You may be aware that Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary President Paige Patterson has come under fire over the past few days for comments he made in 2000 during a Q&A time at a meeting sponsored by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Here are the comments that are drawing criticism.
The church will never be a refuge for abused women so long as prominent leaders like Southern Baptist Paige Patterson are making dangerous statements like this… https://t.co/mOrukbKvjD pic.twitter.com/xeH2lfXe9z
— Jonathan Merritt (@JonathanMerritt) April 28, 2018
More vile comments from Paige Patterson. Perhaps worse than the first! Here the @swbts president says he encouraged an abused woman to remain with her husband. The next week she had two black eyes and he says, “I am very happy!” (Ht: @JJ_Denhollander) pic.twitter.com/F49EvoNt0h
— Jonathan Merritt (@JonathanMerritt) April 28, 2018
You can listen yourself here. And you can read Dr. Patterson’s statement here. My intent here is not to give an exhaustive analysis of everything that has transpired recently in relation to these comments, but I do wish to say a few things.
1. Abuse is always wrong.
This is a clear application of the sixth commandment: “You shall not murder” (Ex. 20:13). Jesus taught this truth when He said, “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!” will be liable to the hell of fire” (Matt. 5:21-22). If being angry with your brother/sister is a violation of the sixth commandment, it’s abundantly clear that abuse is also a violation of God’s moral law as revealed in the Ten Commandments.
But we can go back farther than that. Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” God makes clear in the opening chapter of the Bible that all people are created in the image of God. Since all people are created in the image of God, it is clear that abuse is always wrong.
In addition, you don’t have to look very long throughout the Bible to see the concern of our God for those who are oppressed and taken advantage of.
2. Abuse should never be tolerated or ignored by God’s people.
Pastors should encourage the abused to call the police or offer to do so for them. Pastors and churches should counsel those experiencing physical abuse to leave or if possible have the abuser removed from the home. Churches should help in providing a safe place for the abused to go if necessary. Pastors and churches should not counsel physically abused persons to remain in the abusive situation in hopes that the abuser will change. Pastors protect the flock. Christians defend the weak (Is. 1:17). Jesus said, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Mk 12:31). The best way to love an abused person is to protect her. The best way to love an abuser is to stop him.
The church should also discipline the abuser (Matt. 18; 1 Cor. 5). Church discipline, though, is not a substitute for involving the proper civil authorities.
3. Paige Patterson’s comments were callous and unhelpful at best and dangerous at worst.
Is there a way to interpret Patterson’s comments regarding abuse as only extremely callous and unhelpful? If so, I haven’t been able to figure it out. The statement he released on the seminary’s website doesn’t do much to assure me that I am missing something.
It is dangerous for pastors and other church leaders to have a cavalier attitude toward domestic violence. It has been reported that nearly three U.S. women are killed every day by an intimate partner. Many victims of domestic violence are already afraid to seek help. Some even feel as if there is something they have done to cause or deserve the abuse they are experiencing. Hearing a pastor or church leader speak in a lighthearted manner with reference to blackened eyes only compounds these problems.
4. The tape is old and it resurfaced because of an old foe.
This is true, but it doesn’t change what was said. Neither does it change the fact that 18 years later Dr. Patterson still hasn’t managed to clearly denounce his prior comments. Does he really not cringe when he listens to the recording of himself telling that story?
5. I am thankful that SBC leaders are speaking out.
I’ll conclude with these notable responses.
A better way forward is to think of the SBC’s future mission rather than Paige Patterson’s past success, and I hope he desires the same for the SBC he gave his life to. PP: You did the right thing when it was hard. Now, let me encourage you to do so again. https://t.co/QHAgj4LJ6U
— Ed Stetzer (@edstetzer) May 1, 2018
A statement from Thom S. Rainer. pic.twitter.com/miWmc9Bjn6
— Thom Rainer (@ThomRainer) May 1, 2018
Lots of social media convo this afternoon about spousal abuse. As the Provost of a SBC seminary and pastor at a SBC church, let me be clear: a physically abused woman should separate from her husband and have him put in jail.
— Bruce Ashford (@BruceAshford) April 28, 2018
Any physical abuse on any level is completely unacceptable in a marriage. The church should immediately step in & provide a safe place for the abused. This has been my consistent counsel my entire ministry. Any counsel to the contrary is unwise & even dangerous.
