Abuse: The Gift That Keeps Giving

If you ever experience abuse of any sort, you will discover that you eventually come to a point where you have to make a choice. Do you stay silent, or do you speak out? Do you tell the truth, or live a lie?

Saying it like that makes it sound kinda easy and straight forward - but here's the catch:

Both choices involve pain. 

Both choices will cost you. 

Both choices lead to loss.

If you remain silent you will remain 'acceptable'. You will retain your community. You will keep your relationships. Your reputation. Your job.

But you will live with the pain of having to always hide the truth. Of having to constantly play a part. Of feeling endlessly isolated and alone. You will have to endure seeing those who squeezed your heart dry, smile and play the innocent. And you will know deep down that others will be harmed, and that your silence enabled it. You will lose your voice. Your truth. Your integrity.

If you speak out you will discover the sheer relief of simply saying it out loud. Of telling your story. Of giving yourself permission. You will also find fellow survivors who can encourage and support you, and reassure you that you are not alone. That you are not crazy. That it wasn't your fault.

But you will make people angry. You will be blamed by those who don't want to feel uncomfortable. You will be attacked by those who don't want to believe that their idealised (and idolised) leader has feet of clay. You will be shunned by those who would rather not know that their loving friend or family member can treat others so heartlessly. You will lose friends and family. You may even lose your job.

Even though at times it will feel like "heads, you win - tails, I lose", you do have a choice.

------------

I experienced abuse. And I made the choice to speak out.

I did pay the price. There has been pain and loss.

People did become angry. They did attack me and shun me.

And the truth is that it wasn't just a one-time event. Abuse is the gift that just keeps on giving, because I continue to live with these realities - the lies, the disapproval, the damaged or lost relationships.

And sometimes, as happened this week, I find myself talking to old friends for the first time in years, and having to face the choice all over again. To face the loss of friendship again. To face the pain of rejection again.

And I chose to tell the truth. Again.

Even as I write this, I don't know how my friends will receive that truth. I don't know what cost I will bear for that choice. 

(I don't want to lose their friendship. At the same time I acknowledge that if they reject me for speaking out, I'd already lost it anyway.)

But these days I am confident of who I am (and of who I am not). And I know what prices I am willing to pay (and which are beyond my capacity to afford). And I know that I am worth it (and that not everyone will be able to see this).

And - as unexpected as it was - those things are also gifts that surviving abuse gave me.

The Elephants In The Church

In a recent interview with Christianity Today*, Rachael Denhollander (a survivor of Larry Nassar's horrific reign of abuse) pointed directly at the elephant in the room and clearly named it. The elephant is, of course, the truth that the church is not a safe place to look for help when dealing with abuse. In fact she said it is actually one of the worst places to seek help!

But she wasn't finished. She then looked slightly to the right of this animal and identified it's twin brother - the vilification and shunning of those who dare to expose abuse within the church.

Photo credit

She was under no illusions that the support she had received from evangelical christians in exposing Larry Nassar's abuse was very much tied to the fact that he was regarded as "other" - an outsider and therefore fair game. Evangelicals of all sorts claimed her as their own and held her up as a sterling example of 'christian' courage and forgiveness. Yet when she addressed the issue of the cover-up and enabling of child sex abuse in the church, she was suddenly "mistaken" and making "false accusation[s]". Her own abuse was used as a weapon against her - because she was so wounded, she was seeing things that just weren't there!

But she is intelligent, articulate, and - despite being labelled, judged, and shunned - she is refusing to sit down and shut up. She is standing her ground. And she is pushing back! 

She is pushing back against an institution which, on the one hand, is well-known for advising victims of abuse to simply "forgive and move on", or suck it up for the sake of appearances or even submit to their abuser's supposed "God-given authority"; and which on the other, has a long history of silencing, shunning, and further abusing those who attempt to expose this evil in its midst.

Of course the irony is that this same institution has habitually held itself up as both model and arbiter of all that is righteous and pure in the world. It has regularly condemned "sinners", railed against "the world" and pursued power to enforce its own moral code. And in doing so, it has far too often achieved nothing but to drive people away from the One who came, not to judge and condemn, but to prove his outrageous love. The One who put power aside - consistently rejecting its allure - and cared so little about his own reputation that the religious leaders ruled him unfit to represent their god.

