|
Post by cannalily on Feb 12, 2023 12:46:53 GMT
As you sit in the pew today, remember to not confuse the church and its leaders with Jesus Christ. When this nuance is difficult to believe because of what church leaders have taught, remember girls and boys who have been raped and beaten. Remember the abused spouses. Remember these church leaders have continued to demonstrate they are not Jesus by enabling and covering for abusers. If they have the ability to protect you physically but have not, why do you trust them to protect you spiritually? 100%! There's a bit of a logic fail with all of this. One sits in the pew and under "the pure preaching of the word" while ministers and elders protect the abusers.
|
|
|
Post by stillvanrecovering on Feb 12, 2023 21:06:07 GMT
Wrestle with this thread at your Sunday night discussion group while munching on ham buns - while you bemoan the world (and even churches!) watching the Super Bowl.
I was thankful today my children don't have to go to school tomorrow with a page of sermon notes demanded by a rapist sixth grade teacher.
Laura Robinson @laurarbnsn
🧵Why Christians Have a Hard Time Believing it’s Actually Wrong to Sexually Abuse a Child, as Long as Another Christian Does It. Okay, this is a hyperbolic title. I will be told this is a straw man. Fair! I do try to avoid extreme statements about religion because I do think they invite objectors to just find polite ways to say wrong things in return (“I don’t think single women are worthless! They’re just missing out on what God wants for them.” Etc). But, I do think when you drill into how people explain what they think, you can often find ways in which what they say they believe doesn’t match with what they act like they believe. And, when you look at their related beliefs, the whole thing starts to look more coherent. This thread has been brought on by my frustration of being in way too many churches where someone did something horrible to someone else, and no one cared. These were all churches where people generally worried a great deal about their kids, men spoke gushingly about their wives, and everyone agreed the role of the church was to protect the vulnerable. And yet, when given the opportunity to do so, no one did. Because the occasion is always a Christian hurting another Christian, and often Christians don’t actually think that’s wrong.
There are a few beliefs that make Christians in particular subcultures vulnerable to believing abuse, particularly against women and children, is actually not that serious as long as it is done by another Christian. Here they are: 1) Hierarchy is Health. Good relationships are about knowing and occupying your assigned spot based on age and gender. Most social problems are caused by people failing to comply with their assigned rank. Relationships where rank and role are honored are healthier. Relationships where they aren’t are worse. In general, it’s more desirable to err on the side of a relationship being more hierarchical, not less, since hierarchy is itself an agent of good and order. 2) There Is No Trauma, Only Sin. Depression, mental illness, and damage are manifestations of sin and the individual’s bad habits. They need to be repented of. They have no more power than people give them. Trauma and mental illness can be set aside like any bad habit. 3) People Like That Are the Only People Here. Christians are a class of people whose behavior is rational, consciously motivated, and comprehensible to everyone. Christians make mistakes but are fundamentally trustworthy, like other Christians, and well meaning. Serious wrongdoing is usually caused by some kind of external agent, usually addiction or demonic forces. This state is temporary and easy to resolve. Only outside the church are people likely to be recklessly and chaotically dangerous.
So how does this all add up? Belief 1 means that it’s very difficult for evangelicals to explain what abuse is or why it is bad. Harm and coercion are bad, but order and authority are good. This is part of why it’s very difficult for patriarchalist Christians to even name abuse, much less criticize it. You see this wherever pastors throw out casual “abuse” exceptions without defining what it is (“of course this advice doesn’t apply to abusive marriages!”) or pastors needing a lot of adjectives to explain why abuse is different from a good marriage (“Christian marriage is when a man has power over a woman, abusive marriage is when a man has destructive power over a woman,” etc.) What you’re left with is a situation where everyone aspires to hierarchy but disavows conflict. This is just dehumanizing women and children without the screaming. An abusive marriage is when a man takes his wife’s credit card and car keys so she can’t leave the house without his permission. A good Christian marriage is when the wife never asks for a credit card and knows to ask permission before she leaves the house. An abusive marriage is where a man hits his wife when she wants to visit her mom. A Christian marriage is when the wife only needs to be told she can’t see her mom the first time.
Next: No trauma means no consequences. All sin is dealt with in the same way - God forgives, so does everyone else. An abused child has no lasting damage from the experience of being abused. She might feel inclined to some sins like depression and anger, but it’s up to her to let them go. Most concrete negative outcomes (injuries, pain, lost opportunities, lost relationships) can be rounded up to a light martyrology (it’s suffering for Christ). All emotional effects of abuse are rounded down to the sin of the victim. If you don’t want to be controlled by intense disgust towards your dad, just feel otherwise.
Third: outside the Christian community, some people are irredeemably evil. Inside the church, everyone deserves your trust, respect, and patience. If everyone in the Christian group is fundamentally trustworthy, then behaviors like predation or violence are all temporary mistakes. There is no possibility another Christian has fundamentally bad motives or misrepresents themselves. There is also no reason to avoid another Christian as long as they have expressed remorse for a past action. If a Christian says they’re sorry, they mean it. If they hurt someone again, they say sorry again. The process of harm/forgiveness is repeatable and has no downsides.
