Bill Gothard Resigns!

[JumpyTheFrog]

Hallelujah!

[JumpyTheFrog]

After Doug Philips and Bill Gothard both resigning in six months, I find myself hoping that Michael Pearl will be next. It's time to clean house of these sickos.

 

ETA: By "clean house," I am referring to Christianity in general. I am fully opposed to patriarchy and authoritarian lifestyles, having been at a church that teaches them. The fruit is not good.

[WishboneDawn]

After Doug Philips and Bill Gothard both resigning in six months, I find myself hoping that Michael Pearl will be next. It's time to clean house of these sickos.

I think you could clean house all you want but if you don't acknowledge that the house itself is the problem, the unthinking surrender to patriarchal authority, it will be a rather useless exercise.

 

For every Gothard that's deposed there's a Ken Ham who's uncritically adored.

[Tenaj]

I think you could clean house all you want but if you don't acknowledge that the house itself is the problem, the unthinking surrender to patriarchal authority, it will be a rather useless exercise.

 

For every Gothard that's deposed there's a Ken Ham who's uncritically adored.

 

Can I ask a question about your last sentence?  Why do you (and others) lump Ken Ham in with Gothard?  I've seen this comparison before and I'm not sure why?  Ken Ham isn't a Pastor.  He does run a ministry but it's concentrated on seven-day creation.  Not trying to argue - just genuinely curious as to how Ken Ham gets lumped into a conversation about Gothard?

[Mommyfaithe]

I think you could clean house all you want but if you don't acknowledge that the house itself is the problem, the unthinking surrender to patriarchal authority, it will be a rather useless exercise.

 

For every Gothard that's deposed there's a Ken Ham who's uncritically adored.

I am still not sure that Ken Ham is in the same category....obnoxious, yes....dangerous?? Damaging?? Completely insane cult guru passing out kool aid?! Nah. Probably not.

 

As far as Gothard stepping down? Damage done and someone else is probably ready to step right in.

 

The whole story just makes me sick, sick, sick! And what would Michael Pearl step down from? His family and privately owned publishing company? He isn't going anywhere....just passing down his legacy for his kids to continue on. Ugh!

[FO4UR]

After Doug Philips and Bill Gothard both resigning in six months, I find myself hoping that Michael Pearl will be next. It's time to clean house of these sickos.

 

 

Nah...it's easier to navigate the jungle with a known predator rather than the unknown.  Someone else will step up to fill in these....shoes.  It'll be a more dangerous time for new Christians and new homeschoolers, most especially new Christian homeschoolers.

[MercyA]

Can I ask a question about your last sentence?  Why do you (and others) lump Ken Ham in with Gothard?  I've seen this comparison before and I'm not sure why?  Ken Ham isn't a Pastor.  He does run a ministry but it's concentrated on seven-day creation.  Not trying to argue - just genuinely curious as to how Ken Ham gets lumped into a conversation about Gothard?

 

:iagree: I'm not a Ken Ham fan, but I wouldn't put him in the same category as Gothard. 

 

Actually, Michael Pearl has quite a different mindset from Gothard, too, and has been openly critical of Gothard's brand of patriarchal teaching.  I am very well aware of the many reasons people dislike Pearl, but he is not, as far as I know, guilty of the type of misconduct of which Gothard has been accused.

[Mommyfaithe]

Nah...it's easier to navigate the jungle with a known predator rather than the unknown. Someone else will step up to fill in these....shoes. It'll be a more dangerous time for new Christians and new homeschoolers, most especially new Christian homeschoolers.

My fear exactly! I shudder to think about it.....

[MercyA]

A huge part of the problem is unthinking, uncritical acceptance of teachers and movements.  It's so frustrating to me.  Scripture demands scrutiny.

• But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good; abstain from every form of evil. 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
• Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 1 John 4:1
• ...They received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. Acts 17:11b

[Mimm]

Wow, what happened?

 

And yes, someone else will fill his shoes, but isn't it still worth bringing someone who is harming other people down? This is a man that people followed unthinkingly. Maybe some of them will start to think.

[Mimm]

Never mind, googled it.

 

And I'm not at all a fan of Ken Ham. I was hanging out on the board with The Kerfuffle happened. I believe in evolution. But I don't know anything about him that puts him in the same category with the likes of Doug Philips, Bill Gothard and Michael Pearl.

