and Julie privately messaged me this morning to ask the
same thing. As I already said above (and in my private reply to Julie), I have
never personally witnessed any campaign by emergent folks to silence Julie or la
bel her as crazy. Though I did have a few brief online and face-to-face interact
ions about the situation with various people, including some of the folks Julie
has named here as participating in a cover-up, I NEVER heard any of them say any
thing that sounded like they were trying to hide anything, dismiss Julie as ment
ally unstable, or recruit "minions" to some conspiracy. All I do recall hearing
was 1) that Julie and Tony's marriage had been struggling for a long time, and 2
) that people weren't sure when Tony's relationship with Courtney had started an
d whether it was before or after the divorce with Julie.
I did (very briefly) talk to Danielle Shroyer about that last point (years later
), and she said then what she also repeated here - that she never saw any romant
ic behavior between Tony and Courtney prior to the divorce. She didn't try to sm
ear or label Julie, it didn't sound like she was covering anything up, and I sti
ll have no reason to doubt that she was telling me the truth from her perspectiv
e. That's not to say it didn't happen, but if Danielle says she personally didn'
t see it happening, then I will trust her as much as I trust any one else here that is to say, until I am given a solid reason not to.
I do recall after receiving Julie's email (over six years ago now), thinking tha
t she seemed particularly emotionally distressed and I did, at the time, wonder
about her motives in emailing a bunch of people she didn't know about her marita
l problems, though that didn't diminish my concern for both her and Tony, and as
I said, I did reach out to both of them offering to help. It is possible, howev
er, that I said something to that effect to others who asked me about the situat
ion (I honestly can't recall anymore), and if that contributed in any way to neg
ative rumors about you, Julie, then I am very truly sorry for that. Please rest
assured that I wouldn't have done so at anyone's behest and I was never asked to
be part of any kind of cover-up or gaslighting campaign.
That's pretty much all I know about the subject. I was going through a lot of my
own life-transitions at the time (new baby, cross-country move, starting grad s
chool) so I didn't really give the situation a lot of thought. Besides, I've alw
ays been among those who have experienced the emerging church as a much broader
and more decentralized movement than those who think it all revolves a small han
dful of authors or speakers (and to be honest, the only people I've met who thin
k that tend to be the folks who don't happen to like those particular authors or
speakers), so while I was sad to hear about Tony and Julie's troubles, it didn'
t really impact my own involvement much. That is to say, any attempt to cover-up
something about the situation would have seemed sort of irrelevant to me since
I never really saw the success or failure of the emerging movement as particular
ly hinging on people like Tony in the first place. For me (as for most of us in
the movement I think) it's always been about ideas and action and communities, n
ot about any particular personalities or so-called "leaders."

Anyhow, I hope that helps. I really don't have anything more I can think to shar
e about the subject. Like I've said, I didn't (and still don't) know much.
Thank you for taking the time Mike.
"Oh Danica, believe me, I have seen it in other places. Non-religious places. In
cluding businesses and universities. Which leads me to suspect that theology isn
't the core issue"
I totally agree. It is just that it is so much more insidious when this stuff is
done in the Name of Jesus. Adds many more layers to it.
Lydia,
It's truly bizarre: Jesus spent very little time caring about criticism or his "
public image", yet some of his shepherds appear to continually insulate themselv
es from anything that might harm their perceived moral credentials.
It's almost as if there were two different religions being lived out here: one w
hich demands moral perfection upfront; and another which requires humility to en
ter...
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Thank you for allowing me to share my story here. Thank you for the support. A n
ice soul and others have messaged me with similar messages like this one of supp
ort. Thank you for listening. A person who has undergone junk like I have really
just wants to be heard. I feel heard here and as a member of The Lasting Supper
community.
I have been reading the comments on NakedPaster. Just want to say I admire your
strength and courage in this saga! I can t imagine all that you ve been thro
ugh. This blog has been eye opening. I have no experience with abuse, spiritual
or otherwise and have had a happy marriage. But I am greatly interested and conc
erned for those who have been victimized. I just want to say how much I admire y
our spirit in being willing to apologize (for example to Brad Cecil) and adjust
your understanding with new information. I pray that others will do the same for
you.
Peace and love. You are a survivor!
David Anderson October 6, 2014 at 6:16 pm
My wife discovered this post from a tweet last week and has been urging me to co
mment as it relates to one of my biggest pet peeves regarding unlicensed counsel
ors.
I am a clinical psychologist who specializes in the treatment of individuals who
have been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and other severe ment
al health disorders. Although I am semi-retired (limited practice hours) now, I'
ve spent the better part of two decades doing neuropsychological assessments.
My experience has led me to readily agree with Jeff and Lainie's suggestions tha
t most ministers are not qualified to treat those involved in trauma. The longer
I practice, the more damage I have seen such untrained "spiritual counselors" c
ause.
Typically I see ministers silence those in need of help by ignoring their issues
or minimizing their stories with Bible verses and prayer requests. I was glad t
o at least hear this group of leaders took Julie's account seriously enough to i
nvest their time in a formal meeting and to attempt to connect her with professi
onal services. But I DO hear Julie saying that the mental health options they pr
esented to her made her feel uncomfortable and unsafe. This is where things seem
ed to go quickly down hill.
When I read that Julie was emailing others in search of help, it told me Julie h
ad likely exhausted all her own sources of support. She probably felt powerless
and forced into grasping at the off-chance hope that one of these acquaintances
could intervene. The fact that she was feeling the need to cross normal social b
oundaries and reach out to strangers would have been seen by my colleagues and I
as a cry for help. I am sorry the people who recognized this need were unable t
o help foster support that could benefit her at the time.
I hope one of the insights readers pick up is how important it is for situations
like these to be referred to unbiased mental health professionals who have exte
nsive trauma training. While professionals are no less challenged when sorting t
hrough the differing accounts from alienated spouses, they are at least trained
to offer more support and TO AVOID HARM.
Although I could offer many thoughts on NPD etc. to help clarify some of the ref
erences here, I will just reiterate it is unlikely any outcome will produce 100%
resolution or validation. I encourage her to continue to build support systems
to move beyond this and cheer her on in her life post-divorce.
David Anderson
@David Anderson,
Thank you for your insight. I was a minister for 15 years. In the last five I wa
s in I realized how ill equipped I was for counseling. I took it upon myself to
take a 50 hour crisis counseling course and get state certified. That made me fe
el more comfortable in dealing with an emergency and also gave me the tools to r
ecognize when I was in over my head. I also ceased giving pre marital counseling
and developed a relationship with an MSW who specialized in relationship issues
for such as that. I also forged relationships with places that dealt with grief
counseling, domestic violence and rape and other trauma. I became a referral so
urce so that congregants could get the help they needed. That said, I shudder to
think of the harm I inadvertently caused others in my arrogance and ignorance p
rior to that.
David Anderson thank you for that and coupled with arrogance it can be a real tr
ain wreck. I asked what credentials Doug Pagitt had to diagnose me, and recommen
d I be hospitalized and he said, "We're all Pastors....we just know."
Pat Green you used the humble approach of knowing that you are not a "know it al
l" and referring someone sounds a lot more humane. Apparently, the Licensed Psyc
hologist who assessed and diagnosed thoroughly was not as wise or as well traine
d in clinical mental health as Pastor Doug Pagitt.
Observer October 6, 2014 at 8:52 pm
@David Anderson - I question why you would assert that spiritual leaders shouldn
't offer counseling, but then you participate on a webpage run by a spiritual le
ader who is playing counselor by claiming to be a mediator?
It seemed crystal clear to me Observer that he meant unqualified individuals sho
uld not pretend to be proficient at diagnosing someone with mental health needs,
especially if said diagnosis can conveniently cover up an affair, rationalize a
divorce and make the minor Christian celebrity pose as the suffering spouse.
David Hayward has done an outstanding job at moderating this conversation and th
at is the consensus of the vast majority here, with the exception of those who w
ould rather this story remain untold.
"...why you would assert that spiritual leaders shouldn't offer counseling, but
then you participate on a webpage run by a spiritual leader who is playing couns
elor by claiming to be a mediator?"
Let it never be said that the Strawman Argument is on the decline.
And, I don't recall David Hayward ever calling himself a "mediator."
nor the ad hominem argument, nor concern trolling, nor passive-aggressive be
haviour
And what's the name for saying: "I feel this about X", within X's hearing?
(Or, perhaps, "Please tell X to stop doing Y"?)
It's not really talking behind someone's back, more talking behind their front!
Likes(6)Dislikes(1)
Hi Observer:
You're right. I'm not a certified professional mediator. But I do run this blog
and moderate the conversation. Anyone can host a conversation. The point is to t
ry to do it well, that is, fairly. I have edited nor deleted anyone's comments.
Anyone is free to comment, and we have seen a fairly good conversation take plac
e as a result. It's been a pleasure overseeing such a free dialogue. Thank you f
or your participation here too.
Bob Lundgren October 6, 2014 at 10:06 pm
The last few comments focused on the lack of appropriate help for Julie when she
reached out. But what about the cause of her trauma, if it was perpetrated by a
person with NPD? What is the proper process for seeking accountability and ensu
ring that the NPD gets help?
Likes(9)Dislikes(0)
Lurking Liberal October 6, 2014 at 10:12 pm
As someone who has been educated as an advocate for many women in Julie's positi
on I find the back and forth of this thread to be infuriating. It should be easy
for anyone reading to digitally access or at least write a letter to the courth
ouse demanding the public records related to her cases. The law requires officia
ls to document domestic abuse for example. I don't know where Julie's case unfol
ded, but restraining orders are also covered by the Freedom of Information Act i
n most states. Both of these could end the snarky opposition. Not all states hav
e their records posted online but some do. It might even be possible to link fro
m this post right to the supporting records. Then the apologies would really flo
w.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
LL I wish it were that simple. A skilled NPD will even work the police. He was a
police chaplain and hosted the annual chil festival at the police station. Not
sure if you read the thread but the night of my shoulder injury by his hands he
said, "haven't you ever heard of the code of the blue? They'll never believe you
." He talk hunting leaning on the squad car as a male officer asked my kids what
happened. They detailed Dad hurt mom but the report says, "fell in a chair" unb
elievable. They asked is I wanted to press charges and I said no not wanting my
kids to have their dad arrested. They gave me the number to a battered shelter a
dvocacy and escorted him out of the home. So, with an NPD who gas lights and is
amazing at getting others to do his dirty work things are not as they seem. Also
, records would not include discernemt letters, a grassroots crazy campaign, or
Doug Pagitt pressuring me to go to a hospital. What you would see is a ridiculou
s amount if legal motions filed by him...a ridiculous amout! Only an NPD could r
eek such havoc. And they do! They truly enjoy the theatrics and the process.
LL I wish it were that simple. A skilled NPD will even work the police. He was a
police chaplain and hosted the annual chil festival at the police station. Not
sure if you read the thread but the night of my shoulder injury by his hands he
said, "haven't you ever heard of the code of the blue? They'll never believe you
." He talk hunting leaning on the squad car as a male officer asked my kids what
happened. They detailed Dad hurt mom but the report says, "fell in a chair" unb
elievable. They asked is I wanted to press charges and I said no not wanting my
kids to have their dad arrested. They gave me the number to a battered shelter a
dvocacy and escorted him out of the home. So, with an NPD who gas lights and is
amazing at getting others to do his dirty work things are not as they seem. Also
, records would not include discernemt letters, a grassroots crazy campaign, or
Doug Pagitt pressuring me to go to a hospital. What you would see is a ridiculou
s amount if legal motions filed by him...a ridiculous amout! Only an NPD could r
eek such havoc. And they do! They truly enjoy the theatrics and the process.
Likes(7)Dislikes(1)
Lurking Liberal October 6, 2014 at 11:14 pm
I do understand, Julie. Completely. I deal with this sort of thing all the time.
Was the battered women's shelter able to provide you any assistance? Even if th
e police could somehow be compromised, the court system reviews years of evidenc
e and testimony before ruling. It is in no way limited to police testimony for e
xactly this reason. I have seen many innocent women vindicated, despite an incom
plete police report, when judges followed the paper trail around a series of eve
nts that are as obvious as the ones you describe. Are any of the cases still pla
ying out? Perhaps your day will still come. I wish I could have worked on your c
ase for you but I just saw that you are in Minnesota and I am in California.
Likes(4)Dislikes(0)
Lurking Liberal,
I posted links to the public summaries of Tony's court cases in the comments abo
ve.
Here they are again:

Tony Jones' and Julie McMahon's court cases have gone from 2008 - 2014. They're
protected by an image verification system.
Search for Case Number 27-FA-08-5921 for
In the Marriage of Anthony Hawthorne Jones and Julie Anne McMahon Jones 2008-201
4
Search for Case Number 27-CO-13-8209 for
Anthony Hawthorne Jones vs Julie McMahon Jones 2013-2014
As far as I remember, the online records contained broad event and cost summarie
s only.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Lurking Liberal October 7, 2014 at 8:30 am
Tim,
Thanks for those case numbers and full names. That might be a good start. Maybe
I will see if I or someone else in that region can look into this in more detail
.
Thanks.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
David Anderson October 7, 2014 at 10:26 am
Pat Green, thanks for your transparency. I have probably given a few terrible im
promptu "sermons" I wasn't qualified to give too. I learn as I age to stick to m
y own field and leave lectures to people who went to seminary.
Julie, I am not religious but have experienced many pastors to be well meaning p
eople who lack the training to offer complete and ongoing mental health support.
It sounds like this group tried in their own way, but failed to have much impac
t on your problems. I wish it would ve played out differently for you.
RelStuPhd Strawmen have never bothered me too much. :)
Observer, I visited the page to add the small benefit of my training and career
experience. As Julie pointed out, I don't see the moderator here claiming to be
a psychologist. But yes, I do recognize the limits of an online forum like this.
I can see how a forum like this might generate a few psychological benefits, but
I can also (with no disrespect to the host) see the differences between this fo
rum and a guided mediation.
This forum is a little bit like what happens in a counselor's office in some sma
ll way because the counselor doesn't collect and weigh evidence from both partie
s involved. This is because the counselor is not there to make a call about who
is telling the truth or who is to blame. They let the client get everything they
want off their chest. This includes theories, accusations, and feelings. Everyt
hing is welcome and nothing is censored. Counselors create a space like this bec
ause their goal isn't to establish judgment. Their goal is about client adjustme
nt. In other words counselors try to help the client build coping skills and ach
ieve more self satisfaction.
I think some of the comments here aim at supporting Julie in this way. Their pri
mary goal is hearing someone who doesn t feel heard. I would also acknowledge
that Julie speaking up in this forum did in fact mediate several apologies from
two or three people who independently gossiped about her.
But yes, Observer, you are right to suggest that mediations are different than w
hat is happening here as well. Formal mediations require two estranged parties t
o give their permission and to choose to participate. Also, in a mediation couns
elors work from court records, bank account statements, and custody reviews. The
y are not guided by personal testimony (or they would just go round and round pl
atforming opinions and never end). Also to speak frankly, there's been quite a b
it of speculation from uninvolved parties that most professionals would consider
distracting to the purpose of a mediation. Mediation is designed to be a safe p
lace where private matters are dealt with by only the parties involved (although
those parties are often supported by one or two trained mediators).
I think most readers are objective enough to see that what is happening in this
forum is its own unique thing. It s not psychological treatment. It certainly
doesn t adhere to the APA s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of
Conduct. It is also not a court. There is no presentation of evidence from both
parties, there are no legally-appointed juries or judges, and very little eyewit
ness testimony is presented. The intention here is not to make a legal judgment.
This instead strikes me as a sounding board that can help a pained spouse be he
ard and to feel supported in moving on.
David Anderson October 7, 2014 at 10:27 am
Bob, that is an especially fair-minded question and I appreciate you asking abou
t the other party. There is something called
Reactive Narcissistic Regression
which has been proven to occur when client s emotional stability is disrup
ted by a major life crisis. (It s also sometimes called transient or short ter
m narcissism.) In other words, while fighting for divorce and custody, people na
turally become excessively self-absorbed in their own protection for a stage. Th
is amplifies their negative traits, but often (not always) their behavior return
s to less damaging or more acceptable levels post-trauma.
Regardless of what type of disorder is being alleged here, I would suggest someo
ne who has manifested narcissistic traits would benefit from enrolling in their
own therapy with a qualified, trained counselor they feel they can trust. Their
goal similarly would be to develop better coping skills and find self-satisfacti
on. They would also be helped by building their own networks to support their on
going mental health.
It s important to speak against mental health stigma in forums like this as we
ll. NPD is a disorder that is thought to be conditioned in childhood and may eve
n have genetic links. People do not choose it for themselves and it often causes
them harm. Also, it is disappointing to me to see some people casually speculat
ing about NPD and promoting stereotypes which are dehumanizing to its sufferers.
Even if an individual was first diagnosed with NPD in childhood and has lived w
ith it their entire life, this diagnosis should not be taken as evidence they ar
e a criminal. Rather it makes them deficient in empathy. Other evidence of cours
e may suggest a person with NPD has committed criminal acts, but many people who
exhibit narcissistic traits do not commit crimes. Police officials, judges and
other legal advocates are trained to ensure all those with mental health disorde
rs receive a fair hearing that requires the same proof of guilt required of any
other party.
I am traveling this week and then will be returning to my part-time practice, bu
t I will leave you with these final thoughts. Supporters of either spouse might
focus on providing encouragement and moral support. Research has shown that afte
r a sometimes lengthy initial grieving stage, positive support for the future (r
ather than solely recycling past trauma) can help both parties guard against dep
ression and move toward healing.
While former spouses will never see eye to eye on the other's health, our hope c
an be that both establish clear boundaries that cleanly separate their lives fro
m each other. Rather than continue the accuse-and-defend run around which can ne
ver be fully resolved, both parties seek to find their own respective peace and
move on leaving the other to do the same. It is important that at some point bot
h parties move onto focusing more on their new lives than on their past life wit
h their former spouse. Constantly analyzing one s ex-partner and recounting th
eir misdeeds keeps them unfortunately connected rather than allowing them to flo
urish in new separate lives.
The spouses will usually choose support among different and possibly opposing gr
oups of people as seems to be the case here. But the world is usually big enough
for them to both have their own respective communities. My guess is Julie would
love to live in that place where she experiences enough regular support and ene
rgizing new life experiences that she barely thinks about her former husband. Sh
e may even be relieved to move into new interactions with some of you that do no
t center in lengthy online discussions that connect her day-after-day to the per
son she has said she is trying to separate from.
While Julie did not receive support that worked with her the first time round, I
sincerely wish her better local support in this stage of life. And as Bob s q
uestion implied, it also benefits everyone including Julie if her former spouse
finds support and healing too.
Likes(7)Dislikes(1)
David Anderson,
Your comments are one reason I gave up on therapists/psychologists. NPD's do kno
w right from wrong. Their lack of empathy might be genetic or from childhood but
they also know how to mirror right behavior. In other words, their entire lives
are built on "faking it" when it benefits them. And it is easy for them to find
"healing" because they have no real conscience so nothing they have done to oth
ers really bothers them all that much UNLESS it makes them look bad.
Their lives are a continual circle of using people to get their supply. They cou
ld always "fake compassion" and stop using others.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
I think interaction with a Narcissist (from my personal experience) is the close
st thing to evil I will ever know.
They are a menace to society and their damage and destruction is far reaching.
I do not think my words are too strong. I think they accurately match the carnag
e.
Heaven help those that ever cross them or make them look bad....if they pull bac
k the curtain from the all knowing and powerful Oz and dare to whisper...."I thi
nk you're a fraud and I see straight through you." They will hunt you down in ev
ery effort to take you out.
I am not talking about people with "narcissistic traits" or those that are "stre
ssed under circumstances and behaving poorly." No, I am only speaking of individ
uals with full blown diagnosis from a well respected clinical psychologist , MMP
I, hours of one on one clinical sessions, and another test I can't remember....w
ho said she had never given that full blown diagnosis before in her 25 years of
practice. She explained she had many times said patients had "traits," but to be
given an Axis II diagnosis of NPD is extremely significant. She advised me to g
et a great lawyer and therapist for me and my kids to weather the endless waves
of tsunami 's that would be coming my way...again and again and again. I am the
Narcissistic Target and he will not, cannot let me go.
This leads me to the issue of negligence on the part of the Emergent leadership/
authors/speaking publishing of the minor Christian celebrity circles for allowin
g this to be swept under the rug. Wise and older leaders author(s) of this movem
ent or "conversation" or whatever you want to call it, KNEW of this illness and
did nothing except perpetuate the rationalization and lies that I was the crazy
one, and he the suffering spouse.
This is NOT about the details of my divorce but about spiritual abuse by a few a
nd the Pathology that led to the Thugology in the resulting context of really ba
d Theology.
David Anderson, I would like to be an addendum to Julie's comment just above.
Some of your words are helpful but you sound clueless about the interpersonal de
vastation caused by people with NPD characteristics. Maybe it's because you are
looking at it from the disordered person's perspective while sitting in the clin
ician chair. Maybe it's because you haven't met the full-blown disorder in your
office since they do not see themselves as needing help. I daresay you've not li
ved around/with such a person.
My pastor-father had the characteristics of NPD plus he enjoyed hurting his fami
ly. At no time did he see himself wrong, and no one in his various parishes saw
it either. Later in his life, he allowed that he'd been immodest towards me (yea
rs of overt sexual abuse) but throughout my life until a month before his death,
he also repeated how very sad it was that "God made you [Patrice] for suffering
". (I speak only of one aspect done me and nothing about my sibs.)
I add my vignette because you are not yet understanding the picture Julie has of
fered. People with such disorders do not respond healthily to "encouragement and
moral support" so that they will guard "against depression and move toward heal
ing".
Certainly it would be your clinical job to practice empathy/helpfulness, if Juli
e's ex or my father came into your office. These are the requirements of your pr
ofession. But that would slowly increase pressure towards beginning self-honesty
, and that is the one thing that can't be done by those who carry entrenched ver
sions of NPD. I say "can't" because I've been unfortunate to meet a few of these
types and they have truly, honestly not been response-able. It's horribly sad,
but even more horrible is that they make others around them suffer for it. And t
hat is what the greatest concern is here. Everyone around them are deceived and
many are eventually hurt, cross community.
So what then? Given that their need pushed them into attention-getting and power
positions, what then? What then for their communities who suffer devastation or
complicity? When they push off for greener pastures only to repeat themselves,
what then? And these particular examples also claim God on their side.
I don't think you understand and I am sorry about that because this is your fiel
d, even though a specialization, and we do need expertise.
Patrice, I am so sorry for what you have survived. You really do get it! The leg
al system and even skilled professionals are fooled. They are that good. Obvious
ly, church people who are looking for a leader and see what they want to see, ar
e of course not going to pick up on it. I think once you have experienced this,
then you become highly sensitive to sniffing it out in people. Again, I am very
sorry for what you endured. That makes my blood boil for you and your siblings.
Evil. Pure evil.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
As I read this quote, I was reminded of some of the reactions I had seen on this
thread:
"Groups also have a [mob mentality] problem, best described by Wilfred Bion in a
n oddly written but influential book, Experiences in Groups. In it, Bion, who pr
acticed group therapy, observed how his patients would unconsciously coordinate
their actions to defeat the purpose of therapy. In discussing the ramifications
of this, Bion observed that effective groups often develop elaborate structures,
designed to keep their sophisticated goals from being derailed by more primal g
roup activities like gossiping about members and vilifying non-members."
From Clay Shirky, "Why I Just Asked My Students To Put Their Laptops Away"
https://medium.com/@cshirky/why-i-just-asked-my-students-to-put-their-laptops-aw
ay-7f5f7c50f368
(which is largely irrelevant to this thread, apart from its discussion of group
behaviour and unconscious behavioural influences)
Likes(1)Dislikes(1)
" Iadd my vignette because you are not yet understanding the picture Julie has o
ffered. People with such disorders do not respond healthily to "encouragement an
d moral support" so that they will guard "against depression and move toward hea
ling
I am so glad you chimed in. we have crossed paths on other blogs. I so appreciat
e your input because you have worked so hard to be healthy and healing and have
helped me so much with your insights.
.You know what has blown me a way about this entire thread? That Julie has a bon
afide diagnosis. Do folks not realize how rare that is? That should stand out to
her ex's defenders like a neon flashing sign of "oh no, what have I gone along
with!!!" But it doesn't for so many. That gives me chills. Perhaps they do not r
eally understand what that means for the lives of those the NPD is after. Perhap
s they don't care?
So many people live around bonafide NPD types and their lives are miserable and
few can understand it because they use a rationality that has nothing to do with
how the NPD operates and even helps an NPD play their grand chess game better.
Very rarely do people they get a bonafide diagnosis because most NPD's won't see
k help or admit they need it. It is always someone else who has the problem. Not
them. And even with the diagnosis, the NPD is protected because wrecking havoc-whether emotional, spiritual, mental abuse is not a crime. Even when done to th
eir own kids.
I have seen mega churches adore their narcissist on stage and shower him with ac
colades, money, etc and have NO CLUE what they are supporting. It sends chills d
own my spin when I think of those days. And they are still operating strongly te
aching other young men how to be like them.
I'm so impressed by the courage women have shown by telling their stories here.
Anne Lamott wrote,