In part 2 I want to look at the effects of these beliefs. I think it’s easy to see from this how this makes abuse possible. What I’m more interested in is beyond this - I actually think it makes it difficult for Christians to even reach the very basic step of thinking abuse is wrong enough to prevent - as long as it happens between Christians and along the right hierarchies.
|
|
|
Post by stillvanrecovering on Feb 12, 2023 21:17:01 GMT
Another thread in a similar vein to discuss over dessert and coffee. Stay holy folks, don't watch that super bowl! Trey Ferguson @pastortrey05 A few years ago, as part of a capstone project ( video sample here) I was workin on in seminary (about the necessity of online ministry), I touched on white supremacists being radicalized online. My research led me to a man named John MacArthur. But here’s the thing… JMac was here before the digital revolution. And, because of how spiritual formation works, we’ll be dealing with him for quite some time. And that is bad. Because his is a theology of cruelty and control. White supremacy is not just a danger to people who are not white. It is bad for everyone. It is a way of looking at the world that prioritizes “order” over *justice*. That is not the way of Jesus. It is the way of mammon. I do not care how “orthodox” the theology of these white supremacists seems. I do not care how many big words they use. There is no salvation there. There is no salvation without safety. Their gospel is no Good News at all.
|
|
|
Post by Feminist on Feb 12, 2023 21:45:16 GMT
Your exPR family members still love you and want to see you thrive.
|
|
|
Post by stillvanrecovering on Feb 12, 2023 23:18:15 GMT
Part 2 - follow @laurarbnsn on Twitter
Why Christians Struggle to Believe Abuse is Wrong (If Another Christian Does It)
So aside: My concern is with my own background: white American conservative evangelicals. If you want to know about other churches, ask people who come from there. There are other people from my background who are vocal about criticizing abuse - @davidafrench , @nancyafrench , @sheilagregoire, @bethallisonbarr to name a few. But I also think their superpower is that they don’t believe the things I’ve laid out in that first thread: the inherent goodness of hierarchies, the non-existence of mental illness and trauma, and an uncritical commitment to the ingroup.
So what are the effects of those beliefs? How do they make it hard for Christians to actually want to prevent abuse?
1) We don’t know what abuse is. If hierarchy is good and deviating from it is bad, a lot of abuse that happens through the correct hierarchical channels (pastor to parishioner, husband to wife, parent to child) is more of an overzealous good than an actual evil. Some forms of abuse deviate from Christian abilities to explain them as overzealous good – eg., sexual abuse of young children. This is less reliable when you’re talking about sexual abuse of older girls or women (natural theology patches over a lot). Still, secondary abuse that emerges in the wake of this – coverups, minimizing, encouraging people to stay in abuse, allowing the abuser to dictate the terms of his “restoration” – is a return to hierarchies. A man abuses his children and his wife wants to go to the police, he doesn’t want her to do that, and the church backs him. In a hierarchical system, things are running as they should. Skepticism of non-doctrinal ways of knowing also means we’re missing key insights about abuse that are standard to everyone else. Even people who want to prevent abuse have no standard of when it starts or stops. A man abuses his wife. He cries to the pastor about how sorry he is. He buys his wife flowers. The elders encourage the family to accept his repentance and forgive him. The fact that the “honeymoon stage” of abuse (promises, remorse) is actually just part of abuse is not in the church’s pool of knowledge. The fact that the same thing happens in a month is forgiving 70x7. No one knows that the family is actually being abused *the entire time.*
2) We don’t know who does it. The vanguard of the evangelical church is the man with good doctrine. His doctrine is evidence that he is ontologically different from other men. When he sins, this is a setback, he apologizes, and he tries to do better. Because he is the vanguard of the church, hurting his reputation or interrupting his ministry (even if his ministry is just the state of being a religious man) is not to be done lightly. The church really needs this guy. Most men with good doctrine get this title of “great man.” Because of this, evangelical girls basically grow up pre-groomed for Christian abusers. If grooming is about winning the trust of the victim and breaking down boundaries, the church does this preemptively. Religious spaces prioritize intense authenticity and transparency, so most boundaries you might have with people you don’t know well at church are already limp. Men with good doctrine require no boundaries, unless they enforce them (ie Billy Graham rule). If you are taught to inherently trust and defer to men in the church, you’re just one bad motivation away from being taken advantage of. And you will be. The only boundary women really get to keep is around sexual inexperience, but even that’s not particularly sturdy. It doesn’t last long on its own, purity culture means once it’s down, it’s down, and you have to chuck it at home when you get married, anyway. The result of this is that within a church community, there is rarely such thing as a red flag when you are talking about a known, doctrinally-sound Christian man. No one knows the name of his concerning behavior. A man who doesn’t want the women or children in his life to have autonomy apart from him is just a normal man. If his behavior becomes egregious, everyone is surprised and skeptical, because he’s never done anything like that. Of course, he actually has done things like it before, all the time. It’s just that no one noticed.
3) We don’t think it’s harmful. If you don’t believe in bodily autonomy, trauma, mental illness, or unredemptive suffering, then it’s hard to know why abuse is actually bad. Abuse is definitely against The Rules, and sexual abuse of children, particularly incest, is easy for Christians to understand as unnatural. Outside of these categories, though, the harms of abuse get harder to name in Christian circles. So let’s use the example of a teenage girl who is sexually abused by a leader in her church. Why is this bad? Does this destroy her trust in the church and people around her? Sure, if she wants to rebel against the church as a result of this. Does it diminish her ability to form relationships, have boundaries, and enjoy sex? Only if she wants to reject her design as a woman to be a wife and mom. Does it violate her bodily autonomy? Depends how much you think she had that in the first place. Insofar as it’s an offense against her purity (re: virginity), the extent to which it’s an offense depends on her behavior before or after. It can also be an offense against someone else (dad), or a hypothetical person who doesn't need to be placated (future husband). But evangelicals are really good at defining the effects of abuse as being the responsibility of the victim. It's not psychic damage, it's a series of conscious choices that people can either indulge or reject. If you indulge those feelings, you’re in the wrong. If you don’t indulge those feelings (repress them, ignore them, set them aside), part of your repentance is usually agreeing not to disrupt the structure that allowed the abuse to happen in the first place. In practice, if you don’t have a category for the way abuse does real, unresolvable harm to people, it’s hard to think of a reason why abuse matters. Except, of course, that it hurts the witness of the church. But you can solve that by covering the abuse up. So, why wouldn’t you?