[Seasider]

Ken Ham is dangerous in a different way. The other men (Phillips, Gothard) were leaders of movements that have the potential side effect of putting women and children in spiritual, sexual and physically abusive situations. Of course there are many adherents that follow patriarchal teachings with love and gentleness; the point is, the prescribed methods of patriarchy can breed abusive situations (both Phillips and Gothard are testimony to that).

 

Ham teaches 7 day creation, including the line of thought that those who do not believe in a literal 7 twenty four hour day creation event aren't true Christians. This is a different form of abuse, but injurious nonetheless.

 

In each of these cases, the leaders/teachers/movements twist scripture to promote their specific agenda. That's the real issue. That's why believers are instructed to "be as the Bereans" who diligently searched the scriptures to compare and identify false teachings.

 

As far as guys like Gothard, Phillips and a number of folks currently involved in a lawsuit over sexual abuse within Sovereign Grace ministries, what we really need to see are some criminal prosecutions. As for (what I believe are errant) teachers such as Ham, we who call ourselves followers of Jesus need to make sure we have a firm grip on what scripture teaches and be ready to closely scrutinize any message that comes along that focuses (and capitalizes) on one sliver of the message to the detriment of Christ's overarching mission of grace and forgiveness. I believe guys like Ham turn off a lot more folks from the faith than they attract to it.

 

(Obviously some of what I've written above is based on my own beliefs. Some of you will obviously disagree.)

[G5052]

Read the letter.  He resigned to "listen" to his accusers.  No admission of wrong at this point.  

 

Sigh.

[LucyStoner]

I am sorry, with or without Gothard, ATI and IBLP are houses that are too filthy to clean. They are total teardowns, in need of a total rebuild, not fresh paint and cheery new window treatments.

 

The ideas are no less reprehensible than the actions of the man.

[MercyA]

In each of these cases, the leaders/teachers/movements twist scripture to promote their specific agenda. That's the real issue. That's why believers are instructed to "be as the Bereans" who diligently searched the scriptures to compare and identify false teachings.

 

As far as guys like Gothard, Phillips and a number of folks currently involved in a lawsuit over sexual abuse within Sovereign Grace ministries, what we really need to see are some criminal prosecutions.

 

Well said.

 

[JumpyTheFrog]

Yes, we absolutely need people being sent to jail.

 

Even though Gothard will never admit to wrongdoing, we can still cheer that he's gone.

 

I agree that the "house" of patriarchal teaching is rotten. You know it's bad when even someone as yucky as Michael Pearl points out problems with it. Specifically, while he has no problem with husbands bulling their wives (and expecting wives to be cheerful about it), he did write some articles about parents being wrong to try to make their adult children follow their own vision. I guess he wouldn't be a fan of Doug Philip and others pushing 200 year family plans.

[JumpyTheFrog]

I am sorry, with or without Gothard, ATI and IBLP are houses that are too filthy to clean. They are total teardowns,

 

Yes, but they are largely a "cult of personality." Maybe without Gothard they will fall apart faster, especially as more people share their stories on blogs.

[WishboneDawn]

Can I ask a question about your last sentence? Why do you (and others) lump Ken Ham in with Gothard? I've seen this comparison before and I'm not sure why? Ken Ham isn't a Pastor. He does run a ministry but it's concentrated on seven-day creation. Not trying to argue - just genuinely curious as to how Ken Ham gets lumped into a conversation about Gothard?

He expects people to take his word as gospel and is quite vicious to those who disagree with him.

 

His MO isn't exactly the same but he still has an entitled authority that his fans seem loathe to question. There's a willingness to cede reason and the work of faith to certain men in some quarters and Ham is as much a symptom of that as Gothard.

[WishboneDawn]

Yes, but they are largely a "cult of personality." Maybe without Gothard they will fall apart faster, especially as more people share their stories on blogs.

The cult of personality aspect is another commonality with Ham.

[G5052]

Yes, but they are largely a "cult of personality." Maybe without Gothard they will fall apart faster, especially as more people share their stories on blogs.

 

They're already in financial trouble, and this will only accelerate that.

[Tenaj]

He expects people to take his word as gospel and is quite vicious to those who disagree with him.

 

His MO isn't exactly the same but he still has an entitled authority that his fans seem loathe to question. There's a willingness to cede reason and the work of faith to certain men in some quarters and Ham is as much a symptom of that as Gothard.

 

Or . . .there are people who respect Ken Ham because they also believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis.  That doesn't mean they "cede reason".    