So maybe it's time for a new plan - one that looks a whole lot more like Jesus. And maybe that needs to start with acknowledging those elephants are there; admitting that we invited them in; and cleaning up those stinking piles of their dung!

* I highly recommend you click through and read it!

When Church Leaders Act Like Abusive Husbands

In my last post, I mentioned that a board member of my ex-church once told me that I had a problem submitting to "godly" authority. I responded by telling him I didn't have a problem submitting to Godly authority. And he didn't like that. At all. I saw his anger. And I didn't care.

Because I knew I wasn't the problem.

My lack of submission wasn't the problem.

But it's only in the last few days, I've seen with clarity what the real problem was.

As I wrote in that last post, the issue of how the church has failed survivors of domestic abuse has hit the headlines here in Australia. And in following the conversations being held, the stories being told, and the responses and reactions of different people, I have seen more clearly into the realities of my own experience of abuse in the church.

And I've had a moment of revelation. An "aha!" moment.

The real problem in our church was not my failure to submit to "godly" authority. It was the failure of its leaders to serve as Jesus served.

In the stories of domestic abuse that I've been reading, the husbands all quoted scriptures to demand submission from their wives. The husbands claimed they had "godly" authority over their wives, and based on this supposed authority they thought it was entirely appropriate to demand that their wives submit to them, no matter how harshly or hurtfully they treated them.

Of course, what they failed to realise is that their use (or misuse) of scripture damns them, not their wives. Because the scriptural call on them as husbands is to love their wives sacrificially, not to sacrifice those they love on the altar of their own inflated egos.

In similar fashion, my fellow leaders appeared to believe they had the right - in the name of God - to enforce submission and to compel obedience from their brothers and sisters. They showed willing to inflict hurt on others in order to gain the desired outcome, and then berate them for being wounded. And in doing so, they displayed their own failure. Because the God from whom they claimed to derive their authority is the God who equates greatness with servanthood, not tyranny. In demanding servility from others, they failed to obey the one who said he came to serve, not to be served.

You see, the problem was not with my refusal to submit. I knew I had nothing to fear from submitting to Godly authority, because I knew that truly Godly authority would never act in a way that harmed me. The "problem" was that I wouldn't submit to abuse. People didn't like me naming it for what it was and, using the same tactics as those abusive husbands, they tried to blame me. Like an abused wife I struggled with that, and sometimes I even fought back, but that did not make me "the problem".

The problem was created by those who, in attempting to crown one man "king" in the church, failed to acknowledge the true King. It lay with those who, in seeking to "lord it over" others, failed to obey the words of the "Lord over all". It was caused by those who, in demanding submission from others, failed to submit to the teachings of Jesus who said, "Do you understand what I’ve done for you? You call me teacher and Lord, and you’re right because that’s what I am. So if I, your Lord and teacher, have washed your feet, you must wash each other’s feet. I’ve given you an example that you should follow."

That was the real problem in our midst. "Leaders" demanding submission instead of displaying servanthood. "Followers" who refused to follow.

Submit, Or Else...

This morning, a Facebook memory alerted me to the fact that this time 5 years ago I had just attended my last meeting as an elder of my ex-church. After months of conflict and stress over leadership issues, I had been told that a fellow elder (and his wife) were now seen as the leaders of the church by the church's board, and that if I felt "uncomfortable" with that, I should "consider stepping down" from leadership.

I was convinced that I would be given no peace until I either bowed down to this man, or I resigned. And having already had a taste of the board's highly partisan approach, I knew that I would be treated as a problem - an undesirable - until I complied one way or the other.

Although I can now read the minutes of that meeting perfectly dispassionately, I haven't forgotten how traumatised I was at the time. Time, and the effort I have put into healing, have combined to give me a quite different perspective on the events of that whole year but I do remember, both in the lead up to my resignation, and the devastating aftermath, how many times my thoughts bordered on the suicidal.

But quite apart from Facebook's reminder of its timing, this week I have been thinking about that meeting for another reason. Because the second instalment of an investigation into domestic violence and religion by journalist Julia Baird aired recently. And the same man who sat and delivered the 'submit or resign' message to me at that meeting, responded with the following tweet - apparently absolving the church of any responsibility for the use, or misuse, of its teachings on submission.