— Daniel Akin (@DannyAkin) May 1, 2018
Absolutely correct. I have NEVER advised any spouse to stay in a physically abusive situation. That only enables the abuser and is a barrier to what God could do in that spouse’s life and to advise otherwise breaks the #GoldenRule. https://t.co/zE1MUpxOrO
— James Merritt (@drjamesmerritt) April 29, 2018
*I made a mistake when I initially wrote this article that has been pointed out in the comments. I referred to the sixth commandment as the fifth commandment. That has been corrected.
Adam,
Your post helped me to see this entire sad episode as a well-coordinated and choreographed “hit job” by all mentioned in your piece and others feeding it on social media.
I will never enter another LifeWay store again.
Right, Ron, because when news breaks and people go to Twitter to register their thoughts on the topic, its a “well coordinated and choreographed ‘hit job'”. Gee, maybe these are people who are simply no longer able to keep silence regarding what an embarrassment Patterson has been to the convention for a number of years.
Ron, there’s no doubt that it is a hit job by the one who brought these comments back up. His blog makes it pretty clear that his intent is to take down Paige Patterson. I think the others are genuinely sad that they have been placed in a position where they feel it necessary to say a clear word about what Southern Baptists believe concerning abuse.
Ron,
This seems like a childish response to leaders our convention who are speaking out against a very serious matter. This isn’t a “hit job” as you so aptly put it. There’s no coordinated effort to dispose of Dr. Patterson. He brought this upon himself for not being wise and biblical in his counseling and comments.
Ron, neither blind hatred nor blind loyalty will help us here.
Mr Hale’s comment already prove my hopes dashed, but it was going to be my hope that all camps within the SBC treat this incident equally as they do/did the SGM issues and Pastor CJ Mahaney. If one should be removed, they both should; if one should be given grace, both should.
Abuse (emotional, physical, sexual), adultery, and other similar sins need to be confronted. But they need to be confronted equally. We should not, and cannot be easy on the people we like, and harsh on those we oppose.
Thank you for not being silent on this and standing for women. Ron it is not a hit piece, it is a piece that has been written by Wade Burleson and others ten years ago and ignored for the reason of not speaking out against Paige Patterson. It is fact. It was wrong then and is even more wrong now that Paige defends these very words again today. I am thankful for those who are standing for women. I wish it would have been done by more ten years ago, but glad that it is happening now.
From Dr. Patterson’s statement (see link in the OP): “For the record, I have never been abusive to any woman. I have never counseled or condoned abuse of any kind. I will never be a party to any position other than that of the defense of any weaker party when subjected to the threat of a stronger party. This certainly includes women and children. Any physical or sexual abuse of anyone should be reported immediately to the appropriate authorities, as I have always done.” I agree with this and I don’t see how the interview or statement comport with the… Read more »
Did you even read P.P. own words? He told a woman, according to him, who experienced abuse to go back into a private bedroom with the man who was abusing her. That’s bad advice! P.P. is a giant in theology. He helped SBC find it’s way back to the Bible, but his bad advice needs to be exposed to the light of day so that other young pastors will not follow this dangerous course.
Jeff, this is from his statement (link in the OP) and what I read: “Many years ago in West Texas, a woman approached me about the desire of her husband to prevent her attendance in church. He was neither harsh nor physical with her, but she felt abused. I suggested to her that she kneel by the bed at night and pray for him. Because he might hear her prayer, I warned her that he could become angry over this and seek to retaliate. Subsequently, on a Sunday morning, she arrived at church with some evidence of physical abuse. She… Read more »
Randy, I did a comparison of both statements here.
He altered the 2nd story. It’s much more likely that the 1st story (wife had experienced some abuse, and then got black eyes after praying by the bed per Patterson’s recommendation, is the more accurate story. The more time goes by, the more inaccurate stories become.
https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2018/04/30/analysis-paige-pattersons-teachings-on-domestic-violence-put-victims-in-harms-way/
Yes Julie Anne I saw the difference in the two stories right away, remembering the statement he gave ten years ago. No mention was made of the man being saved and the marriage being happily ever after, and I don’t believe that is what happened for a second. In the first statement which was recorded and coming from Paige’s mouth, aka the original statement said the man came to church, that was the end of the story. Now Paige seems to be adding to the story by saying the man came to salvation and the marriage was happily ever after.