4) Stopping it is not worth the price. I’ve said before that it drives me nuts on @bethallisonbarr 's behalf when people insist that her criticisms of patriarchy only refer to abusive relationships, not healthy, hierarchical ones. No one ever actually says what the difference is, or how you keep one from becoming the other. Wanting to retain a situation where one party has power and the other party doesn't, but not wanting abuse, is like saying you never want to wash your dishes, take out your trash, or clean your kitchen – but you don’t want flies. You want the conditions of the bad outcome, you just don’t want the consequence of the conditions. But if you believe that hierarchy is good and abuse is not serious, you don’t solve the problem by taking out the trash. You solve the problem by enduring the flies. It’s just not worth losing hierarchies to prevent. Those are too important. Most of the ways victims get help – going to the police, separating from a spouse, seeing a therapist – inherently damages a hierarchy. The courts tell a church what to do. Divorce ends a Christian marriage. Parents lose control of their kids. If the hierarchies are good and need to stay in place, almost anything that actually and decisively removes a person from abuse is a problem. It’s not worth damaging the reputation of the church. That can be protected in a lot of ways. It’s not worth putting out the Christian men who have good doctrine, because there aren’t that many of them and we can’t lose a single one. The church is in a war with the world, and the hierarchies, the reputation of the church, and the men with their doctrine are the only weapons the real church has. So if you believe everything I’ve laid out, and you can abuse your child without threatening the hierarchies, the church’s witness, and the doctrine... or once abuse has happened, you can't get justice without sacrificing the hierarchies or your doctrine...
How wrong do you think it is to abuse a child? Is it wrong? It just doesn't seem like it is.
Again, it's easy to say that abuse is wrong. It's even easier to believe it on some kind of cognitive level. What is different is to believe it in a way in impacts your behavior.Your doctrine is your praxis. Your praxis reveals your doctrine.
If you cannot act on your beliefs, they are not actually your beliefs.
Do I think any of the thousands involved in church abuse cases and their cover ups consciously believes or teaches abuse is wrong? No. Do I know they explicitly believe things that make abuse easier to ignore or commit? Yes.
Do I believe they believe something more central than the injustice and evil of harming another Christian in the church when they don't act? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by stillvanrecovering on Feb 13, 2023 3:06:43 GMT
Part 2 - follow @laurarbnsn on Twitter Why Christians Struggle to Believe Abuse is Wrong (If Another Christian Does It) So aside: My concern is with my own background: white American conservative evangelicals. If you want to know about other churches, ask people who come from there. There are other people from my background who are vocal about criticizing abuse - @davidafrench , @nancyafrench , @sheilagregoire, @bethallisonbarr to name a few. But I also think their superpower is that they don’t believe the things I’ve laid out in that first thread: the inherent goodness of hierarchies, the non-existence of mental illness and trauma, and an uncritical commitment to the ingroup. So what are the effects of those beliefs? How do they make it hard for Christians to actually want to prevent abuse? 1) We don’t know what abuse is. If hierarchy is good and deviating from it is bad, a lot of abuse that happens through the correct hierarchical channels (pastor to parishioner, husband to wife, parent to child) is more of an overzealous good than an actual evil. Some forms of abuse deviate from Christian abilities to explain them as overzealous good – eg., sexual abuse of young children. This is less reliable when you’re talking about sexual abuse of older girls or women (natural theology patches over a lot). Still, secondary abuse that emerges in the wake of this – coverups, minimizing, encouraging people to stay in abuse, allowing the abuser to dictate the terms of his “restoration” – is a return to hierarchies. A man abuses his children and his wife wants to go to the police, he doesn’t want her to do that, and the church backs him. In a hierarchical system, things are running as they should. Skepticism of non-doctrinal ways of knowing also means we’re missing key insights about abuse that are standard to everyone else. Even people who want to prevent abuse have no standard of when it starts or stops. A man abuses his wife. He cries to the pastor about how sorry he is. He buys his wife flowers. The elders encourage the family to accept his repentance and forgive him. The fact that the “honeymoon stage” of abuse (promises, remorse) is actually just part of abuse is not in the church’s pool of knowledge. The fact that the same thing happens in a month is forgiving 70x7. No one knows that the family is actually being abused *the entire time.* 2) We don’t know who does it. The vanguard of the evangelical church is the man with good doctrine. His doctrine is evidence that he is ontologically different from other men. When he sins, this is a setback, he apologizes, and he tries to do better. Because he is the vanguard of the church, hurting his reputation or interrupting his ministry (even if his ministry is just the state of being a religious man) is not to be done lightly. The church really needs this guy. Most men with good doctrine get this title of “great man.” Because of this, evangelical girls basically grow up pre-groomed for Christian abusers. If grooming is about winning the trust of the victim and breaking down boundaries, the church does this preemptively. Religious spaces prioritize intense authenticity and transparency, so most boundaries you might have with people you don’t know well at church are already limp. Men with good doctrine require no boundaries, unless they enforce them (ie Billy Graham rule). If you are taught to inherently trust and defer to men in the church, you’re just one bad motivation away from being taken advantage of. And you will be. The only boundary women really get to keep is around sexual inexperience, but even that’s not particularly sturdy. It doesn’t last long on its own, purity culture means once it’s down, it’s down, and you have to chuck it at home when you get married, anyway. The result of this is that within a church community, there is rarely such thing as a red flag when you are talking about a known, doctrinally-sound Christian man. No one knows the name of his concerning behavior. A man who doesn’t want the women or children in his life to have autonomy apart from him is just a normal man. If his behavior becomes egregious, everyone is surprised and skeptical, because he’s never done anything like that. Of course, he actually has done things like it before, all the time. It’s just that no one noticed. 