Entitled 'Submit to your husbands': Women told to endure domestic violence in the name of God, the report suggested that "the men most likely to abuse their wives are evangelical Christians who attend church sporadically." It includes stories from women who have not only been abused by husbands claiming a mandate from God to do so, but who have also had church leaders fail in their duty of care towards them.

And it appears that the man who once told me that I had "a problem submitting to authority" is now denying the lived experience of countless women who have suffered abuse at the hands of husbands claiming the church's teaching on 'wifely submission' as their justification - women who have been told, as they were being beaten physically or emotionally, that God demands they submit to their husbands. I wonder if he believes they have a problem submitting to authority, too?

According to an article on the ABC News website, this man "said he was "perplexed" by the [...] report which found some church ministers are encouraging victims of domestic violence to remain in violent relationships and "submit" to abuse." He claims he's "never met a leader who supports that proposition" yet he himself happily told me to "submit" to a man whose behaviour had already led to the resignation of one fellow elder, and which had left me struggling with both physical and emotional health problems. The inconsistency and contradiction between these two positions takes my breath away!

So I am writing to add my voice to the growing chorus of those choosing to expose the abuse inherent in a system which selectively calls for the submission of wives to husbands, while ignoring the preceding call for mutual submission between the two. 

I am also questioning the credibility of anyone who, on the one hand apparently denies that any "christian leader" would encourage a woman to simply submit in an abusive marriage relationship, yet who seems to find nothing wrong with insisting that a woman (an elder of the church) should submit in another type of relationship where the "testimony of two witnesses" revealed that bullying and coercion had been at play.

And in doing so I am asking the question: if this dissenting voice is so lacking in credibility, how many other "church leaders" are dismissing or protesting the work of Julia Baird while at the same time enabling, concealing (or even engaging in!) abuse in the church, conveniently justifying and excusing it under the doctrine of "godly submission"?

I Am Valid - And So Are You!

Maybe it's because it's the first anniversary of the day I learned that my sister's body was only being kept 'alive' by machines...

maybe it's because a friend has found closure with someone who denies the same to me...

maybe it's because I'm sickened by seeing almost daily proof that the children of my ex-friends have been taught that shunning and treating others like shit is good christian behaviour...

or maybe it's just because it's cold and wet and grey.

But this morning I feel tears pricking my eyes, and a weight on my soul.

The lies and abuse and deception in the 'church' just continue. The elephant is ignored, and when that doesn't work, it's painted and prettified to make people feel better about its existence.

The religious machine keeps chewing up the broken and spitting them out. The religious leaders today are as toxic as those Jesus addressed 2 000 years ago (Matthew 23) - and the people continue to support and enable them.

And yet I find, even as I sit and write these words, that a renewed strength is rising within me. I no longer hope or expect things to change, but I will not stop speaking out because that is my natural response to injustice.

I no longer let others dictate who I am, or how I should behave. I no longer bow to the pressure to pretend or conform. I have permission to be me - no matter how much others hate me for it.

I am reminded that it is legitimate to be me. Exactly the way I am.

I am valid.

And I want to remind you that you are too!

Spotlight

Spotlight

There is a scene in the film Spotlight where Mark Ruffalo's character discovers incontrovertible proof that the head of the Catholic church in Boston not only knew about the child sexual abuse scandal in the church, but was complicit in its cover-up. He urges immediate publication of the story, and ends up storming out of the office when his editor (played by Michael Keaton) refuses, choosing to wait until they can expose the entire, corrupt system rather than target a single man.

After some self-reflection, Ruffalo confesses to a fellow journalist that his anger and frustration at his editor was driven largely by the loss of an unacknowledged hope he's carried for years. Having been brought up in the church and subsequently walked away, Ruffalo shares that he'd always assumed that one day he'd be able to return - go back to the familiar ritual and comfort of his childhood.

But he's had to face the harsh reality that this he's swallowed the red pill and there's no going back. The institution which has symbolised for him the security of his childhood has demonstrated just how ready it is to sacrifice innocent children in its determination to retain power. He's found proof of a system which cares little about the devastation it has inflicted on the wounded and vulnerable, and, as William Wilberforce said, "[he] can never say again that [he] did not know".