You own everything that happened to you. Tell your stories
. If people wanted you to write warmly about them, they should have behaved bett
er.
I applaud you all. I applaud the men too.
Anita Sarkeesian writes on her blog Feminist Frequency. She critiques misogyny i
n our culture, especially in the gaming world. At a recent talk she gave, she cl
osed by saying this sentence:
"One of the most radical things you can do is to actually believe women when the
y tell you about their experiences."
It's been an honor for me to provide a space where people, mostly women it seems
, can share their experiences, be heard, and even be believed.
I want to thank everyone who has honored this space not only by sharing, but als
o by listening and believing.
Bill Kinnon October 8, 2014 at 11:18 am
There was a time when Kathy Sierra was the best example of what I once called Th
e Generous Web. She was taken out by trolls in a manner not dissimilar to what J
ulie and others in this conversation have experienced. Read Trouble at the Koola
id Point.
A quote from it:
"You must be stopped. And if they cannot stop you, they can at least ruin your q
uality of life. A standard goal, in troll culture, I soon learned, is to cause
personal ruin . They aren t all trolls, though. Some of those who seek to
stop and/or ruin you are misguided/misinformed but well-intended. They actually
believe in a cause..."
philosophicalpastor October 8, 2014 at 11:20 am
@Lydia I agree with you it is a really big deal that Julie can be sure of the di
agnosis. In my situation, we had court-ordered psych evals and my ex had his res
ults and the custody eval immediately "sealed" -- the only thing I got was a mar
riage counselor warning me I was dealing with a dangerous person and to "be very
careful." LOL...as if I didn't know this. The problem was that NO ONE ELSE seem
ed to "get" how destructive this person was in the marriage, and for years after
ward.
I wrote Julie this morning and she asked if I could share the first part so here
it is:
********************************************************************************
**************************
I have some friends, a married couple, who I re-connected with during that time
(we met at a local "cohort" when "cohorts" were one of the new things the emergi
ng movement thing was organizing). Our re-connection is not important but what I
wanted to tell you is that when I told the wife about this thread, and that "To
ny Jones' ex-wife is telling her story...I guess they got divorced?..." (I hadn'
t been around emergent long enough even to follow that, but my friends stuck wit
h it for years) my friend said ( FIRST THING out of her mouth!) "Ya, I heard she
was bat-shit crazy." My mouth dropped. I told her "O my God...that is exactly w
hat she is talking about on this blog. How would you know that? " And my friend
told me she basically just heard it. Like it had become some kind of thing peopl
e just said to one another. They hadn't met either of you