 

 

Thanks for explaining.

[NASDAQ]

I think the concern about Ken Ham is that he has a para-church ministry that can, in some ways, undermine the local church body. I might admire someone as a great radio host or writer or pianist or swimmer,  but it's a different dynamic than to look at someone quite distant from you as a spiritual authority.

 

I know nothing personally about Mr. Ham. Just saying that these Christian-not-church ministries do have pitfalls and I think that's what people were pointing out.

 

If I wanted to bring up someone who seems to be going a bit nutty and runs a Christian organisation, I'd pick Mark Driscoll.

 

ETA: I think Vision Forum was a bad thing whether or not Doug Phillips was an immoral jerk, because it seemed so common that people would look to VF and be dissatisfied with themselves and their lives because it didn't look like his tea party of a life. VF is to religion what carefully curated blogs are to homemaking, and what facebook is to life.

[Mommyfaithe]

Never mind, googled it.

 

And I'm not at all a fan of Ken Ham. I was hanging out on the board with The Kerfuffle happened. I believe in evolution. But I don't know anything about him that puts him in the same category with the likes of Doug Philips, Bill Gothard and Michael Pearl.

 

Yep, and quite frankly, Debi Pearl is a much bigger nut job than her husband. I can understand his redneck ways just a bit, but HER???? Oh my LORD JESUS!!! Whacko does not even describe her!

[LucyStoner]

Yep, and quite frankly, Debi Pearl is a much bigger nut job than her husband. I can understand his redneck ways just a bit, but HER???? Oh my LORD JESUS!!! Whacko does not even describe her!

 

Something has to be going on upstairs to say some of what she spews.  I mean, anyone who advocates staying married to a man who sexually abuses their children?  That person is not operating in reality.  Any person, and especially any woman, who subscribes to that sort of misogyny has to have some serious problems. 

[PeterPan]

Back to Gothard.  Can I ask a really basic, obvious question?  WHY IS THIS MAN NOT BEING PROSECUTED???  Are the families scared?  Did nothing he do technically violate any laws?  That, it seems to me, should be the next step for these people.  They could organize, find a lawyer, and go after him legally for his ill-deeds.

[MercyA]

Something has to be going on upstairs to say some of what she spews.  I mean, anyone who advocates staying married to a man who sexually abuses their children?  That person is not operating in reality.  Any person, and especially any woman, who subscribes to that sort of misogyny has to have some serious problems. 

 

Just to be clear--Debi Pearl does indeed advocate staying married to such a man, but she also advocates reporting him to the police and testifying against him in court so he goes to jail.  I'm guessing that doesn't improve your opinion of her, though. 

 

[itsheresomewhere]

Back to Gothard.  Can I ask a really basic, obvious question?  WHY IS THIS MAN NOT BEING PROSECUTED???  Are the families scared?  Did nothing he do technically violate any laws?  That, it seems to me, should be the next step for these people.  They could organize, find a lawyer, and go after him legally for his ill-deeds.

 

Sadly, these families have been so brainwashed.  One day, I truly hope that one of the girls finds the courage to do something about it.  Unfortunately, she will have to probably do it without the support of her family and church family as she will have been the cause of him to stumble based what they have been taught to believe.

[laughing lioness]

Can I ask a question about your last sentence?  Why do you (and others) lump Ken Ham in with Gothard?  I've seen this comparison before and I'm not sure why?  Ken Ham isn't a Pastor.  He does run a ministry but it's concentrated on seven-day creation.  Not trying to argue - just genuinely curious as to how Ken Ham gets lumped into a conversation about Gothard?

 

 

Because Ham followers tell non-Ham followers that they are going to hell (ask me how I know). Because his doctrine has been re-made into a salvation issue.

 

Because Ham publically attacks believers who disagree with his doctrine. This has been going on since the early 90's.

 

His ministry is not just concentrated on a 7-day creation. It is concentrated on legalism and seperation of true (i.e. "pure") followers (believers) from those who aren't.

 

There are plenty of innerantists who DON't agree with Ham- but according to him, if you don't agree with him, you don't belive in the authority fo the Bible. His way or hell. Which kind of supercedes the authority of the Bible.

 

 

[LucyStoner]

Just to be clear--Debi Pearl does indeed advocate staying married to such a man, but she also advocates reporting him to the police and testifying against him in court so he goes to jail. I'm guessing that doesn't improve your opinion of her, though.