I've been thinking about that scene all day (I watched the film last night). It caught my attention because I know what it's like to wake up and realise you can never 'unknow' what you've discovered. That the institution you once believed was safe and friendly is actually incredibly toxic and will lash out at you if you start to question it. That the people you thought would love and care for you no matter what, willingly turn on you when you no longer support their agenda. That too many religious leaders would rather leave you bloodied by the side of the road than get involved.

The truth, when it hits you, is both shocking and painful. And there is a price to pay for that truth.

But, just as the Boston Globe journalists discovered, when you let the truth out, and you hear the sheer relief in the voices of other victims as they learn they are not alone, you know you couldn't have done anything else.

Kings and Other Despots

Back in the day, there was a concept known as the "Divine Right of Kings". This meant that if you happened to be lucky enough to be born into the right family, you got to rule - no questions asked.

You got to do and say whatever you pleased and no-one had the right to challenge you. You got to dictate to others how they lived and what they believed.

You had God himself in your back pocket!

Today, there are still some people who think they are entitled to power, privilege and respect with no questions tolerated. Many of them call themselves "pastors".

The only difference I can see is that these days dissenters aren't beheaded.

They are hounded from churches and shunned. They are discredited and silenced. And they are threatened with legal action.

And for too many people, this is normal christianity!

But as the exposure of scandal and abuse in the 'church' increases...

and the appalling hubris of 'pastor' after 'pastor' is revealed... 

I think about the only King who truly had 'divine right' on his side. 

And I thank God, that he chose to give up that right.

That he chose to humble himself. 

That he chose to serve.

(Luke 22:24-27)

Spock on Abuse

Spock obviously understood how abusers operate:

And how abuse is enabled:

Not sure I really need to say anything more... except that his wisdom lives on!

LIVE LONG AND PROSPER!

How Do We Tell Who The Real Victim Is?

izquotes.com

In recent times, I've been following developments in the story of Julie McMahon vs Tony Jones, which first surfaced last year in the comments section of this blog post.

Since that time, emotions have run high. People have taken sides and tried to shut down opposing voices. Names have been called and accusations thrown around. 

In other words it's been messy and, at times, ugly. That's what situations of abuse are like.

And like 99.9% of all abuse cases, the same arguments and defences are being trotted out.

Many people are saying, "There are always two sides to a story", meaning if one person acted badly it was probably because the other had too.

While that sounds reasonable and rational, it doesn't take into account that, in cases of bullying and abuse, the victim is often driven to such desperation that they do lash out, or fight back. It ignores the fact that the abuser has provoked that behaviour, and that it would not otherwise have occurred.

Along with this goes, "They gave as good as they got." It pretends to ignore the fact that when you are attacked, the 'fight or flight' instinct kicks in. Some people fight because they've been attacked. And then they are crucified for doing so!

Or you hear, "Neither person is perfect", implying moral equivalence (i.e. whatever one person did, the other person's actions were equally bad - no matter what those actions actually were). So... to follow this reasoning, slapping someone across the face in anger and frustration is morally equivalent to beating someone to a pulp and hospitalising them. Because both are acts of imperfect people!!!

In the midst of all this, there has been on-going questioning of who abused whom.

"He did this, therefore he's clearly abusive."

"No! She said that, so he's the one being victimised."

We weren't privy to all those conversations, we didn't witness the actions of those involved. So what are we to believe!?

Here's a tip: When one of the parties walks away with their position and power intact, they are most likely NOT the victim of abuse!

Abuse involves a real or perceived imbalance of power, rank, status, authority, control. Its tools are things like intimidation, gas lighting, whispering campaigns, mobbing and victim blaming. Most of these tools can only be wielded by the person holding the greater power.

So when you see a situation where one person in the conflict holds all the power cards in his or her hand, and at the end of the conflict they are still holding them, its highly unlikely that they have been the one damaged by abuse!

The Paradox of Freedom - Part 1

Many years ago I found myself, completely against my will, dealing with the loss of my marriage. I'd spent 7 years married to a man who lied and deceived seemingly without conscience, who was a master of emotional manipulation, and who acted as if the world revolved around him alone. While his regular outbursts of anger only occasionally resulted in physical abuse, it almost always ended with him breaking things - usually my things!