3) We don’t think it’s harmful. If you don’t believe in bodily autonomy, trauma, mental illness, or unredemptive suffering, then it’s hard to know why abuse is actually bad. Abuse is definitely against The Rules, and sexual abuse of children, particularly incest, is easy for Christians to understand as unnatural. Outside of these categories, though, the harms of abuse get harder to name in Christian circles. So let’s use the example of a teenage girl who is sexually abused by a leader in her church. Why is this bad? Does this destroy her trust in the church and people around her? Sure, if she wants to rebel against the church as a result of this. Does it diminish her ability to form relationships, have boundaries, and enjoy sex? Only if she wants to reject her design as a woman to be a wife and mom. Does it violate her bodily autonomy? Depends how much you think she had that in the first place. Insofar as it’s an offense against her purity (re: virginity), the extent to which it’s an offense depends on her behavior before or after. It can also be an offense against someone else (dad), or a hypothetical person who doesn't need to be placated (future husband). But evangelicals are really good at defining the effects of abuse as being the responsibility of the victim. It's not psychic damage, it's a series of conscious choices that people can either indulge or reject. If you indulge those feelings, you’re in the wrong. If you don’t indulge those feelings (repress them, ignore them, set them aside), part of your repentance is usually agreeing not to disrupt the structure that allowed the abuse to happen in the first place. In practice, if you don’t have a category for the way abuse does real, unresolvable harm to people, it’s hard to think of a reason why abuse matters. Except, of course, that it hurts the witness of the church. But you can solve that by covering the abuse up. So, why wouldn’t you? 4) Stopping it is not worth the price. I’ve said before that it drives me nuts on @bethallisonbarr 's behalf when people insist that her criticisms of patriarchy only refer to abusive relationships, not healthy, hierarchical ones. No one ever actually says what the difference is, or how you keep one from becoming the other. Wanting to retain a situation where one party has power and the other party doesn't, but not wanting abuse, is like saying you never want to wash your dishes, take out your trash, or clean your kitchen – but you don’t want flies. You want the conditions of the bad outcome, you just don’t want the consequence of the conditions. But if you believe that hierarchy is good and abuse is not serious, you don’t solve the problem by taking out the trash. You solve the problem by enduring the flies. It’s just not worth losing hierarchies to prevent. Those are too important. Most of the ways victims get help – going to the police, separating from a spouse, seeing a therapist – inherently damages a hierarchy. The courts tell a church what to do. Divorce ends a Christian marriage. Parents lose control of their kids. If the hierarchies are good and need to stay in place, almost anything that actually and decisively removes a person from abuse is a problem. It’s not worth damaging the reputation of the church. That can be protected in a lot of ways. It’s not worth putting out the Christian men who have good doctrine, because there aren’t that many of them and we can’t lose a single one. The church is in a war with the world, and the hierarchies, the reputation of the church, and the men with their doctrine are the only weapons the real church has. So if you believe everything I’ve laid out, and you can abuse your child without threatening the hierarchies, the church’s witness, and the doctrine... or once abuse has happened, you can't get justice without sacrificing the hierarchies or your doctrine... How wrong do you think it is to abuse a child? Is it wrong? It just doesn't seem like it is. Again, it's easy to say that abuse is wrong. It's even easier to believe it on some kind of cognitive level. What is different is to believe it in a way in impacts your behavior.Your doctrine is your praxis. Your praxis reveals your doctrine. If you cannot act on your beliefs, they are not actually your beliefs. Do I think any of the thousands involved in church abuse cases and their cover ups consciously believes or teaches abuse is wrong? No. Do I know they explicitly believe things that make abuse easier to ignore or commit? Yes. Do I believe they believe something more central than the injustice and evil of harming another Christian in the church when they don't act? Yes. This article exposes the threat a third-party investigation poses to Classis East delegates like Rick Wieringa of Georgetown PRC (and all those agreeing nothing less than 100% alignment on theology is required of any third party investigation). Their praxis HAS revealed their doctrine, and it is found wanting. Time and again it is exposed as love for a controlling system, not the sheep. They will not lie down their life for the sheep, but are fine with others feeding on them. See how often they blame them. See how a professor says this problem isn't severe enough to warrant a day of prayer. Will you yet listen to the voices of your bloodied sheep, or harden your hearts with each successive announcement and Bullet Point? Think about the scores of little ones offended by Ron VanOverloop, Hulda Kuiper, Ivan Bleyenberg, Lamm Lubbers, Jack Lenting, and Don Faber to name a few. Think of the abused and beaten spouses and children. Enabled and supported, the evil of perpetrators covered. Do not think the judgement which came to Belshazzar could not fall upon you. Is your face pale with fright, are your knees knocking? Will these words be spoken to you? God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end; you have been weighed in the balances and found wanting; your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians shepherds after my own heart. Your distinctives and confessional standards will not save you. Praise God today is still a day of salvation. A day given with ability to seek right and do justice.