I take that back Julie, in the original statement Paige did say the man came forward etc. in the original statement. I had forgotten that or did not hear that part to begin with, but you are right about the comparisons. I gave wrong information, so it’s better to not rely on memory as facts, but the actual recording and words.
What actual evidence do you have to impeach either version?
It is nearly universal that accounts of events from the same person can vary depending upon many factors, without either intentional or accidental error. Proper impeachment takes more than just minor variations and additional details.
Julie Anne – there were two different contexts in play: 1) real-time interview and 2) a rehearsed statement. Since there was a another party, i.e., the woman who gave testimony, the details may been more accurate in the second.
I think the last two sentences there are really informative as to context.
Also, further up in the comment he referred to being happy – and at that time stated it was not because of the abuse.
Again, disagree with his methods – denounce his counsel – but attacking him for it without context and intimating he condones and supports abuse and abusers is out of bounds, imo.
I mean seriously Paige Patterson has done and said enough patently clear egregious stuff over the years that we don’t need to latch onto out of context stuff to find objection.
A couple things:
1) I don’t believe anyone accused Patterson of being abusive. Not sure why he was going out of his way to say that. The issue isn’t “Has Patterson ever been or condoned abuse?” The issue is “Did Patterson give good counsel to a woman who was abused?” So the comment seems strange
2) We should take spiritual and verbal abuse just as seriously as physical and sexual abuse. Singling out JUST physical and sexual abuse is part of the problem. As we can already see, whatever type of abuse it was it eventually manifested in physical abuse.
But Paige did abuse women, 25 plus of them in the Gilyard case, which is not the subject of this thread.
How? By requesting something more than rumor and innuendo to actually evidence serious charges? (BTW, that pesky, inconvenient two or three witnesses/due process thing is Mosaic law) By not immediately jumping to “Jim Crow” era stereotypes about the rumored promiscuity of Gilyard? (One should note the context here of how few persons of color were actively participating in Southern Baptist life two decades ago) By not dropping everything to monitor Gilyard’s conduct 24/7? By withdrawing all support for Gilyard and publicly stating he was no longer eligible to pastor when there was finally evidence and corroboration of misconduct? And why… Read more »
God bless you, Tyler. I have been looking to see who would pick up on your point number two. Those singling out physical abuse have a serious blind spot and need to further educate themselves on abuse. It is disheartening to feel as if “the world” is willing to stand up for the abused while we parse through shades of abuse. What does this say for our witness?
There are several problems with this analysis. 1. Persons in counseling are often not completely truthful and many times leave out material facts, which can degrade if not completely undermine any pastoral or legal counsel. 2. Even the law, law enforcement, and the secular courts can have difficulty with sorting through many alleged “abuse’ allegations. And the church no longer has ecclesiastical courts to properly evaluate occasions of domestic discord. 3. Hindsight is 20/20, but past performance is not always a good or reliable predictor of future results. 4. “Shades of abuse” involve a panoply of unchristian conduct, from mere… Read more »
John, So it is clear, I posted under “A Woman” previously, but have agreed to add a name. Without doubt it is more challenging for Christian counselors in some respects as you have mentioned. Maybe walking through some of those points can help us examine how we can better serve those who are vulnerable in our care. How do we walk the line between sorting out “alleged abuse” and sending an unbelieved victim back until there is undeniable proof (black eye, for instance)? Should we walk that line at all? Even “mere words” should not be dismissed as if they… Read more »
NotEmily, I’m not one of the objectors to anonymity. “How do we walk the line between sorting out “alleged abuse” and sending an unbelieved victim back until there is undeniable proof (black eye, for instance)? Should we walk that line at all?” First of all, most jurisdictions would now have controlling law as duties regarding victims presenting with outward injuries. In that sense, Christian counselors would be obligated to respect and follow the law, while preserving confidentiality to the fullest extent lawfully possible. Second, the ex post facto judging of Dr. Patterson is based on hearsay within hearsay about events… Read more »