********************************************************************************
*****************************
I want to say here I completely understand how this works, because it happened t
o me, too. It doesn't need to be a "conspiracy" or an elaborate plan where every
one is on board with being out to get you. The lies that were perpetuated in my
case could be said to be the result of my ex getting an idea started and then si
mply letting the natural propensity for people to gossip, to draw their own conc
lusions, to never actually call me or talk to me and ask me if I'm okay and what
is going on and instead just take other people's word-on-the-street as gospel,
etc etc. It is actually not very hard to perpetuate character defamation... we s
ee it all the time in politics. All it takes is for someone to start a rumor and
then never do a thing to correct it or stop it and in fact to foster it whereve
r it serves the purpose it was started for.
Unfortunately, there are more people on the planet who just want to talk ABOUT o
thers than there are people who want to talk WITH and AMONG others....which is j
ust what a Narcissist needs to survive. It's sad to me that more people don't go
by the adage: "what a person says about 'someone else' says far more about the
person than about the 'someone else.'" When someone tells me an unfavorable thin
g about someone else, particularly when it is someone I don't really know very w
ell, it is my practice to ask them WHY they are telling me this! If a single guy
tells you (with that sad feel-sorry-for-me look in his eyes) that his ex was "b
at shit crazy" -- RUN and DON'T LOOK BACK!
Patrice October 8, 2014 at 11:31 am
Julie, yeah, I recognized a fellow traveler. ;-)
Lydia, if you are also sometimes Purple, hi lady! Re the test results, I know ri
ght? Sheesh! I haven't known Emergents to devalue psychology as some Evangelical
s do. Am I wrong on that? The testing used in the field is very very good.
People have told me, often, that I should stop the hyperbole regarding my father
because he was never tested and I'm no professional. But Julie has it in hand,
clear as day, and it is evaded as-if-not-there. Fascinating!
This isn't as much a miserable divorce problem (or in my case, a too-common chil
d-abuse problem) as it is a community problem. It comes from an inability to fac
e facts about who we humans are.
And they are rotten facts to face, requiring courage. It sets awry our ideas of
moral agency. It requires us to divide sins into categories, and treat them vari
ously. It demands that we carefully track the individual heart to the communal h
eart, and back. If we aren't careful, it can cause us to revert to primal ideas
of demonization.
We need to understand these disorders better. We need to learn some different th
ings about relationships and community. We need our theology to take account of
it, with clarity---they aren't just "wolves" and that's that.
If we simply learn our lesson, "run not walk" while casting behind us an efferve
scent hope that it will now stop because so many of us have learned it the hard
way, it will keep happening. It spreads, so now we have a national problem and i
t is both inside/outside the church. How I wish I were being merely hyperbolic!
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Bill Kinnon October 8, 2014 at 11:40 am
I want to note that philosophicalpastor is someone who helped me understand and

begin to recover from the personal and family trauma caused by working with/for/
under an NPD church leader
PP has been a long-distance friend for many years
now.
Likes(9)Dislikes(1)
philosophicalpastor October 8, 2014 at 11:52 am
TY Bill. We all need eachother to abide where it's really real... You have been
a that kind of friend to me.
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Lydia October 8, 2014 at 12:16 pm
"The lies that were perpetuated in my case could be said to be the result of my
ex getting an idea started and then simply letting the natural propensity for pe
ople to gossip, to draw their own conclusions, to never actually call me or talk
to me and ask me if I'm okay and what is going on and instead just take other p
eople's word-on-the-street as gospel, etc etc. It is actually not very hard to p
erpetuate character defamation... we see it all the time in politics. All it tak
es is for someone to start a rumor and then never do a thing to correct it or st
op it and in fact to foster it wherever it serves the purpose it was started for
."
I call this the poisonous seed planting tactic. It works. It is often done in a
whispering campaign that is impossible to trace. Evil is best described as decep
tion. Evil does not come to us with a pitchfork and cup of poison to drink. It h
ides behind position, charm,. manufactured credibility, etc.
I have seen first hand people ruined under the "guise" of helping them: She need
s help. She is emotionally unstable and won't accept our help. We really care ab
out her.
And the next thing the poor woman knows is that everyone is avoiding her like cr
azy and she has no idea why. People are not asking her what happened and they do
n't even want her side of anything because the one with position and power spoke
.
Now, If she shows any emotion in public (anger, sadness, etc) it only affirms th
e "emotionally unstable" remark. The poison seed sprouted and it was planted und
er the guise of "love".
Yeah, it is evil all right. And I saw it all the time in the evangelical industr
ial complex. It is in the playbook.
Bill, thanks so much for link, situation writ large and stark.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
not surprised October 8, 2014 at 4:09 pm
to Julie and all of the others who have been raw and honest on this thread, I th
ank you. I have dealt with NPD in my family of origin and it is still devastatin
g - to the point that I won't use my name hear. We are still dealing with too mu
ch. I haven't had time to read through all of this, but have been hearing about
it for weeks. I don't know you Julie, but I heard the exact term "bat-shit crazy
" in reference to you from at least 3 of the men in emergent. When I read that r
ecent comment, I was amazed, as I've never heard that term in reference to anoth
er person, but I heard it about you. I'm so sorry. Wow, now that I think back, i
t was horrible, but since I wasn't involved, it just made me not respect the peo
ple who said it, but I didn't speak up. I was not part of emergent over the long
haul, but I am close friends with many who were, and the women have many storie
s to tell of how badly they were treated. Most will say 'the boys' at the center
spoke as if they were theologically egalitarian, but acted no better than the e
vangelical men these women had been dealing with in their churches. Women were d
egraded, told they were too emotional, and only used to speak on panels if they
were praising the men. They weren't seeking to publish women. Tony and Doug fina
lly put a lot of women on stage when they started JOPA and knew women would make
them money. Many women heard form Tony for years "there just aren't the women t
heologians doing the work" for why we don't have them speaking. but as soon as t
hey had a for profit conference business, they put a majority of women on the st
age for the first time!! I seriously doubt there was any organized conspiracy. W
ith the male culture the way it is, all you have to do is drop a few phrases, an
d the woman is immediately discredited. Women continue the pattern if they are t
he token woman who has 'gotten in.'
This is definitely a cultural issue in the US evangelical church (it's been a ho
rrible place for women), and the emergent boys brought it with them as they left
their evangelical posts. Brian McLaren was an exception, and when many women sp
eak of their experience, and they say he was the one who fought to bring the wom
en into leadership and on the Board. In all of our conversations about this, he
came up as the one who was always supportive, but not willing to take on the con
flict with the culture. I'm sorry for your experience.
And NPD is is part of the evangelical 'charismatic men on stage' industrial comp
lex. so true!! from what i've learned from the history, the acts 29 thread, and
the emergent thread both were part of the young leaders network, and were all to
gether until they split - primarily over the issue of women in leadership. Both
were the cussing, smoking, young evangelical men who were going to lead the chan
ge in the church and be known in 500 years as the reformers. One friend said "un
til they realized they each wanted to be THE ONE."
And yes, and NPD diagnosis is extremely rare, and should be taken seriously. Ton
y's reputation with many is as an extreme narcissist anyway. so sorry for your p
ain. and this really needs to be dealt with in Christian circles for the sake of
our sons and our daughters. I don't want my children anywhere near these types.
Andrew October 8, 2014 at 9:00 pm
Having been linked to this a few times through SCCL, I finally caught up and rea
d most of it. Julie, I am so glad that you found a safe place to share your stor
y. It is very clear to me that you are not lying. I am sorry that people keep im
plying that... As someone that dealt with a liar in the past, a liar would not c
ome to a thread like this and share their fake story just for apologies. Liars l
ie to GET THEIR WAY, and then disappear from those people's lives. You are telli
ng the truth, and I believe in the power of the internet to continue to expose a
buse, lies, and violence. Thanks for sharing!
Andrew, Not Surprised, Lydia, Patrice, and PP and everyone else that has shown m
e love and support now and over the past few years, thank you! I am overwhelmed.
You may or may not know how deeply cathartic and healing this has been. I wish
this for anyone who has ever suffered similarly. I hope that they feel heard her
e too.
To be heard. To be validated. To be told I believe you, and I am sorry that happ
ened to you. That's all I think any of us want.
Now, onto implementing a zero tolerance and a boycott to participating wherever
these types rear their ugly, arrogant, misogynistic heads. Even when cleverly co
ncealed with charisma and craftily shrouded in uber feminism.
I was emailed this morning by a female theologian with a PhD, who had a run-in r
ecently with the aforementioned thug brothers. She had the audacity to point out
where they were dead wrong. She was private messaged and efforts were made to s
ilence and shame her into compliance. NOT OKAY! Not today, and not ever. When yo
u look the other way and refuse to stand up and call this shit out (it IS shit),
then you are perpetuating all that is toxic and dysfunctional. No more.
"You may or may not know how deeply cathartic and healing this has been. I wish
this for anyone who has ever suffered similarly. I hope that they feel heard her
e too."
I most certainly know. I cannot tell you how much. When you add the "spiritual"
layer to abuse through the silencing and censoring done by others --who are supp
osed to be your Christian brothers and sisters-- it is overwhelmingly detrimenta
l to any healing. One is better off walking away from all of it but it can take
years to figure that out.
I am not sure there is anything worse than deception done in the Name of Jesus C
hrist. As if He thinks it is a good thing and supports it. Truth, transparancy a
nd openness is the only way to go. The problem is the victims/survivors fare the
worst in that scenerio and take the brunt because the rally cry is "prove it" a
nd so much of this is impossible to prove in ways for people to believe it. That
is why I am impressed you have a diagnosis. I just cannot understand why that i
s not enough proof for some.
I cannot thank David enough for allowing this thread. It is so unusual to have t
he courage to allow it.
And I have no doubt your ex will try to make you pay big time for this thread. I
t sounds so cliche but I am praying for you to have wisdom and courage. And I am
praying for your children. This is not close to being over for them.
Thanks so much Lydia.
Becky Garrison October 10, 2014 at 4:05 am
This news might help shed some light on why author/speaker types might not want
to rock the boat. Bad for usness to diss the dude hired to acquire books for Aug
sburg Fortress http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/industry-news/religio
n/article/64296-surprising-range-religion-publishing-in-minnesota.html
who also hs a gig as a theology professor
http://www.unitedseminary.edu/faculty/tony-jones/
More upcoming academic involvements in 2015...
http://www.fuller.edu/Academics/School-of-Theology/DMin/Incarnational-Spirituali
ty-and-Theology-Cohort/?terms=tony%20jones
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
A very good article on the difference between Narcissists and A**holes. The auth
or, Lisa Thomson follows it up with Managing the Narcissist. Read them both.
Likes(4)Dislikes(1)
Kathy Sierra has written "Trouble at the Koolaid Point" about her experiences as
a woman with online visibility. Harrowing reading, and similar in many ways to
the experiences related in this thread.
There's a copy at Wired as "Why the Trolls Will Always Win, for when Kathy takes
hers down. (She doesn't want it permanently on her blog. Her choice, after all.
)
Similarly, "The Offline Nightmares Behind Online Trolling" tells several people'
s stories of online abuse.
The common threads in these stories appear to be:
* groups that unquestioningly support people or behaviours,
* people who feel they can do whatever they like without consequences, and
* media that allow anonymous/pseudonymous expression.
Oh, and systems of entrenched discrimination. Musn't forget those! Often misogyn
ist/partiarchal (even in progressive crowds), and always threatened by people wh
o are not like them being heard. (And, generally, telling stories they don't lik
e.)
If you really wish to scrape the bottom of the barrel, "How To Intimidate People
" from Vice makes disturbing reading. Many parallels between those who use intim
idation in their work ("Pro Tips from Drug Dealers, Hostage Negotiators, Bouncer
s, and Drag Queens"), and common pastoral/religious behaviour.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Sara WG October 15, 2014 at 2:37 pm
HiThank you all for sharing your thoughts and stories. I have had multiple convers
ations these past few weeks with people about the importance of this thread.
I'm was reading Traci West's (a womanist ethicist at Drew University) Disruptive
Christian Ethics : When Racism and Women's Lives Matter. It's a wonderful text
and fits well with many of the themes raised in this conversation.
Julie- I was especially encouraged and thought of you while reading a particular
passage because it is about the story of a woman who was assaulted and not beli
eved...and then about the way that it was necessary for there to be a public for
um where she could claim and own her experience. Having myself experienced publi
c silencing, sexism, and sexual harassment, I resonate with the need to have a f
orum to "give witness" to my experiences. Here's the text from page 62 that spea
ks to these notions:
"Although it is not directly communicated as such, Yvonne's testimony also raise
s a spiritual need that should not be overlooked. Her wish to have her story of
violation believed--recognized as true--represents a spiritual concern. Beyond a
desire for personal affirmation of her suffering, Yvonne's story indicates a ne
ed to be recognized as a bearer of truth. To be recognized in this way involves
not just empathy for her, but also an honoring of the sufferer (Yvonne). Yearnin
g for this kind of recognition represents one element in a common longing for su
pportive connections with others and reflects a spiritual aspect of our humanity
. Public humiliation, like Yvonne endured in the reactions to her childhood rape
, which may be a part of the dismissive practices surroundign sexual violation m
ust take place with appreciation of the victim-survivor's contribution of a coun
terpublic voice as a valuable societal contribution."
Thank you again. I have been deeply impacted by this thread.