|
|
|
Post by searchingbeliever on Feb 15, 2023 0:55:22 GMT
I have a copy of the letter I can share frim the consistory about Hulda Kuiper
Dear Congregation of Southwest PRC, In response to the request of an individual, the consistory has investigated a case of sexual abuse of children in our history and how a report of that abuse was handled by Southwest's consistory. Through its investigation, the consistory has verified that Hulda Kuiper (now deceased), a member of our congregation from 1969-1989, and a former teacher in several Protestant Reformed Christian Schools, was in fact a sexual abuser of children. Hulda sexually harassed, assaulted, and abused children using her authority as a schoolteacher and in other contexts. Our investigation focused mainly on events in the 1970s-80s, but there is reason to believe the abuse preceded those years as well. Although Hulda Kuiper is now deceased, the consistory judged that there is a present need for this information to be publicly known. First, according to Christ's compassion for his sheep and the requirements of the 6th commandment, it is the consistory's duty to seek out and minister to those who have been sexually abused by Hulda Kuiper. The consistory has reason to believe there are more victims suffering silently and alone. By making this announcement, we hope that these potential victims might seek the help they need. Since Hulda lived and taught in schools around the country, we are also notifying the consistories of all Protestant Reformed Churches of this information as well. Second, this announcement is also necessary because Southwest PR's failures in this history are a cause for public offense. When an instance of this abuse was reported to Southwest PRC's consistory in 1981, the consistory failed in several respects. • After receiving the report of Halda's sin, the consistory failed to investigate the nature and extent of her sins in order to make a faithful judgment of Hulda 's repentance when her sin was presented to the consistory. • The consistory failed to exercise Christian discipline with Hulda Kuiper. • The consistory erred by treating Hulda's gross sin of sexual abuse of children as a private matter The consistory failed to report the abuse of a child to the civil authorities Consistory failed to notify the board of HOPE PRC that Hulda Kuiper, one of the schools teachers was sexually abusing a child Consistory failed when it transferred the membership papers of Hulda Kuiper to Faith PRC without giving notice of her history as a sexual abuser of children. The consistory failed to keep a faithful record of its work in this case. The consistory failed to act with compassion, carefulness and urgency that is necessary for the care and protection of the children of Gods covenant A more complete explanation of these judgments can be read in the consistory's full report which is available upon an emailed request to the clerk. We understand that our sin has provoked God to anger and endangered the children of His church and covenant. We understand the grievous nature of this failure in that we have offended these “ little ones which believe in me" (Matthew 18:6). We acknowledge that our failures have compounded and added to the suffering of victims of sexual abuse. And not least of all, we confess that the way we responded to this abuse has given many an occasion to blaspheme the name of God. We take responsibility for these failures, and confess them as our sin against God, against His church, against our neighbors more broadly, and especially against victims of sexual abuse. Though these failures occurred many years ago, we bear a corporate responsibility for them, and we pray that God will forgive us, cleanse us, and that he might preserve us from such grievous failures in the future. We cast ourselves on the mercy of God and take refuge in the cross of Christ alone. Finally, we sincerely desire that victims of Hula's sexual abuse would reach out to us (as well as victims of abuse more generally). We are eager to confess our faults to you, to listen and learn from you, to bear the burden of your suffering with you, and to bring the comfort of God's word to you. Sincerely, The Consistory of Southwest Protestant Reformed Church
|
|
Hw
The Kitchen
Posts: 1,190
|
Post by Hw on Feb 24, 2023 16:57:31 GMT
I have a copy of the letter I can share frim the consistory about Hulda Kuiper Dear Congregation of Southwest PRC, In response to the request of an individual, the consistory has investigated a case of sexual abuse of children in our history and how a report of that abuse was handled by Southwest's consistory. Through its investigation, the consistory has verified that Hulda Kuiper (now deceased), a member of our congregation from 1969-1989, and a former teacher in several Protestant Reformed Christian Schools, was in fact a sexual abuser of children. Hulda sexually harassed, assaulted, and abused children using her authority as a schoolteacher and in other contexts. Our investigation focused mainly on events in the 1970s-80s, but there is reason to believe the abuse preceded those years as well. Although Hulda Kuiper is now deceased, the consistory judged that there is a present need for this information to be publicly known. First, according to Christ's compassion for his sheep and the requirements of the 6th commandment, it is the consistory's duty to seek out and minister to those who have been sexually abused by Hulda Kuiper. The consistory has reason to believe there are more victims suffering silently and alone. By making this announcement, we hope that these potential victims might seek the help they need. Since Hulda lived and taught in schools around the country, we are also notifying the consistories of all Protestant Reformed Churches of this information as well. Second, this announcement is also necessary because Southwest PR's failures in this history are a cause for public offense. When an instance of this abuse was reported to Southwest PRC's consistory in 1981, the consistory failed in several respects. • After receiving the report of Halda's sin, the consistory failed to investigate the nature and extent of her sins in order to make a faithful judgment of Hulda 's repentance when her sin was presented to the consistory. • The consistory failed to exercise Christian discipline with Hulda Kuiper. • The consistory erred by treating Hulda's gross sin of sexual abuse of children as a private matter The consistory failed to report the abuse of a child to the civil authorities Consistory failed to notify the board of HOPE PRC that Hulda Kuiper, one of the schools teachers was sexually abusing a child Consistory failed when it transferred the membership papers of Hulda Kuiper to Faith PRC without giving notice of her history as a sexual abuser of children. The consistory failed to keep a faithful record of its work in this case. The consistory failed to act with compassion, carefulness and urgency that is necessary for the care and protection of the children of Gods covenant A more complete explanation of these judgments can be read in the consistory's full report which is available upon an emailed request to the clerk. We understand that our sin has provoked God to anger and endangered the children of His church and covenant. We understand the grievous