As to “mere words,” again the content and the context are necessary to determine what interventions are warranted. Just as the police do not arrest everyone who is accused of uttering hurtful words, Christian counselors need responses that are not only consistent with their biblical charge, but also proportionate to the actual risk and legal duties arising in the situation. “In counseling, which side should we err on?” The redemptive and restorative side, unless there is a credible basis to believe that: (a) the law requires more aggressive intervention; or (b) a credible threat of violence is reasonably imminent. “[W]e… Read more »
John, My intent is not to make a judgment of PP. The audio recording that has resurfaced has led many leaders to comment on abuse. However the responses of many leaders leave unaddressed questions as to how they would handle abuse of varying kinds. That is my concern. I appreciate you taking time to respond to me. To your third point, I don’t believe a counselor/pastor is always in the best position to decide when violence is imminent. Furthermore I reiterate that violence is not always physical. To your fourth point, I entirely agree. It is not always clear cut.… Read more »
I disagreed with these comments when l learned about them 10 years ago. They were widely discussed back then. I am pleased that other leaders are now registering their disapproval. But I do wonder about what rock they were living under 10 years ago. This episode demonstrates for me what I believe to be an awful tendency in leadership that is now very present in evangelical circles. The lack of balance and perspective. People, especially people who talk for a living, say things they wish they could take back or they say things without proper perspective or without the necessary… Read more »
“This resurrected statement should not be the basis for a lynchning party. That applies especially to people who owe their jobs to Paige Patterson.”
So people should remain silent about sending wives back to their abusive husbands because Patterson gave them their jobs? Are you saying that people’s jobs are more important than women’s lives? Because that’s what it sure sounds like you are saying, Louis.
No. I am not saying that. I disagree with what Paige Patterson advised in that statement. But I said so 10 years ago, not 10 years later and not with trumpets blaring as I stood on a street corner.
I agree with you that the timing should have been 10 years ago, but do you think women who have been subjected to abuse are complaining that it is finally being talked about? I don’t think so. Regardless of their personal issues involving PP, it is always appropriate to shine a light on the darkness.
And I agree with you there, too!
And I see someone who has mentioned CJ Mahaney. There are some important things to remember about comparing these things. Dr. Patterson spoke things with which many of us disagree. Strongly. Dr. Patterson is trying to address what he said. I don’t believe his additional statements have resolved anything, but he has tried. Mr. Mahaney has never given an account or explanation. He has simply denied that as the Apostle over his churches that he knew about or had anything to do with what happened. The real comparison, however, is to compare the full throated condemnations being leveled at Dr.… Read more »
It appears that the context of PP’s comments was in trying to prevent divorce, not to enable abusers. The critics of PP’s comments imply that divorce is an easy option when it’s really not especially for those with children. I’m disappointed by all the self-righteous chest-thumping from those in the SBC who couldn’t wait to criticize an 18-year tape that was maliciously reposted. Piling on PP in this way isn’t beneficial to anyone. No one is going to justify abuse but it is a complex issue with different types. We should acknowledge that and not pretend like there is always… Read more »
I don’t think we’re chest thumping. If you read Dr. Stetzer’s article, he was very gracious in his words. He thanked Dr. Patterson for his service , and Dr. Rainer’s statement did not even mention Dr. Patterson. It’s not chest thumping to say that you would counsel an abused party to separate from the abuser. It’s just compassionate advice. In my opinion, Dr. Patterson brought the criticism on himself by responding to the tape as he did. He could have said something more concise and left it at that.
Tony, I agree that Ed’s statement contained some very good words.
But it’s also the anxiousness to respond here that bothers me.
We can be seen as so craven to appear to be on the right side of things.
I don’t think it’s required at all, but it would be so refreshing to read one of these statements leading off with, “I called my good friend and mentor today, Paige Patterso, and talked with him about the statement that was reported this week …”
Louis: We aren’t appearing to be on the right side of things, we are on the right side of things and that should be said and often just as it is now.