Great reflection and quote Sara WG!
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Rick October 15, 2014 at 7:00 pm
I was catching up on my reading today and ran across something Thom Rainer wrote
on October 1st about the 'Fourteen Symptoms of Toxic Church Leaders' (http://th
omrainer.com/2014/10/01/fourteen-symptoms-toxic-church-leaders/).
Here are 10 of the symptoms:
1. They rarely demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit.
2. They seek a minimalist structure of accountability.
3. They expect behavior of others they don t expect of themselves.
4. They see almost everyone else as inferior to themselves.
5. They have frequent anger outbursts.
6. They say one thing to some people, but different things to others.
7. They are manipulative.
8. They do not allow for pushback or disagreement.
9. They surround themselves with sycophants.
10. They are self-absorbed.
Sure sounds familiar.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Sara WG I do wish any victim of similar abuses would find their voice and a safe
space to speak their truth. So healing and necessary.
Rick. Wow. #1. During my time of experiencing abuses/deception/darkness, I did s
eek God for answers. I did pray for a mountain to be moved. It seemed that I cou
ld not swing a dead cat without hitting the bible verse John chapter 15.
I must have asked, "Where is the fruit?" 100 times. That WAS my verse. There was
only rotten fruit as far as I could see. I knew this was not of God but of ego,
greed and darkness. I could go into great detail about the spiritual warfare as
pects of my story. I can tell you a tangible darkness came over our home. It was
actually my mother who called it out, without knowing any of the details. She F
ELT it. Little did I know then that there was great merit to her intuition. A pr
ophetic friend had a dream that he was being used not to glorify God but to rais
e up the enemy. She called him and told him about her dream and told him it was
a warning. He told her, "You know nothing about Emergent!" He hung up on her. Be
fore he was about to board a plane his back went out, and he was flat on the flo
or moaning. I truly believe it was a sign from God saying STOP, get your family
in order. Refusing to be sidelined fame and soaring notoriety he took a wheelcha
ir to the gate, and got on Vicodin and went to Ireland. Then twittered to his ad
oring fans how much pain he was in, and the sympathetic replies came pouring in.
"I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me and I in him, he bears
much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing. "If anyone does not abide in
Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast t
hem into the fire and they are burned.
Van Rue October 18, 2014 at 5:41 pm
I am both dismayed, and in anguish over this thread for so many reasons. I am in
anguish over the pain caused by people who follow God against other believers a
nd esp those believers we call wives, even though its a strange distant and arch
aic term. I am at once convicted to hug and love mine more.
Julie and other people on this thread. I wish I had God's power to bring healing
into your lives for what is truly wrenching events that have no place in Christ
's body. I am so angry that I am shaking as I write this.
But I also want to apologize that this thread represents a failure of the entire
Christian Church... we have done a terrible job of tending to, and bringing Chr
ist s love and healing to our brothers and sisters in Christ who have been wou
nded. Forgive me for not giving proper credit to its author, but as someone once
said "The Christian army is the only army in the world that doesn't tend to its
wounded". Julie, and others, we as a church have deeply failed you and for that
I am so sorry. First to protect, and then to offer council, comfort, healing an
d community. I pray for you Julie that the God who made you and loves you will b
ring full peace and healing into your life.
A little about me, although I am known only to a few of you my ministry has been
many times to address spiritual abuse, rebuke (and comfort pastors), but in man
y cases my service the church has been to address, confront and expose false the
ology. Instead books and blog posts like many of you my ministry has been more p
erson to person (I am not diminishing your ministries in anyway, I am very grate
ful for them, but I have quoted many of you here many times!) If there is one pr
ofound central mission or verse that defines my hope, and the hope of Jesus, it
s that simply "the Truth will set you free" (john 8:32).
The question that David posted at the beginning is whether "The Thug or the Theo
logy" Came first. The answer matters less to but what matters more is how the he
aling comes first: it comes from Truth. That truth is revealed first in the pers
on of Jesus Christ, but then as both personal and theological truth as he works
out in our lives as we co labor taking every thought captive the obedience of Ch
rist. (2 Cor 10:5).
And its with that hope in truth and in love (eph 4:15) I begin a small admonishm
ent. Although by word volume this will seem more negative than my heart truly is
, but as so many others more eloquently share, encourage and minister to Julie b
etter than I ever could, I will leave the great 500 posts on this thread support
ing Julie to speak for themselves. I couldn't add or improve on them if I tried.
So please don't interpret my following remarks relative to their volume, or any
way an attempt to minimize or discredit Julies or others sincere pain. I only o
ffer these because the few that have tried to speak out have been unfairly shot
down. There is a small danger here that I believe others have spoken to. But sad
ly those others have been shot down because of sympathetic and dangerous groupth
ink.
Someone (maybe Clair) way up around post 480 asks some good questions on what ca
uses people to become abusers. Brad Sargent as always has some great insight but
I would add one more: Groupthink. Our desire for community and acceptance, even
out of selective empathy and care lead us to think black and white in our relat
ionships, its us vs. them! We pick teams when we are kids and that simply carrie
s into adulthood in different more complex ways. It s easier because I don t
have to think as hard to label people belonging to one group or another. I can
look at a conference docket and assume automatically I don t like this person,
because so-and-so spoke at 10 am on the same stage. But our desire on some degr
ee our need for identity and community (which are legitimate needs) gets short-c
ircuited we can create a social and environment ripe for others and ourselves wh
ere discrimination and abuse are not only OK, they are welcome. Have you ever wo
ndered why abusers find other abusers? The develop a secret community where that
terrible abuse because excused, justified, and welcome. That secret community o
ffers shared and close fellowship. We simply abuse because it s a short cut wa
y to both have friends and avoid the failings deep in our own lives.
This discussion covers many things, too much to address here so I would like to
focus on one area. Tony Jones terrible abuse, adultery, neglect should fall unde
r church discipline. His attempt to justify that with heresy is disgusting and s
hameful. Tony if you read this I humbly urge you in Christ Jesus to repent. To s
eek God and fully reconcile with the truth first, and those you have hurt second
and submit to living loving, truthful and faithful life in Christ.
The Emergent Church has come under fire
again. But I could write for days on
this, so I won t talk about it here.
But there is also the serious charges against the 6 of those who aided and abett
ed the serious crimes of Mr. Jones in Dallas, and I speak to these because the o
thers that have brought this up been so viscously shot down or ignored on this f
orum. Sadly. I will bring it up again. As we mix charges and evidence, it s im
portant to recognize that simply none-of these 6 were perpetrators or even first
-hand witnesses to most (maybe some) to the terrible treatment Julie sadly endur
ed. Many of them are being unfairly lumped together with Tony because of the Gro
upthink presented on this thread. No matter title, conference presence, friendsh
ip, book credits, phone or email records
etc, none of that makes them Tony Jo
nes or answerable to his sins in anyway. Tony must be assessed and discerned alo
ne on the evidence that pertains only to him, which at this time seems both volu
minous and credible. True some people denigrated Julie behind her back, cruelly
and unfairly, and some of them have gratefully apologized here.
The 6 others that have been accused by Julie on this thread of neglecting her an
d aiding abetting the crimes of Tony, should be held to account. But they should
be held to account on their own evidence not on Tony s. 3 of them have appear
ed here to defend themselves here, which is admirable. All 3 of them make claims
of discrepancy between Julie s account and theirs. Brad Cecil asks Julie to r
elease the letter they wrote that supports their claims on innocence. Then some
guy named Alex pops on under the name AnImpartialOberserver, Alex, Alex the Inep
t I am not sure, asks some very good questions
but gets shot down.
I would like to address that Brad Cecil, AnImpartialObserver/Alex and now myself
have all asked to see this letter written by our 6 alledged conspirators. Bibli
cally charges against an elder should be brought by 2 or more witnesses, I would
accept that letter as one. But I am suspicious now because Julie refuses to rel
ease it.
This forum is public. It has been read by thousands now, and maybe even for year
s. So the standards that would exist in a therepy session simply don t apply h
ere. Major charges of complicity have been raised. As someone who fights abuse,
I am deeply concerned when evidence exists but is withheld. And many of you here
are conspiring to withhold it. This is falls under the ausipcies of church disp
line given the gravity of the charges and the people involved.
You cannot simultaneously cry out of church discipline and at the same time negl
ect its Biblical requirements . Of 2 witnesses. (1 Tim 5:19). That scripture w
as designed to prevent
abuse. Abuse of another kind.
David the Naked Pastor I appreciate your page, but I don t appreciate how you
have let this discussion about abuse, tragically and sadly, become the petri dis
h for another form abuse. Just more subtle even if it s done in and out of rea
l pain, its not justified before God or men. One abuse does not excuse the other
. Are these 6 people guilty of something? Maybe they are, but they cannot nor sh
ould they be publically denigrated without evidence. Julie has been asked to sha
re that evidence, but she has not. She has been excused because of her pain. I w
ould offer to end as I started, that simply the truth will set you free. And wit
hholding that truth is neither fruitful for the Kingdom of God, the Body of Jesu
s Christ, or even the healing of those involved.
David the Naked Pastor you have received many negative comments about this threa
d in pms. Much of that concern is justified. Not to hide Tony s deeds, or to p
rotect the Emergent Leaders, because simply in many ways this thread has started
the seeds of the very abuse that it claims to oppose.
Van Rue: I was appreciating your comment until you got near the end and proved t
hat you do not understand what's going on here. You said "Biblically charges aga
inst an elder should be brought by 2 or more witnesses, I would accept that lett
er as one. But I am suspicious now because Julie refuses to release it." As has
been said over and over again, this is not a court, but simply a safe space for
people to tell their stories, for people to be heard, and for people to listen.
I don't think anyone is hoping that some will walk away proven guilty. That's wh
y Julie, perhaps, doesn't feel the need to share documents. Same for me. That's
not what this is about. Julie was able to tell her story, be heard, and even fin
ally believed by some. The apologies were incidental. Please just listen.
Gordon Schneider October 18, 2014 at 9:20 pm
Van Rue - I have to agree with David - you just don't get it. This isn't a court
. I figured when you started talking about truth, mentioning your ministry in ex
posing "false theology", that you were on another evangelical quest for certaint
y. That quest for certainty sure encourages the groupspeak you think you see, wh
ere someone dares to question what the group sees as truth. Yes this conversatio
n was painful to read but I'm thankful that Julie and others have found some hea
ling from it. And for that it was worth it.
Van, a fair amount of coinciding testimony and historical context has been put i
nto this thread. Added together, they give open-ended veracity to Julie's tale.
You agree and hope/pray for her. You chide Tony.
You also correctly point out that some people who were accused were not altogeth
er guilty. Yes, this is what happens when silence descends after harm is deliver
ed, when no one will speak up, clear the air, care for the victim for righteousn
ess' sake. For years! It is inevitable that the whole group will be tarred with
the same brush. But happily, on this thread, a couple of them did speak up and i
t was sorted!
So when people whisper in your ear about their lack of culpability, why do you n
ot send them over here, or to Julie privately, to sort it out? Heck, there's eve
n precedent! But instead you come here to "admonish".
You write that you require one extra piece, one particular thing that Julie hasn
't been willing to make public but has given to others privately. You declare th
at without this one extra bit, everyone on this thread (including the blog owner
) are like those we are criticizing. And then you add that many people agree wit
h you.
So perhaps you don't really believe Julie's tale? I have no idea but am aware th
at you are manipulating us and I can't help but wonder if you are being manipula
ted too.
And honestly, after what Julie has been through with this bunch (and her support
ers have been through with different-similar groups), why would any of you belie
ve your critical opinions matter to us? Especially considering your little treat
ise on groupthink.
I suggest you tell those whisperers to gather up their courage and face their pr
oper jobs of reconciliation.
I've been thinking further of Van's comment these last days and have one more le
ngthy comment to him. (I hope that's ok, David. If not, I don't mind deletion.)
I'll split it in two.
I am not part of this group. I am associated with Julie and a few others here on
ly by a common-type experience---being abused inside the church and then rejecte