nature of this failure in that we have offended these “ little ones which believe in me" (Matthew 18:6). We acknowledge that our failures have compounded and added to the suffering of victims of sexual abuse. And not least of all, we confess that the way we responded to this abuse has given many an occasion to blaspheme the name of God. We take responsibility for these failures, and confess them as our sin against God, against His church, against our neighbors more broadly, and especially against victims of sexual abuse. Though these failures occurred many years ago, we bear a corporate responsibility for them, and we pray that God will forgive us, cleanse us, and that he might preserve us from such grievous failures in the future. We cast ourselves on the mercy of God and take refuge in the cross of Christ alone. Finally, we sincerely desire that victims of Hula's sexual abuse would reach out to us (as well as victims of abuse more generally). We are eager to confess our faults to you, to listen and learn from you, to bear the burden of your suffering with you, and to bring the comfort of God's word to you. Sincerely, The Consistory of Southwest Protestant Reformed Church I reached out with an utterly disappointing response in return. No care or concern whatsoever. They did say i could talk to them about Hulda and Hulda only in order to help them prevent this in the future. No. I was her victim. IT'S NOT THE VICTIMS PLACE TO HELP EDUCATE THEM BY TELLING THEM THEIR STORY! I was appalled to say the least. Not one little iota of care or concern or apology. I passed on that glorious opportunity to share my abuse. I'm not wasting time or breath on people who couldn't care less about me. If anyone thinks they are changing, i don't think they are. I truly believe it's been a time of cleaning house and destroying records. I can imagine how scrubbed my "file" is. While s but disappointed, I'm not surprised. We need to be here for the victims who will pour out of there. My guess is, 25 years from now it will look the same.. and that is so sad to me.
|
|
|
Post by sharikasten on Feb 24, 2023 17:01:56 GMT
I have a copy of the letter I can share frim the consistory about Hulda Kuiper Dear Congregation of Southwest PRC, In response to the request of an individual, the consistory has investigated a case of sexual abuse of children in our history and how a report of that abuse was handled by Southwest's consistory. Through its investigation, the consistory has verified that Hulda Kuiper (now deceased), a member of our congregation from 1969-1989, and a former teacher in several Protestant Reformed Christian Schools, was in fact a sexual abuser of children. Hulda sexually harassed, assaulted, and abused children using her authority as a schoolteacher and in other contexts. Our investigation focused mainly on events in the 1970s-80s, but there is reason to believe the abuse preceded those years as well. Although Hulda Kuiper is now deceased, the consistory judged that there is a present need for this information to be publicly known. First, according to Christ's compassion for his sheep and the requirements of the 6th commandment, it is the consistory's duty to seek out and minister to those who have been sexually abused by Hulda Kuiper. The consistory has reason to believe there are more victims suffering silently and alone. By making this announcement, we hope that these potential victims might seek the help they need. Since Hulda lived and taught in schools around the country, we are also notifying the consistories of all Protestant Reformed Churches of this information as well. Second, this announcement is also necessary because Southwest PR's failures in this history are a cause for public offense. When an instance of this abuse was reported to Southwest PRC's consistory in 1981, the consistory failed in several respects. • After receiving the report of Halda's sin, the consistory failed to investigate the nature and extent of her sins in order to make a faithful judgment of Hulda 's repentance when her sin was presented to the consistory. • The consistory failed to exercise Christian discipline with Hulda Kuiper. • The consistory erred by treating Hulda's gross sin of sexual abuse of children as a private matter The consistory failed to report the abuse of a child to the civil authorities Consistory failed to notify the board of HOPE PRC that Hulda Kuiper, one of the schools teachers was sexually abusing a child Consistory failed when it transferred the membership papers of Hulda Kuiper to Faith PRC without giving notice of her history as a sexual abuser of children. The consistory failed to keep a faithful record of its work in this case. The consistory failed to act with compassion, carefulness and urgency that is necessary for the care and protection of the children of Gods covenant A more complete explanation of these judgments can be read in the consistory's full report which is available upon an emailed request to the clerk. We understand that our sin has provoked God to anger and endangered the children of His church and covenant. We understand the grievous nature of this failure in that we have offended these “ little ones which believe in me" (Matthew 18:6). We acknowledge that our failures have compounded and added to the suffering of victims of sexual abuse. And not least of all, we confess that the way we responded to this abuse has given many an occasion to blaspheme the name of God. We take responsibility for these failures, and confess them as our sin against God, against His church, against our neighbors more broadly, and especially against victims of sexual abuse. Though these failures occurred many years ago, we bear a corporate responsibility for them, and we pray that God will forgive us, cleanse us, and that he might preserve us from such grievous failures in the future. We cast ourselves on the mercy of God and take refuge in the cross of Christ alone. Finally, we sincerely desire that victims of Hula's sexual abuse would reach out to us (as well as victims of abuse more generally). We are eager to confess our faults to you, to listen and learn from you, to bear the burden of your suffering with you, and to bring the comfort of God's word to you. Sincerely, The Consistory of Southwest Protestant Reformed Church I reached out with an utterly disappointing response in return. No care or concern whatsoever. They did say i could talk to them about Hulda and Hulda only in order to help them prevent this in the future. No. I was her victim. IT'S NOT THE VICTIMS PLACE TO HELP EDUCATE THEM BY TELLING THEM THEIR STORY! I was appalled to say the least. Not one little iota of care or concern or apology. I passed on that glorious opportunity to share my abuse. I'm not wasting time or breath on people who couldn't care less about me. If anyone thinks they are changing, i don't think they are. I truly believe it's been a time of cleaning house and destroying records. I can imagine how scrubbed my "file" is. While s but disappointed, I'm not surprised. We need to be here for the victims who will pour out of there. My guess is, 25 years from now it will look the same.. and that is so sad to me. I’m so sorry for your continuing pain from the PRC who will not comfort or love you after all the abuse you have been through.