I disagree with Patterson’s advice – I wouldn’t give the same advice – I agree with Adam’s scriptural and pastoral points above – but I also see this being brought up again as an hit job on Patterson. ( I don’t believe Adams article is a hit job… But I do believe there’s an agenda afoot by others) Those notions are not mutually exclusive. And with regard to Louis’ statement above… I think he is correct that all of those SBCV leaders posted above are in fact members of the council on manhood and womanhood – and also as Lewis… Read more »
I haven’t perhaps followed this as close as some. I’m not much of a denominational person these days so I don’t really have a dog in the fight. I do doubt very seriously if everyone on this thread would be willing to give Dr. Patterson a fair hearing on anything. I’m not privy to the context years ago. I do agree wholeheartedly that “divorce is not the first line of defense,” if that is what Dr. Patterson was getting at. Immediate separation and talks of divorce are two distinct issues. I personally believe that the Bible is clear, “God hates… Read more »
There’s no doubt that Ed Stetzer has called for Dr. Patterson to resign. You can agree or disagree with that, but it should be distinguished from what others have said. Others have condemned Dr. Patterson’s comments and have stated very clearly their positions regarding abuse. To understand why they felt the need to comment, you have to understand how the world views this. When an SBC leader of Dr. Patterson’s stature is heard saying what he said, people naturally ask whether that is what Southern Baptists believe regarding abuse. I believe it is helpful for other leaders to speak up… Read more »
Adam, I appreciate the balance and tenor of your statement here.
Adam, I am not sure I agree with you that his statement in the baptist press muddied the waters….I think it provided some context … here is what he said: “In an interview with Baptist Press, Patterson said he doubts “seriously” that a person of either gender experiencing physical abuse ever would be morally obligated to remain in the home with their spouse. Yet, he said, “minor non-injurious abuse which happens in so many marriages” — and which does not make the wife fear for her safety — might spur a woman to “pray [her husband] through this” rather than… Read more »
Stetzer: “In the aftermath of the Conservative Resurgence, the SBC made a mistake. We spent more time taking victory laps than really leading. We let our history become mythology. We turned men into heroes, and then we turned our heroes into gods.”
Now we have, ahem, the stained glass windows that will have to be addressed one of these days.
For any who may have missed the BP article:
Paige Patterson Clarifies Domestic Violence Stance
http://www.bpnews.net/50802/patterson-clarifies-domestic-violence-stance
David R. Brumbelow
Here are Stetzer’s final words in his piece: “But many SBC leaders I know think this and privately acknowledge that it is time for a new era. They can’t say it because of the unofficial rules, so let me say it. If Patterson preaches at the SBC, he will, because of his past work, get a standing ovation. Every news story will point to that moment, tie it together with the accusations against Paul Pressler, and say that Southern Baptists don’t take abuse seriously. And it’s not just a public relations crisis. It’s a message to women that we must… Read more »
William: Thanks for the good quotes. They address what I am driving at. There are churches and religious systems that truly do not have healthy views of women. I don’t see the SBC In that light. I am sensitive to the need for good PR and making sure we don’t say and do things that are counterproductive. But I often see the SBC as having really bad PR instincts. It’s probably due to our polity – 45,000 autonomous churches, lack of central control. We need to be thinking about how we relate to and project ourselves to the world long… Read more »
Thank you, William. I used the word resignation, and that doesn’t seem to be an accurate representation of what Stetzer said. He did not call for Patterson to resign in disgrace. He called for him to graciously retire now.
If he was a disgrace, then why should he retire in honor? Would God say “well done faithful servant?”
As a pastor, I found these anecdotal stories like the one PP told way back when to be very compelling. The idea that you counsel a woman to pray about her abusive husband and to expect harsher abuse, then she shows up at church with two black eyes but the abuser gets gloriously saved communicates the wrong idea: get beat up and maybe your husband will be saved. I’m guessing that not a few naive young pastors thought that if this worked for PP then it must be the way God works. His words stuck around to harm him. A… Read more »
Galatians 5:15 But if you bite and devour one another, beware lest you be consumed by one another!
We have all said hurtful dumb things off the cuff.
We are in the midst of a feeding frenzy. Some justified; some goes too far. Would some now want Jesus Christ to step aside for His politically incorrect statement? But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. -Jesus; Matthew 5:39 Of course I’m against abuse. But there are a multitude of degrees and nuances. Woe to us all, if our entire life and ministry hangs on getting every word and nuance exactly right, and politically correct. May God bless and protect Paige Patterson in… Read more »
David B.
You had me till that last sentence….