d for it. I know only one person a little, Lydia, because we've enjoyed conversa
tion together in other comboxes.
What you are labeling groupthink here is a number of people who recognize the th
oughts/feelings that come from someone who has been severely abused. There is an
underlying response pattern that makes up such states of being. I did not come
here assuming that Julie was correct but through reading, I recognized it.
What you are seeing here is not groupthink but a bunch of intelligent scarred in
dividuals who know what they are looking at and understand how important it is f
or an individual to tell the story and to correct history as far as can be done.
This is a well-established ceremony used also by international workers (thinkin
g here particularly of those who functioned as face-to-face formal witnesses to
tales of atrocity in South Africa and Chile).
That you do not recognize it indicates that you require more education. I hope y
ou do take the time for it because your own work will be made richer, deeper, cl
earer.
(second part)
Groupthink makes some members complicit to severe wrongs and others bewildered a
nd withdrawn. It tries to keep as few people "in the know" as possible because '
gossip'. Minimizing/denying occur without thought because members are (subconsci
ously) frightened that honesty will destroy the group. Rumors are spread against
the outsider, small preemptive actions for protection against the outsider.
When finally confronted with the truth, groupthink becomes fiercely defensive be
cause there's been too much investment of time/energy to risk a demoralizing tal
e told by a long-gone outsider. Members will talk urgent among themselves, picki
ng out weaknesses (real/imagined) that can be used to dismiss the complete tale
as pathetic and un-actionable.
Thus the black/white thinking you mention will require ever more proof from the
outsider and will inevitably conclude that there is nothing at all, not one thin
g, that any of them can do about any of it because the outsider refuses to offer
real honest-to-goodness evidence.
In light of that, those who've come here to sort it out with Julie (or who have
done so privately) are properly understood as courageous and honorable people.
I would also like you to think about the "two witnesses required" process for a
moment. The worst abuse occurs one-on-one. To use extreme egs, how can such a pr
ocess work with child sexual abuse or rape? How, in a marriage? This scriptural
passage is blithely quoted widely these days, a panacea that pushes away immense
interpersonal destruction by its thoughtless misuse.
One last personal bit. I am finished with men preaching at women. I am weary of
watching men getting praise and comment even in threads like this while women ar
e ignored, reduced to damsels-in-distress, or only allowed the job of maternal-t
ype support. There is no way I would again attend a church that does not, in pra
ctice, treat women as peer-humans, and the Emergence movement as ended my long s
earch for it. It is apparently not to be had.
Van Rue: "Tony Jones terrible abuse, adultery, neglect should fall under church
discipline. His attempt to justify that with heresy is disgusting and shameful.
Tony if you read this I humbly urge you in Christ Jesus to repent. To seek God a
nd fully reconcile with the truth first, and those you have hurt second
and s
ubmit to living loving, truthful and faithful life in Christ." True. "But I am s
uspicious now because Julie refuses to release it." Never once have I ever said
I refuse to release it. I will attach it here if there was an attach function. M
essage me and I'll freely send it to you or anyone. BRad Cecil has it....why doe
sn't he post it. I hold nothing back.
Sincerely, Julie
Also, if they (the 6) are innocent and mere victims of a Narcissist machinations
, then I do and DID apologize both publicly and privately. Truly, sorry. I will
never know what they did or did not know and when they knew it. I do know there
are dirty hands, and there was an abuse of power by Pastors in leadership. I am
not sure of who exactly. 3 of them I am confident were aware of the issues and a
ttempted to have me slienced and discredited as crazy.
Naif October 28, 2014 at 11:29 am
Julie, I write this as someone who knows nothing about divorce law and the ways
of child support disputes. If what I'm about to write is old news, already taken
care of in the law, great.
I find the disparity between your multiple court cases dealing with insufficient
child support because of your ex's inability to pay one one hand, and your atte
station of his lifestyle on the other, difficult to make sense of. So I wonder..
..are there ways he can route income to his sacramental wife or to family or fri
ends that make it look like he has insufficient income for child support?
Again, this is probably dealt with in the law and I'm aware of my naivete.
Could his share of conference revenue be assigned to someone else? Could speakin
g fees be assigned to someone else? Maybe not. But if it's possible that his sac
ramental-not-legal wife is receiving income for his labors, it would be possible
for him to be a paper pauper while enjoying a nice lifestyle via his wife's ext
ra income.
Or could he be provided with debit cards or credit loaded by others, be it famil
y and/or friends? The lifestyle could be funded by the cards while maintaining l
ittle official income from which you could draw child support.
Perhaps these are silly ideas, far from the truth, and maybe he is genuinely liv
ing in a restricted financial context. It would be sad and unjust if he WERE abl
e to re-route income to an off-ledger person and cause your children to subsist
in a deficient manner.
Just wondering aloud....
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Naif,
Your wonderings all make sense. I have no doubt (as do the professionals) that h
e has his "lavish lifestyle" currently in Italy created to look like he is desti
tute on the books but has a wine collection and exclusive Horse and Hunt Club an
d on and on. I was told early on when the self employed are also diagnosed narci
ssist....your basically screwed. He has never once willingly given a penny for h
is kids but money has been pried from his cold hands through the county collecti
ons. His income streams are craftily covered up through his various and there ar
e many revenue streams. I fought for my kids to get money for years and now I am
taking it into my own hands getting my Masters and will pull us out of poverty.
Screw him. This path is healthier for me and mine and I refuse to titillate the
sick bastard by continuing to play the game with no end that he enjoys so much.
Operating as he does not exist really is my key to peace and happiness. He will
have his reckoning with God for his children crying for milk.
Julie
David November 2, 2014 at 1:10 am
My take is that there are a lot of people here who are not merely trying to pres
s an agenda, but rather truly trying to find their way, which is a good thing. T
here could be some defensiveness but it's overshadowed by a quest for authentici
ty.
Various cultures adapt theologies to their conditions. What is called "bad theol
ogy" in evangelical America may not be the same bad theology of other parts of c
hurch America. Further, theology problems in Swaziland, Fujian Province, or Leip
zig may not bear any identifiable resemblance whatsoever. It is therefore grandi
ose to claim that there are lessons here for the "whole church". That is akin to
U.S. baseball winners being called "World Champions."
That notwithstanding, there are important lessons here for some, and if indeed t
here is psychopathology involved, who knows but that some churches can be fortif
ied against that, too.
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Eric November 4, 2014 at 1:05 am
Came across this article and thought it was fascinating and apropos.
The definitions and descriptions in the article are salient; especially, the "Ps
ychopaths" and "Almost Psychopaths" definitions and "as percentage of population
" (~1% and an estimated 10-15%, respectively) were important to help discuss som
e issues generally, and specifically to this post and the thread (though I haven
't read anything in the last month or so).
http://newworkplace.wordpress.com/2014/11/03/can-you-spot-a-workplace-psychopath
-from-a-resume-and-job-references/
Likes(2)Dislikes(0)
Kevin November 6, 2014 at 6:56 pm
Hey everyone. I know that this conversation has started to slow down since Septe
mber. I have been following it from the beginning, but never felt I had anything
to contribute and didn't want to be another unnecessary comment in the middle o
f an important conversation.
My wife and I had a lot of long conversations about this thread and about Drisco
ll. We are both seminary students looking toward pastoral ministry, and have a l
ot of questions about how to be leaders in the church without abusing it with ou
r demons. As a white, privileged male, I especially have questions about whether
the church would be better off without me.
Anyway, I wrote a piece about it and included a summary of some of the events he
re. Because this has become something of a community, I wanted to submit it to y
ou all for "approval" of sorts. I don't have a large audience or anything to be
worried, but one thing I've learned from reading this thread is that this is not
"my story". So for those on this thread whose story it is, I want to give you t
he voice to change the way I have portrayed the story if you think I've done a p
oor job reflecting it.
In the process, I hope that my article contributes to this conversation in some