|
|
|
Post by wewerepr on Feb 24, 2023 18:04:53 GMT
I have a copy of the letter I can share frim the consistory about Hulda Kuiper Dear Congregation of Southwest PRC, In response to the request of an individual, the consistory has investigated a case of sexual abuse of children in our history and how a report of that abuse was handled by Southwest's consistory. Through its investigation, the consistory has verified that Hulda Kuiper (now deceased), a member of our congregation from 1969-1989, and a former teacher in several Protestant Reformed Christian Schools, was in fact a sexual abuser of children. Hulda sexually harassed, assaulted, and abused children using her authority as a schoolteacher and in other contexts. Our investigation focused mainly on events in the 1970s-80s, but there is reason to believe the abuse preceded those years as well. Although Hulda Kuiper is now deceased, the consistory judged that there is a present need for this information to be publicly known. First, according to Christ's compassion for his sheep and the requirements of the 6th commandment, it is the consistory's duty to seek out and minister to those who have been sexually abused by Hulda Kuiper. The consistory has reason to believe there are more victims suffering silently and alone. By making this announcement, we hope that these potential victims might seek the help they need. Since Hulda lived and taught in schools around the country, we are also notifying the consistories of all Protestant Reformed Churches of this information as well. Second, this announcement is also necessary because Southwest PR's failures in this history are a cause for public offense. When an instance of this abuse was reported to Southwest PRC's consistory in 1981, the consistory failed in several respects. • After receiving the report of Halda's sin, the consistory failed to investigate the nature and extent of her sins in order to make a faithful judgment of Hulda 's repentance when her sin was presented to the consistory. • The consistory failed to exercise Christian discipline with Hulda Kuiper. • The consistory erred by treating Hulda's gross sin of sexual abuse of children as a private matter The consistory failed to report the abuse of a child to the civil authorities Consistory failed to notify the board of HOPE PRC that Hulda Kuiper, one of the schools teachers was sexually abusing a child Consistory failed when it transferred the membership papers of Hulda Kuiper to Faith PRC without giving notice of her history as a sexual abuser of children. The consistory failed to keep a faithful record of its work in this case. The consistory failed to act with compassion, carefulness and urgency that is necessary for the care and protection of the children of Gods covenant A more complete explanation of these judgments can be read in the consistory's full report which is available upon an emailed request to the clerk. We understand that our sin has provoked God to anger and endangered the children of His church and covenant. We understand the grievous nature of this failure in that we have offended these “ little ones which believe in me" (Matthew 18:6). We acknowledge that our failures have compounded and added to the suffering of victims of sexual abuse. And not least of all, we confess that the way we responded to this abuse has given many an occasion to blaspheme the name of God. We take responsibility for these failures, and confess them as our sin against God, against His church, against our neighbors more broadly, and especially against victims of sexual abuse. Though these failures occurred many years ago, we bear a corporate responsibility for them, and we pray that God will forgive us, cleanse us, and that he might preserve us from such grievous failures in the future. We cast ourselves on the mercy of God and take refuge in the cross of Christ alone. Finally, we sincerely desire that victims of Hula's sexual abuse would reach out to us (as well as victims of abuse more generally). We are eager to confess our faults to you, to listen and learn from you, to bear the burden of your suffering with you, and to bring the comfort of God's word to you. Sincerely, The Consistory of Southwest Protestant Reformed Church I reached out with an utterly disappointing response in return. No care or concern whatsoever. They did say i could talk to them about Hulda and Hulda only in order to help them prevent this in the future. No. I was her victim. IT'S NOT THE VICTIMS PLACE TO HELP EDUCATE THEM BY TELLING THEM THEIR STORY! I was appalled to say the least. Not one little iota of care or concern or apology. I passed on that glorious opportunity to share my abuse. I'm not wasting time or breath on people who couldn't care less about me. If anyone thinks they are changing, i don't think they are. I truly believe it's been a time of cleaning house and destroying records. I can imagine how scrubbed my "file" is. While s but disappointed, I'm not surprised. We need to be here for the victims who will pour out of there. My guess is, 25 years from now it will look the same.. and that is so sad to me. yep. 25 years from now it will look the same. it looked this way 25 years ago. it looks this way today. it will look the same way in 25 years there will be no real change....this is why leaving is a good idea.. if not for you, then for your kids. in 25 years your kids will have grown up and be in the same system there is now. I am old, 25 years goes by fairly fast. NOW is the time to leave.