I assume you add Paige Patterson to Paige Patterson’s list of enemies? Lol
I do not condone any abuse of women, so let me state that up front. Here is the conundrum that I see today and in the foreseeable future: We seem to be swayed, motivated, and even shamed by whatever the current social media trends dictate. In other words, if there is a social media movement it is embraced, rarely examined thoroughly, and almost never refuted or modified until many people are destroyed. I won’t go into all the # hash-tags movements, but they are many. What happens when 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years from now another # Hash-Tag… Read more »
Nate,
I just simply can’t find anything in your comment with which to disagree.
Good comment.
Even with this specific issue aside – lots of tails waging dogs all over the place these days!
Presumably, SBC entity heads who know Patterson and his work well enough to praise him for all the good he has done, work alongside of him, and trust him enough to run a seminary and speak at conferences, should also know Patterson and his work well enough to have been aware of the almost 20 year old statements in question, especially when bloggers expressed their concerns about those statements years ago. Do SBC leaders know less about what is going on in the SBC and with its leaders than lay and unaffiliated people on blogs and social media? If SBC… Read more »
Many in our culture seem to be in a contest to see who can be outraged the fastest, and the most, in an effort to prove our moral sensitivity. It’s like we’re looking for new victims just so we can find new offenders to excoriate. I’m not accusing Adam of doing this, because I think he takes a reasonable approach. I do, however, disagree with the Stetzer article quoted here and the would-be “parade of horribles” he cites as evidence that Patterson’s resignation is warranted. As I understand it, Patterson’s comments in 2000 were part of an unscripted response to… Read more »
Jeff Johnson … Your reasoned response is the most sensible thing I’ve read in days concerning this matter. Thank you, Sir!
Dwight McKissic just released an article on Facebook that I wish everyone would go read. It’s fair and evenhanded and brings some rational thinking to this issue. I hope that SBC Voices and SBC Today will repost his article.
John Wylie: I read the article by Dr. McKissic and respectfully disagree with it. Paige Patterson should have been made to step down 10 plus years ago, but because of the unspoken rule “Thou shalt not speak ill of Paige Patterson”, nothing was done. And for more reasons than his bad advice, which was worse than telling someone to get an abortion in my opinion. His advice caused this woman to be beat and show up with two black eyes. That is beyond reprehensible and then to say “I am happy” is even more reprehensible. Blind loyalty is just that,… Read more »
BTW: I read a lot of those people who defend Paige, which I do not understand at all, that they owe him a debt for favors he has done them. Fine, say thank you, but do not defend what is wrong and sinful. Not one thing that Paige has done has he had to pay a price for. Standing ovations are what he receives no matter what he does. That is wrong and a slap in the face to those who have been victims of Paige’s tremendous power. He knows he can get away with anything, and he is right… Read more »
So someone being beat up is worse than someone being murdered? Debbie, that is irrational.
John,
An interjecting point: Too often an abusive spouse does not stop with simply beating up his wife.
Mike,
I was responding to Debbie’s comment concerning spousal abuse being worse than abortion. How does it get worse than an abortion?
John,
No it doesnt. Youare right. Butmy point is that it could end up being just as bad: murder.
Mike: You are on a roll today. You are the only one who got my point Murder is exactly right. If you are going to defend abortion which has been shown to not only be declining but no Republican, including Donald Trump who has ok’d funding Planned Parenthood, is doing anything about it, but to defend it and not get just as angry about a woman beaten by her husband and shows up with two black eyes shows there is something wrong. This woman risked her life and too many did with the same bad advice. But none of you… Read more »
Debbie, please try some punctuation. I’m pretty sure I still disagree with your abortion comment earlier, but it’s hard to tell. That last paragraph is a mess. 🙂
Debbie,
I agree with you.
Bad advice didnt save that husband, God did.
All bad advice did was get that women beat up.
Her leaving him or separating from him wouldnt stop God from saving Him.
Its a very confused theology to think otherwise.