small way. I think the only way out of this for the Church is to be confessional
and for us all to admit our flaws more readily. Would love some feedback from a
nyone, but especially those whose stories I am repeating. My article is called:
"I am Mark Driscoll, and I need to change." You can find it here: http://wp.me/p
PuFU-cm
Likes(5)Dislikes(0)
Julie McMahon November 7, 2014 at 1:01 am
Kevin, you wrote:
I think the only way out of this for the Church is to be confessional and for us
all to admit our flaws more readily.
I could not agree more. I can tell you when I sat in the grass with Doug Pagitt
in 1996 (I think) and he was dreaming of starting his church and the ideas and d
esire to be real and true and different...I believe the intention was authentic.
..then ego, greed, status, book deals, money and the inability to admit a flaw m
essed him up. He lives 1 block from me and refuses to make peace with me. I have
reached out many times. Most recently tonight and this is why I am writing.
Today my crazy and obsessed ex husband went to the police (again). He lied (agai
n) and said, "She came to my place of business unwanted and harassed me." I drop
ped my sons hockey skates at Doug's and said, "Can you please give these to Tony
so I don't have to drive them to his house." The police called and asked me abo
ut it. I went to Doug's and said, "Do you know what Tony did today when I droppe
d off hockey skates? He tried to say I harassed him and that this is his place o
f business!" Doug seemed to get the sheer insanity and said he would talk to him
about his flat out LYING. Then Doug quickly said, "You told the internet I trie
d to have you hospitalized." I said, "Because you did!" He denied it and everyth
ing else. Then when he realized he was being confronted on the fraud that he has
become he said, "Do you want me to post the email where you say you feel suicid
al?!" I said, "OF course I did....I have 3 kids under age 6 and my husband is ha
ving an affair with a 28 year old in Dallas, Texas the city he was in at that ve
ry moment and refused to talk to me and Doug would answer his cell and say, "He
can't talk to you right now I have control over his cell and laptop." This was A
LL in an elaborate effort to control the spin of a leaked affair. So, tonight "P
astor" Doug's best loving Christian response is, "You need to leave my property
now forever." Many people have witnessed the pattern of Tony and Doug raging whe
never they hear something that paints them in a bad light or questions them. Thi
s is a perfect example. I told Doug he is uniquely positioned to make things bet
ter for my suffering kids and his only response was, "I told you to go to the ho
spital and you didn't listen to me." It seems he REALLY needed me to do that so
he could cover up a whole bunch of junk including the fact that his business par
tner is an unrepentant adulterer who is clinically diagnosed and mentally ill. J
esus was a truth teller and despised frauds. Me too.
So, Kevin....yes, the only way out is to confess, apologize, repent and forgive.
Some egos just, can't. do. it.
Kevin November 7, 2014 at 4:07 am
I couldn't agree more. Thank you for your story and your truth-telling. I pray f
or your peace and for justice in this situation. I hope that more wolves among u
s are exposed, and our own wolf-like tendencies are convicted and squashed by Go
d before they hurt more people like you.
Likes(6)Dislikes(0)
Julie McMahon November 9, 2014 at 12:29 pm
Update: Doug Pagitt has agreed to meet with me and a 3rd party mediator. My purp
ose is to be heard and to forgive and I do not have any higher expectations than
that. I want peace and closure. How dare I claim to be a loving person who seek
s peace if I do not set this straight. Anything short of reconciliation is a hyp
ocrite. I do expect attack, intimidation and bullying tactics. I do not expect a
ny genuine remorse or any admission of any wrongdoing whatsoever. I do expect th
e facts to be twisted and denied as they were in our face-to-face conversation i
n his driveway the other night where he denied ever saying things he did indeed
say. I am willing to let that all go. He knows and I know he knows I know and th
at is enough for me. I want to be heard look him in the eye and say you could ha
ve made a difference for good and you could have improved the outcome for my thr
ee children (and still can) and yet chose to do nothing. That's enabling. Runnin
g me out of a church and making me prove my child attended preschool there...tho
se behaviors are of a man whose frantic to keep things under wraps, whether he'l
l ever admit to it or not is irrelevant.
Patrice November 9, 2014 at 1:01 pm
May it go well, Julie. I wish you the best, courageous lady.
Likes(7)Dislikes(0)
Patric Green November 10, 2014 at 10:40 am
Julie,
I do not anticipate this going well, but I am glad there will be a third party f
or your own protection and I am also impressed with your consistent open door.
You are a beautiful person. Keep being that. It makes the ugly in the world a li
ttle easier to bear.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Patrick Green November 10, 2014 at 10:40 am
And yes. I misspelled my own name. Sheesh!
Likes(1)Dislikes(0)
apolarity November 10, 2014 at 6:05 pm
Commenting so I can subscribe by email to new comments. This has been a remarkab
le thread, and I'm in awe of the bravery, strength, and truth-telling on display
here.
Likes(8)Dislikes(0)
Julie McMahon November 12, 2014 at 12:28 am
Update: I decided not to meet with Doug Pagitt. I asked him to help out in a tou
gh situation with the kids the other night. He lives 1 block away. He never resp
onded. My son used his sisters phone to text his dad about hockey. Obsessed ex c
alled the police and said I was texting him and harassing him and arrest me. I w
asn't even home! The police interrogated a frightened 13 and 10 year old. I aske
d Doug to please put a leash on his insane and obsessed bestie and business part
ner. Crickets. Then he treated me like the "mental patient" because that is the
role I need to play for their narrative to work. I said, "I am going to pass on
the whole reconciliation idea." Then I saw this quote: "I am sorry I just can't
explain this to you again...I'm not the jackass whisperer." Upon reflection, I h
ave no respect for these people (none) who are complete and utter "xian" frauds
so why the hell would I give a minute towards "reconciling" which I know full we
ll means accepting their narrative. I would and tried too many times for peace w
ith my ex for my kids sake, but again...I am not a jack ass or narcissist whispe
rer.
Nakedpastor David Hayward November 12, 2014 at 7:14 am
Self-care is job one.