|
|
|
Post by blessed2be on Feb 25, 2023 13:31:54 GMT
I have a copy of the letter I can share frim the consistory about Hulda Kuiper Dear Congregation of Southwest PRC, In response to the request of an individual, the consistory has investigated a case of sexual abuse of children in our history and how a report of that abuse was handled by Southwest's consistory. Through its investigation, the consistory has verified that Hulda Kuiper (now deceased), a member of our congregation from 1969-1989, and a former teacher in several Protestant Reformed Christian Schools, was in fact a sexual abuser of children. Hulda sexually harassed, assaulted, and abused children using her authority as a schoolteacher and in other contexts. Our investigation focused mainly on events in the 1970s-80s, but there is reason to believe the abuse preceded those years as well. Although Hulda Kuiper is now deceased, the consistory judged that there is a present need for this information to be publicly known. First, according to Christ's compassion for his sheep and the requirements of the 6th commandment, it is the consistory's duty to seek out and minister to those who have been sexually abused by Hulda Kuiper. The consistory has reason to believe there are more victims suffering silently and alone. By making this announcement, we hope that these potential victims might seek the help they need. Since Hulda lived and taught in schools around the country, we are also notifying the consistories of all Protestant Reformed Churches of this information as well. Second, this announcement is also necessary because Southwest PR's failures in this history are a cause for public offense. When an instance of this abuse was reported to Southwest PRC's consistory in 1981, the consistory failed in several respects. • After receiving the report of Halda's sin, the consistory failed to investigate the nature and extent of her sins in order to make a faithful judgment of Hulda 's repentance when her sin was presented to the consistory. • The consistory failed to exercise Christian discipline with Hulda Kuiper. • The consistory erred by treating Hulda's gross sin of sexual abuse of children as a private matter The consistory failed to report the abuse of a child to the civil authorities Consistory failed to notify the board of HOPE PRC that Hulda Kuiper, one of the schools teachers was sexually abusing a child Consistory failed when it transferred the membership papers of Hulda Kuiper to Faith PRC without giving notice of her history as a sexual abuser of children. The consistory failed to keep a faithful record of its work in this case. The consistory failed to act with compassion, carefulness and urgency that is necessary for the care and protection of the children of Gods covenant A more complete explanation of these judgments can be read in the consistory's full report which is available upon an emailed request to the clerk. We understand that our sin has provoked God to anger and endangered the children of His church and covenant. We understand the grievous nature of this failure in that we have offended these “ little ones which believe in me" (Matthew 18:6). We acknowledge that our failures have compounded and added to the suffering of victims of sexual abuse. And not least of all, we confess that the way we responded to this abuse has given many an occasion to blaspheme the name of God. We take responsibility for these failures, and confess them as our sin against God, against His church, against our neighbors more broadly, and especially against victims of sexual abuse. Though these failures occurred many years ago, we bear a corporate responsibility for them, and we pray that God will forgive us, cleanse us, and that he might preserve us from such grievous failures in the future. We cast ourselves on the mercy of God and take refuge in the cross of Christ alone. Finally, we sincerely desire that victims of Hula's sexual abuse would reach out to us (as well as victims of abuse more generally). We are eager to confess our faults to you, to listen and learn from you, to bear the burden of your suffering with you, and to bring the comfort of God's word to you. Sincerely, The Consistory of Southwest Protestant Reformed Church I reached out with an utterly disappointing response in return. No care or concern whatsoever. They did say i could talk to them about Hulda and Hulda only in order to help them prevent this in the future. No. I was her victim. IT'S NOT THE VICTIMS PLACE TO HELP EDUCATE THEM BY TELLING THEM THEIR STORY! I was appalled to say the least. Not one little iota of care or concern or apology. I passed on that glorious opportunity to share my abuse. I'm not wasting time or breath on people who couldn't care less about me. If anyone thinks they are changing, i don't think they are. I truly believe it's been a time of cleaning house and destroying records. I can imagine how scrubbed my "file" is. While s but disappointed, I'm not surprised. We need to be here for the victims who will pour out of there. My guess is, 25 years from now it will look the same.. and that is so sad to me. SundayCoffee
|
|
|
Post by questioneverything on Feb 26, 2023 2:30:35 GMT
...you may be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Andatlastiseethelight on Feb 26, 2023 3:34:48 GMT
The system you see before your eyes is such a distortion of reality. When you give yourself the autonomy to make decisions for yourself, you’ll see everything through a new and “so much less scary” world.
You don’t have life all put together.
In fact, some people have it more together. People from the “outside”.
And that’s ok. And that’s normal.
You might not feel that regular sense entitlement—and that’s good,; it’s actually growth. That humility will do you good to actually serve the people around you in your family, and in your life. You can in fact serve people. Not entirely agree with everything in their life, and still coexist.
|
|
|
Post by cannalily on Feb 27, 2023 12:05:17 GMT
Well, yet another iteration of getting their "jesus" on. Another weekend of Heavenly Bliss!
|
|
|
Post by questioneverything on Mar 4, 2023 22:29:47 GMT
That your denomination began out of a love of doctrine that you found distinctive. Now you worship it.
|
|