 

Telling your child that they mean so little that mom will welcome the sexual abuser back into her home and life is an unbelievably cruel thing to do. Having been raped as a child by someone in my extended family, I can say unequivocally that I could not possibly have any less respect for a woman who would do that to her child, even after a prison sentence was served. I can only hope that Michael and Debi Pearl are talking about this in theory and have no actual experience with what this sort of thing does to the sexual abuse survivor. I believe in forgiveness but I also believe in consequences and boundaries and letting survivors heal and not be constantly exposed to their attacker.

 

If someone related to me, husband or not, sexually assaulted my child the law is the very least of their worries.

[plansrme]

Back to Gothard. Can I ask a really basic, obvious question? WHY IS THIS MAN NOT BEING PROSECUTED??? Are the families scared? Did nothing he do technically violate any laws? That, it seems to me, should be the next step for these people. They could organize, find a lawyer, and go after him legally for his ill-deeds.

What has he done that is prosecutable? There is no indication that the contact was not consensual or was with girls under the age of consent, as far as I know. Sexual harassment in the workplace is not a crime. I am happy to see him run out of town on a rail, but I don't see that he has done anything illegal. Of course there may be things I do not know about, but the offenses I have read about do not look criminal. It would be a huge stretch to say that the girls did not consent because they were brainwashed or felt spiritually threatened, however true that might have been.

[laughing lioness]

I think that he did engage in statutory rape but the statute of limitations had run out. He has been accused of going far beyond harassment. His brother has been accused of more as well, with Gothard covering for him (actually "sending him" girls). 

[MercyA]

Telling your child that they mean so little that mom will welcome the sexual abuser back into her home and life is an unbelievably cruel thing to do. Having been raped as a child by someone in my extended family, I can say unequivocally that I could not possibly have any less respect for a woman who would do that to her child, even after a prison sentence was served. I can only hope that Michael and Debi Pearl are talking about this in theory and have no actual experience with what this sort of thing does to the sexual abuse survivor. I believe in forgiveness but I also believe in consequences and boundaries and letting survivors heal and not be constantly exposed to their attacker.

 

If someone related to me, husband or not, sexually assaulted my child the law is the very least of their worries.

 

I'm very sorry that happened to you, Katie.  Thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts.

 

[LucyStoner]

sexual harassment at work can be a criminal matter.

 

And sexual touching that is with minors or non-consensual with older girls can also be a criminal act.  It might be a gross misdemeanor in some instances rather than a felony but it is a crime. 

 

That said, the issue I see is that these cases are probably too old and with too little evidence to mount a criminal case. 

And with THAT said, I am highly skeptical that he never did more than touch or harass.  He's obviously not asexual and I don't buy that he was able to remain celibate his whole life if he was doing these things to young women and girls. 

[Janie Grace]

Back to Gothard.  Can I ask a really basic, obvious question?  WHY IS THIS MAN NOT BEING PROSECUTED???  Are the families scared?  Did nothing he do technically violate any laws?  That, it seems to me, should be the next step for these people.  They could organize, find a lawyer, and go after him legally for his ill-deeds.

Statute of limitations, I believe.

[mommaduck]

After Doug Philips and Bill Gothard both resigning in six months, I find myself hoping that Michael Pearl will be next. It's time to clean house of these sickos.

 

ETA: By "clean house," I am referring to Christianity in general. I am fully opposed to patriarchy and authoritarian lifestyles, having been at a church that teaches them. The fruit is not good.

 

 

I don't see the Pearls resigning. Their business is purely their own baby. No board, no accountability, nothing expansive. It everyone entirely ignored them and didn't order from them, they'd be out of business.

[Mommyfaithe]

I don't see the Pearls resigning. Their business is purely their own baby. No board, no accountability, nothing expansive. It everyone entirely ignored them and didn't order from them, they'd be out of business.

Truth. And so would all these other guys too. They are in it for power, but they are in it for MONEY!!! I can guarantee, not one of them is driving a Chevette, or living in a mobile home!!

[MyThreeSons]

Truth. And so would all these other guys too. They are in it for power, but they are in it for MONEY!!! I can guarantee, not one of them is driving a Chevette, or living in a mobile home!!

 

Actually, as I remember it (my former church was hugely Gothard-influenced), Mr. Gothard makes it a point to drive a modest car and live in a modest home. 