We'd been living in London and I had taken our baby son on a holiday back to Australia so the family could meet him. While I was there, my husband contacted me and told me he'd applied for a job back home and asked me to stay until he had an answer. After several weeks of being put off like this, I rang the company he said he'd applied to - and discovered the whole thing was a lie. When I confronted him with it, he got angry with me... again...

Now as you can probably imagine, having been treated like dirt for so long, and then abandoned with a year old son to care for, I was pretty distressed about life! I fought to save our marriage, but he just didn't want to know. Eventually, his mistress became pregnant, and I had to face the fact that my marriage was dead.

I set about trying to find my way out of the pain of betrayal and rejection I'd experienced, desperately trying to pursue God's plan for us. I knew I had to forgive my husband, but it was so hard! Some days it felt impossible.

In the midst of my struggle, I picked up a book about recovering from divorce. In it I read the most profound thing I'd ever heard: that I actually had a choice whether or not to forgive my husband!

That may sound really stupid to you, but I'd grown up with a christianity that amounted to a set of rules, a standard that 'must' be reached. If you were a christian, you had to forgive. Being a christian was synonymous with 'doing the right thing'. And doing 'the wrong thing' meant facing the shame and censure of family and church.

But here was this book, written by christians, declaring that I had a choice! I was free to forgive or not - it was entirely up to me! The book did explain that there were certain realities that went with whatever I chose, but nonetheless, I did have a choice.

This was a totally new and revolutionary idea to me! I wasn't being coerced into anything - I was being set free.

And the paradox was that once I realised I had the freedom not to forgive, I found that I wanted to forgive him. Not because it was 'the right thing to do', but because I wanted to be free of the anger and pain that was crippling me.

I'll be honest - it still took time and effort on my part, and there were still days when I wanted him to be hurt as badly as he'd hurt me, but I was doing this for the sake of freedom not because someone was telling me I 'had to'.

I had a choice and I was free!

Of Tolerance and Trolls

So... since my last post, I've been involved in another online discussion...

and I've come to the conclusion that some people are just not interested in genuine engagement with others. They participate for the sole purpose of being provocative.

Now that can be irritating, but when they are convinced that they speak for 'GOD', and will brook no argument, it can actually be dangerous for anyone who's experienced spiritual abuse.

There was one troll in particular who was behaving like a self-righteous ass - baiting, labelling, and refusing to engage with people who were genuinely trying to share their thoughts and ideas. He presented his opinions as facts, took an "I'm right, and you're a loser" stance, and threw provocative one-liners around like confetti.

I called him on it, told him I didn't feed trolls or take their bait, and left it at that.

Which was fine until one woman joined the thread and started singing his praises, saying that he'd brought her "great comfort and joy" for "standing firm on the Bible..."

She added, "Not once have you insulted any of the people in this comment's (sic) section that I have seen, even while the fake "Christians" will spew all sorts of hateful things at you."

Reading this, I could only assume this woman had not actually read his comments, so I showed her examples of the not just insulting, but also rude and dismissive remarks this chap had made.

Apart from calling people "Pitiful", and accusing others of using "histrionic hyperbole" or having a "myopic perspective" or a "judgmental attitude" or being "toxic" or playing a "blame game" or 'having no integrity' or speaking bullshit, he'd also played the religious shaming card, accusing people of 'walking away from God', 'denying God', living "proudly sinful" and surrendering to their "sinful desires". (There's plenty more, but you probably get the picture).

Imagine my surprise then to hear that she was already aware of them! I was utterly gobsmacked that this abuse was what she was applauding! How on earth did this represent "pursuing GOD'S heart and not your own"!?

But no argument I put forward would be heard. In her mind, this woman had pronounced "Truth". No correspondence would be entered into. End of story.

She also encouraged another commenter to "Continue to speak the Truth harshly, as Jesus and Paul did." (What even!!!)

Again, there was nothing I could say that could even register on, let alone penetrate, her shield of self-righteousness. She was right, I was wrong, she had GOD and "Truth" on her side, and that was all there was to the matter.