Thanks Mike and you have summed it up. Also Paige lied when he said he always reports to the authorities and no woman would accuse him of abuse. That is documented as not true. I was associated with helping to bring the Gilyard case to light and had contact with those involved with Gilyard during that time and verify the facts given here and other places as true. http://thewartburgwatch.com/2018/04/30/not-only-did-paige-patterson-rejoice-when-a-woman-was-physically-abused-by-her-husband-he-refused-to-believe-25-reports-of-sexual-abuse-by-darrell-gilyard/
Mike and Debbie – I agree his bad advice did not bring salvation to the man that’s God’s work. But clearly, in honesty, and in context, Patterson was “happy“ about the man’s salvation… Not the abuse. Mike – I too think errant theology seems to lead PP to an “ends justify any means” often. This is not the first time we’ve seen this. Debbie – I also happen to agree with you that Paige Patterson has become, To put it charitably, a bit unassailable in the minds of many. I too have noticed, and been bothered, by him getting standing… Read more »
Debbie, I call a foul!
You’re not relaying PP’s “I was happy” comment fairly. When he used the comment I was happy phrase – he immediately, I think at the time of the initial comments, clarified that his happiness, in context, wasn’t for the abuse but for the spiritual conviction and resulting repentance.
Please, there’s nothing wrong with criticizing PP’s advice – I too think his advice was ill advised – but that doesn’t give one permission to take his words out of context.
Debbie, You said, “And for more reasons than his bad advice, which was worse than telling someone to get an abortion in my opinion. His advice caused this woman to be beat and show up with two black eyes.” Being beaten and having two black eyes is worse that death? I know something about spousal abuse. Grew up and as a little boy watched my drunken father physically beat my mother. Too many times to count. Bloodied and battered. Literally. Unless one has experienced the beating or watched as a child that happening, one cannot fathom the horror. But praise… Read more »
Verse of the day Therefore I, a prisoner for serving the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of your calling, for you have been called by God. Always be humble and gentle. Be patient with each other, making allowance for each other’s faults because of your love. Make every effort to keep yourselves united in the Spirit, binding yourselves together with peace. For there is one body and one Spirit, just as you have been called to one glorious hope for the future. There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who… Read more »
Thanks David.
I’m not a fan, friend, or foe of Paige Patterson. Nor am I that familiar with his career. Nor is he unassailable. Indeed, he should be held to a higher standard. Bro. Dave’s counsel early in this thread about blind hatred or blind loyalty will serve us well and a little discernment will go a long way. I agree with Julie Anne’s statement (“If he was a disgrace, then why should he retire in honor?” – although the second part of her question needs toning down. A lot of Lord’s servants blew it – Moses, David, Peter – will Jesus… Read more »
It might be helpful to read the 5 Reasons to be Thankful for Paige Patterson post listed above to see the depth of the hero worship culture that fostered the do not speak evil of Paige Patterson rule that has been in our convention for many years. https://sbcvoices.com/5-reasons-to-be-thankful-for-paige-patterson-president-of-swbts/ You can read my comments about halfway down to see that this battle against hypocrisy and evil has gone on for 35 years. When W.A. Criswell and the trustees at Criswell College tried to fire Patterson over the Gilyard affair the big dogs in the CR rushed to his defense because he… Read more »
A wrong is a wrong no matter when it is uncovered. The wise thing now is for the accused, and those involved in one way or another, to speak. “Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy.” Proverbs 28:13. God’s mercy is sure. Our expression of mercy toward the culprits? Well, that may take some time. First, we listen to and address the abused, trying to express mercy and compassion toward them. Many leaders are speaking to women in this way – at long last. Most of them are women whose… Read more »
A name, even just a first name, would be nice. Same for a real email address. There are few women who comment here. Under the present climate, anonymity is reasonable. We appreciate your earlier comments.
William,
That is certainly a reasonable request, but unfortunately one I do not feel comfortable with at the present time. If the general consensus would be for me not to post this way, then I will respect that and refrain.
You’ve commented before using a valid email. Generally, someone here needs to know who commenters are, even if it’s kept private. The occasional anonymous comment is not a big deal.
Just as a point of clarification, by the quotes I’ve read PP only clearly states that people who are being PHYSICALLY abused are not morally obligated to stay. This is an important distinction that needs to be clearly addressed. Some leaders are denouncing all abuse, while others are specifying physical abuse. It is further complicated when this is tied to spousal abuse and what is wise and biblical counsel for marriage. Are those against all forms of abuse in favor of a position that allows for divorce? Or just separation? We are all AGAINST abuse. Show of hands, who is… Read more »