[laughing lioness]

Actually, as I remember it (my former church was hugely Gothard-influenced), Mr. Gothard makes it a point to drive a modest car and live in a modest home. 

 

 

Actually I read this too. Along with the fact that his ministry spent thousands and thousands of dollars to keep the car  running. And while he personally never spent money, apparently all he would have to do was mention that he appreciated or maybe wanted something and one, or many, of his adoring fans would acquire it for him. And, btw, that "humble" car frequently drove him to one of the 2 planes he owned- one of which was a Lear Jet.

Oh, the irony, eh?  

[G5052]

While discussing this with a like-minded friend on Sunday, she noted that he also resigned in 1980 when there was a scandal involving his brother, and then he came back.  I vaguely remember hearing about that from friends that were involved in the early 1980's.  It almost pulled them under, but they recovered.  This time?

[WishboneDawn]

Or . . .there are people who respect Ken Ham because they also believe in a literal interpretation of Genesis. That doesn't mean they "cede reason".

 

 

Thanks for explaining.

Agreeing with his view of creationism is one thing. The behavior that Laughing Lioness outlines up thread is another. There are creationists here who share Ham's creationist belief but don't engage in the behavior he encourages or the exclusionary beliefs he promotes.

 

It's not his creationism that makes him such a troubling figure.

[plansrme]

sexual harassment at work can be a criminal matter.

Harassment is not a criminal matter. Civil, yes, but not criminal. Acts that constitute harassment can be, e.g., non-consensual touching, pinching, etc., but none of the accounts I have read were from girls under the age of consent or were not consensual.

[LucyStoner]

Harassment is not a criminal matter. Civil, yes, but not criminal. Acts that constitute harassment can be, e.g., non-consensual touching, pinching, etc., but none of the accounts I have read were from girls under the age of consent or were not consensual.

 

How the heck does someone give consent to be sexually harassed? 

 

Touching someone sexually without their consent is a crime.  In the workplace.  On a bus.  On the street.  At a church.  In the mall.  Otherwise it would be totally legal for a person to grab the genitalia of another.  It is not, to my knowledge perfectly legal to grab people like that. 

 

You need to do more research on sexual harassment before making these sorts of blanket statements.  It varies from state to state but most, if not all, states do have some criminal codes applying to some forms of sexual harassment. 

 

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

Harassment is not a criminal matter. Civil, yes, but not criminal. Acts that constitute harassment can be, e.g., non-consensual touching, pinching, etc., but none of the accounts I have read were from girls under the age of consent or were not consensual.

Harassment can be criminal.

[WishboneDawn]

Harassment is not a criminal matter. Civil, yes, but not criminal. Acts that constitute harassment can be, e.g., non-consensual touching, pinching, etc., but none of the accounts I have read were from girls under the age of consent or were not consensual.

Granted, I'm in Canada but what you listed constitutes sexual assault which IS criminal here. I think it's similar down there.

[Mommyfaithe]

Actually, as I remember it (my former church was hugely Gothard-influenced), Mr. Gothard makes it a point to drive a modest car and live in a modest home.

Looks good, huh??? I don't buy it. Clothes, watches, LEAR JETS???? In it for the MONEY, and for getting away with all sorts misdeeds, perversions and aggressive behaviors because who is gonna call out the pastor???? I am glad people are finally calling them out! And I hope someone has the gonads to prosecute and SUE HIS ASS OFF in civil court!

[QuirkyKapers]

Thanks for sharing!

[jenbrdsly]

:iagree: I'm not a Ken Ham fan, but I wouldn't put him in the same category as Gothard. 

 

Actually, Michael Pearl has quite a different mindset from Gothard, too, and has been openly critical of Gothard's brand of patriarchal teaching.  I am very well aware of the many reasons people dislike Pearl, but he is not, as far as I know, guilty of the type of misconduct of which Gothard has been accused.

 

Regarding Pearl, there was a horrible murder in WA recently where a couple adopted a bunch of kids from Ethiopia, and then followed the Pearl philosophy. One of their adopted daughters died in the backyard of exposure and starvation. They were a homeschooling family and the Dad worked at Boeing. 

 

Hyperlinks aren't working for me right now but if you Google "Skagit Valley Adopted Girl Murder" you can find the info. 

 

:(

 

[LucyStoner]

The Skagit Valley girl was Hana Williams. May she rest in peace. I was glad to see her "parents" convicted.