After that, it felt like this guy went out of his way to be as noxious as he could be, to as many people as possible.

At first I just ignored it. He neither impressed me nor scared me. And I was also concerned I'd let myself argue too hard against the woman who'd been egging him on.

But then I started to wonder whether some of the people he was bullying might actually be genuinely traumatised by his behaviour.

The article under discussion had been exploring why people are walking away from the institutional church and I thought it was entirely possible that there were people reading and commenting who had, themselves, walked away because of experiencing abuse within the church. And it distressed me to think that someone might have been so relieved to discover that they were not alone that they had plucked up the courage to share, only to be met with what would feel like more abuse.

I tried to put myself in their shoes, and I thought about my own situation - of feeling so alone and abandoned when no-one would stand up for me and confront the bullying. Whether they like it or not, by doing nothing they enabled the abuse.

But then I told myself that had been in 'real life', and this was 'only' online.

And then I remembered being in an online conversation regarding spiritual abuse. One guy was really having a go at me and trying to invalidate me, when another chap stepped in and told him to back off. He didn't know me, but he'd seen the bullying behaviour and he stuck up for me. I was so grateful to receive his support!

And that made me think about how Jesus stood up for broken and vulnerable people against the religious bullies leaders of his day. He had no issue in calling out their self-righteous attitude and abusive behaviour. (Have you read Matthew 23 recently?)

And I came to the conclusion that, on-line or in the 'real' world, it is one thing to recommend we engage in a civilised "agree to disagree" discussion and quite another to sit back and allow a religious thug to bully and wound others.

What is That "Sorry" Worth?

Since my own devastating 'church' experience, I've been reading and learning all I can about abuse. What it looks like. How it manifests. Why both abuser and abused seem to act out their parts as if reading from some ineluctable script, regardless of the finer details of the situation.

There are the classic moves like blaming, gas lighting and shunning.

There is the haunting pain of shame, self-doubt and isolation.

And there is, to mis-quote Maxwell Smart, the old 'say sorry and then insist your victim gets over it' trick.

I've been watching this trick being played throughout the fall of the Driscoll Empire: "He's said he's sorry, what more do you want from him!?"

And because people like Warren Throckmorton keep pressing for answers, they are accused of being judgemental, bloodthirsty and self-righteous. And that's just the polite words...

What some people refuse to understand is that people who have survived abuse (or at least understand its foulness) will move heaven and earth to make sure no-one else becomes a victim. If you've experienced that depth of pain and betrayal, you won't sit idly by and watch an abuser just walk away. Free to keep on devastating the lives of the innocent or unwary.

It's not a case of "wanting to bring them down" or "being out for revenge". It's knowing that an unrepentant abuser will strike again. Think about it for a moment - if they don't believe they've done anything wrong, why would they change their behaviour!?

That is why it is wise to seek proof of 'repentance' before trusting again. To ask that actions line up with the words.

Reparation. Redress. Restitution. Recompense. Restoration.

These are the things that can lead to reconciliation. Things that prove the sincerity of your words. Things that show how serious you are about what you have said.

But be warned! If you stand your ground in wanting to see the evidence, there's a real danger that you'll be further vilified. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about!

Of course, the upside to that is you'll know exactly how much that "sorry" was worth!

Not Another Driscoll Post!

wikimedia

Thousands of words have been thrown around the Internet in recent months about Mark Driscoll and the bodies under his bus. And so many of those words have resonated with me because they sound so much like the things I experienced. Which started me thinking…

With all the differences between that situation and mine, why did it sound so much the same?

This post is part of my answer:

1 Samuel 8:6-22 (emphasis added) 

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 are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me 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 will 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 king. 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 commanders 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 chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyardsand 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 your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”  

But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.” 

When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.” 

Do you hear what the people were saying to Samuel? "We don't want to listen to God - what would he know!? We want what we want."

How many times have we read stories about the Israelites and rolled our eyes and pronounced judgement on their stupidity? How many times have we prided ourselves on our superior ways?

Thank God we're not so full of sin and pride as to go against God's best for us! Not like those dreadful Israelites - they were always complaining and refusing to listen to God.

No, we christians are far wiser and godlier.

Really?