Patrice November 19, 2014 at 4:10 pm
"Jackass whisperer"? I wonder if time is spent searching for such insults or if
they simply pop fully-formed into minds so inclined?
Boundaries are important, as high as needed.
I pray God's generosity be poured on you (in the interstices), enough for you an
d your children to thrive.
Likes(4)Dislikes(2)
Sara WG November 19, 2014 at 4:42 pm
A note of thanks: This thread was influential in how I approached my sermon this
Sunday on forgiveness. So often the sermons, Christian books, and discourses I
have heard that deal with matters of forgiveness silence victims of abuse and si
n. This thread gave me increased amounts of courage to own my deep discomfort wi
th the narrative about forgiveness as a tool of oppressors and silencers. As I s
aid to one of the women who came up to me after church: "I needed to narrate som
e "good news" about forgiveness that didn't kill me." Too often faith and concep
ts like forgiveness are utilized and employed to kill and destroy those who have
been/are being abused and silenced. I am, instead, committed to a gospel that t
ruly is "good news" and gives us all voices and believes and sees those who have
survived as fully human persons. Thank you again for your courage, Julie and ot
hers. And David Hayward- thanks for reminding me about why I'm committed to prov
iding spaces where people can experience life and live their truths.
Nakedpastor David Hayward November 19, 2014 at 4:45 pm
Sara WG: Thank you so much. Really. Thank you.
Likes(3)Dislikes(0)
Lydia December 1, 2014 at 8:21 pm
" I said, "I am going to pass on the whole reconciliation idea."
Julie, there can be no reconciliation with totally unhealthy people who are real
ly looking to silence you so they can keep their image or brand they have built.
That is all it is.
You can forgive but that does not mean fellowship, reconciliation or even silenc
e. Negative truths are not sinful.
Everyone thinks that is what forgiveness means. It means giving up any rights to
revenge...an eye for an eye. It does not mean enabling liars, abusers or those
who use Jesus for personal gain. The most healthy thing is to walk away. As litt
le contact as possible. His calling the police over a text from that phone is in
dicative of NPD behaviors. It is all about "getting you" for him.
I thought I would go insane with all the silly platitudinal forgiveness sermons
that basically gave all abusers carte blanche. I don't even listen to them anymo
re.
Julie McMahon December 3, 2014 at 12:11 pm
Lydia, I know you are right. Over Thanksgiving I had positive interactions with
my ex mother-in-law where we discussed how reprehensible this all is, and how th
e children are the true victims. She and I agreed to bridge peace so that the ch
ildren can have healthy exchanges with their Grandmother and physically sick Gra
ndfather. I want that for my children, and am wiling to do my part. If we are un
willing as humans to bridge peace in our relationships? What is the point of all
or any of this. Julie
Nakedpastor David Hayward December 15, 2014 at 7:45 pm
After a few months since I posted this article, What Came First: the Thug or the
Theology, in which I wrote about Tony Jones' take on Mark Driscoll, I've finall
y decided that I need to write this closing comment.
One of the values of nakedpastor is that people can express themselves without f
ear of censure or censor. I critique ideas, behaviors and systems that are harmf
ul to people and their communities. So providing a safe space for the voiceless
victims of spiritual abuse is crucial to me. I build places where people can sha
re their own interpretation of events and give voice to their own sufferings wit
hout fear of discipline. Nakedpastor (and my online community The Lasting Supper
) is a space where people can freely express their pain, where victims are heard
and abusers called out
something many spiritually abused people did not expe
rience in the church that promised them care. Most abused people feel they must
live in silence or confide their private pain to a therapist while their abusers
thrive. For those who participate on the nakedpastor blog, there is an implicit
respect for those speaking, that we will listen and not edit, instruct, or corr
ect what they say. For those who don't participate, it is understood that they a
re observing a sacred space for cathartic healing. As I repeated throughout the
comment section, I never took sides but only kept the space open for people to s
hare their stories. When some tried to control the conversation, they were quick
ly admonished by the community to let them keep telling their stories freely. It
would be impossible to be an advocate for each and every story. But it is entir
ely possible to be an advocate of a safe space to tell their story in. Yes, ther
e were negative comments, including negative comments about me. However, I belie
ve this was a rare and historically significant event where the spiritually abus
ed told their raw stories and held their personal truths in a public forum witho
ut being shut down.
I want to reiterate that the opinions of those commenting do not reflect mine. W
hat I say and what others say is distinct. Some claim the comments come under th
e aura of nakedpastor and people cannot help but interpret them as an extension
of my opinion. They are concerned when I allow comments to stand that are critic
al of others that I am believing, condoning, and endorsing them. I want to be cl
ear that this is not true. However, even though I have no trouble distinguishing
what I say from what the commenters say, some do not accept this distinction.
I cannot apologize for what others said. But I can apologize for the pain nakedp
astor caused by association. I realize that the post put a distance between myse
lf and others. This grieves me.
Here's what's motivating me: in a world that's becoming more divisive and polari
zing, I want to work in the opposite spirit of unifying and gathering. I'm not i
nterested in campaigns against people or the groups they compose. So even though
I will continue critiquing ideas, behaviors and systems that are harmful to peo
ple and communities, I want to cooperate with those interested in furthering the
unity and health of the church and the world and ridding it of anything that hu
rts people.
I welcome anyone who feels genuinely hurt by my actions and who wants to work to
ward reconciliation to contact me personally and begin the process.
In summary:
1. I will continue to create space for challenging what is unhealthy while uplif
ting what is healthy for people and communities.
2. I'm glad many people found a safe space here to share their unedited stories.
3. I have, by association, hurt others.
4. I'm sorry and want to reconcile and work together for the common good of all
people, the church, and the world.
I will now close the comment section of this post for the sake of discretion and
closure.
Sincerely,
David
2014-2015 Naked Pastor. All Rights Reserved.

Text Comments On Tony Jones On Mark Driscoll - What Came First, The Thug or The Theology? - Nakedpastor

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Text Comments On Tony Jones On Mark Driscoll - What Came First, The Thug or The Theology? - Nakedpastor

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Tony Jones on Mark Driscoll: What came first, the thug or the theology?

BY NAKEDPASTOR DAVID HAYWARD

ructures to keep our unhealthy tendencies in check.

David Hayward September 11, 2014 at 9:56 am

alytic Diagnosis" by Nancy McWilliams, Ph.D.

t a doubt the #1 source for insider dirt re MHC. http://wenatcheethehatchet.blog

and generous as possible.

we differ. While I agree with the principle of generosity in interpretation, I

when I do that, my own position is often strengthened and solidified. But

but then the whole 'keep things in person', cropped up.

to me for the very real re

ly... destroy any hope of good.

relevant to expanding our understanding of the dynamics of abuse.

the abject nonsense of legal marriage vs spiritual marriage

with the full pa

es that I showed up at Christianity 21 to "make a scene" and "I'm crazy." No, as

on on the left. If you dare yahahaha ;)

Are any of you having this conversation in person, or voice to voice?

passing on things that I have no actual knowledge of.

It is like Bill Gothard talking about "umbrellas of protection" to shield from h

Danica September 17, 2014 at 7:15 pm

tru September 18, 2014 at 12:23 am

this happen again. We need to follow Julie's lead re what can/cannot b

* You're the most self-centered person I've ever known.

Chris Hill September 19, 2014 at 6:52 pm

I can't even trust myself, so who does that leave?

they are real. Sorr

David Hayward September 20, 2014 at 6:33 pm

to promote peer dialog can get hijacked by celebrities.

I think it would be safe to say the Jon M. Sweeney is simply a representative of

Let the personal attacks on me begin.

re in response to Julie's unaccountable torrent is deeply troubling."

Commenders Who Prop Up and Perpetuate an Authoritarian System:

Within the Perpetrator/Perpetuator system is a super group

Calls for a transparent, public process of accountability through apolog

Bill Kinnon September 22, 2014 at 7:01 pm

3. They shame the participants of this discussion by likening them to rubberneck

h and justice is so powerful.

response is pretty consistently the same:

I (and family) entertained some interest in C21 conference, coming to AZ in a fe

Not a flat Earth,

"But for my part, this is neither an intellectually nor spiritually compelling m

Tony...his mistress filmed it and giggles throughout...kinda cute. Cue cackle at

why the EC is so white, I have a threefo

# of people I've met in professional settings who have sa

any ad hominems in private emails will

cipants in this discussion!

ore good fruit will appear.

Danica September 24, 2014 at 12:53 pm

Austin Thomas September 24, 2014 at 2:58 pm

ff. There really is nothing new under the sun.

t be saying anything else:

take accusations of spiritual abuse seriously

Cecilia Davidson September 24, 2014 at 7:39 pm

decade, I can assure you

David started this post to ask

Which came first

the thug or the theol

And I think the

Julie, Brian; David, Holly. Even Tony J.

d like to offer that, neither can you.

ed to the US emergent brand, we made amends.

ons" via business companies, tax-exempt non-profit church(es), and a tax-exempt

-oriented for postmodern culture. I'm a culturologist, not a philosophist. So