Well, it looks to me that we are EXACTLY like those stupid, stiff-necked people.

We, too, keep asking for kings. And they keep "claiming their rights."

We want to be like "other nations". And they keep "claiming their rights."

We refuse to listen to "Samuel". And they keep "claiming their rights."

God warned us! They take our sons and daughters. They take the best of… the tenth of… We become their slaves.

And the 'church' is no longer safe, because the 'kings' play their power games, and abuse, and shun, and cover up, and throw people under the bus.

And the people just keep asking for another king…

(Written in loving support of all the victims of a 'king'.)

Righteous Response or Manipulation?

In my post, Magic Words Syndrome, I wrote about a particular board member who does a lot of counselling and mediation work in churches. One of the questions he often asks when someone has an issue with another person's behaviour or attitude is, "What is your righteous response?"

In other words, "How do you think Jesus would want you to respond to what you have experienced?

Now this is not a bad question to ask. What would Jesus want us to do? What behaviour might he have modelled that he would want us to use as a guide? On the face of it, this was an entirely appropriate question to ask.

The trouble lies in the presupposition which lurks within this question - the assumption that Jesus would tell us to be 'nice' and then insist that we 'submit to authority'.

I wrote about one of those mediation sessions in my post, Jesus the Buddhist? That was the first time I had used the "A" word.

Abuse.

Finally, I was admitting (to myself and those involved) that I felt abused by the bullying, controlling behaviour of elder J and his wife.

But this was given no credence by those present. I was told that while this might be my reality the actual issue was, "What is your righteous response?"

Of course, the 'correct' answer was to forgive and forget. And stupidly, desperately, I played my part in the game. Did exactly what was expected of me.

Which meant that I just continued to be bullied and abused… until I longed for oblivion.

And there was nothing I could do about it because "everything had been dealt with" and I had "promised not to bring it up again".

But nothing had been dealt with! So I did bring it up again. Which proved how 'unforgiving' and 'bitter'  I was. And I was damned for 'going back on my promises'. And the abusive cycle just kept rolling...

So what was the righteous response I should have given?

Walk away.

Refuse to be manipulated.

Imitate Jesus.

There were plenty of times when the religious leaders of Jesus' day tried to manipulate and control him. They tried to trap him with his own words, they tried to force him to behave 'acceptably', they tried to bully and abuse him.

But he stood his ground and didn't play their games. He told them exactly what he thought of their behaviour. He refused to be manipulated. And he walked away.

That was his 'righteous response'.

I wish it had been mine.

It can be yours.

And that is why I am sharing my experience. In the fervent hope that someone reading this post might be encouraged and strengthened by what they read. And resist the manipulative teaching that too many religious leaders promote which says, in effect, that 'good christians' must submit to abuse.

I pray you see it for what it is and respond with the righteousness that Jesus displayed!

Things That Should be Obvious to Every Christian

By Sam Powell @ My Only Comfort

Jesus expects and commands us to distinguish between wolves and sheep (Matt.7:15-16)

A wolf is known by his appetites. A wolf wants to use the sheep to fill his own lusts, and does not care about whether this hurts the sheep or not.

A man who rapes children is a wolf, not a misguided sheep.

A man who molests children is a wolf, not a misguided sheep.

A man who beats his wife, cheats on his wife, demands complete and absolute obedience from his wife, and believes that he is the voice of God in his home, is using his wife to fill his own lusts for self-importance, power, and self-worship to the hurt of his wife. He is a wolf, not a sheep.

A man who has his children in absolute terror, who holds or gives his favor to his family based upon his whims and his lusts for power and control is using his God-given authority to destroy and devour the sheep. He is a wolf, not a sheep.

And here is a biggie. Matthew 18:15-18 are the instructions of our Lord concerning brothers who have sinned against each other. They are not intended as instructions on how to deal with wolves. Wolves must be cast out and left in the hands of God. Wolves have no problem pretending to be sheep – even to the point of tears and all of the right words. But Jesus said that you will know them by the fruits, not by their tears and empty words.

Before you apply Matthew 18, you must ask yourself if you are dealing with a wolf or with a sheep. Jesus commanded us to tell the difference. You will know them by their fruits (see above).

Continue reading here…