I follow the women’s gymnastics team every four years when the Olympics take place. I don’t know if I’d ever heard of Rachael Denhollander until a couple of weeks ago when her victim impact statement against uber-pervert Larry Nassar went viral. Now a 33-year-old lawyer, she spoke powerfully to condemn Nasser’s actions in abusing what now totals at least 265 teenage girls while also clearly presenting the gospel. She is credited as being the first person to take a public stand against abuse and was the driving force behind bringing this doctor to justice and ending his reign of terror.
We have also come to find out that she was asked to leave her church a while back because she took a stand on behalf of the victims in the Sovereign Grace Ministries sexual abuse scandal and against the way the “restoration” process was being handled. I have searched for details on this without much progress. She advocated for those who were abused and the elders of her church sided with the leadership of the SGM, telling her and her husband that they were not a fit for that church. They used the fact that she was an abuse victim as evidence against her. The sad fact is that the church has too often sided with the abusers against the abused.
Every time I have heard her, or read her, I have been amazed. She strikes the perfect tone when she addresses these difficult issues.
Rachael Denhollander’s Victim Impact Statement. (in print)
Rachael gave an interview with Christianity Today which laid out her story in more detail and shared the sad history of her removal from her church for siding with victims of the SGM scandal. It is a must-read.
I wish I’d never heard of Rachael Denhollander – or at least for these reasons. It would be wonderful if children were not sexually abused as she was. Would that churches sided with the abused and ministered to them instead of so often circling the wagons to protect the reputations of the abusers. I wish Rachael Denhollander could practice her faith and her law career and raise her family in anonymity. I am guessing that she would agree – that if none of this ever happened she would be thrilled.
But it did happen. And since it did I am glad there is a voice such as hers as a spokesperson. I have seen plenty of Christian testimonies in the public square – sports, politics, celebrities – and many make me cringe. Hers gave me chills! I would make several brief observations.
1. She understands that forgiveness does not abrogate the consequences of sin or negate God’s judgment.
Perhaps the line I read that struck me the most was this:
I pray you experience the soul-crushing weight of guilt so you may someday experience true repentance and true forgiveness from God, which you need far more than forgiveness from me — though I extend that to you as well.
Her God is no pushover who winks at sin and says, “It doesn’t matter.” She understands guilt and wrath and judgment. As she says, we can only understand the full glory of God’s grace against the background of the darkness of sin and the holiness of God’s character. She says some harsh things to Dr. Nassar but all within the context of repentance and coming to faith in Christ.
2. She has chosen grace instead of bitterness.
It is difficult to counsel a person who has been abused to seek grace rather than vengeance or bitterness. I remember a discussion on this blog in which I was told that abused women were not required to follow the biblical injunctions to forgive those who sinned against them – as if it was an exception clause. As you watch her speak, you see her relentless strength but get no sense of a bitter heart – in spite of was the doctor did to her or how her church mistreated her. She has chosen to live in God’s grace. All of us have been sinned against, though few as egregiously as she has been.
But she seems to have found the way of God through that. Instead of becoming mired in hate and vindictiveness, she has prospered because she chose to obey God.
Folks, think about it. In her victim-impact statement, she hoped that the man who sexually molested her as a teenager would repent and find the grace of God. She told the man who put her through hell how to get to heaven! She returned good for evil, grace for sin. She loved her enemy and prayed for the one who persecuted her – all that “Jesus-stuff” we tend to ignore.
I hope when I grow up I will be the Christian she is!
3. She is relentless is advocacy for the victims of abuse.
It is amazing to me how the church rallies around well-known figures who are accused of sin, and in the process generally attacks those who accuse them. Sure, there are false accusers out there and they should be held accountable, but most are not.
When we wrote about the shameful story of Andy Savage, we received many comments asking us why we were accusatory, why we were setting ourselves up as the sin police, why we were attacking a good man. Not a one of those who spoke to defend Andy Savage showed concern for the victim of his abuse. That tends to be how it goes. Question the story. Blame the accuser. Defend the leader.
Rachael stood up for the victims of Larry Nassar. She advocated for the victims of the leadership of Sovereign Grace Ministries, even though her own church leaders turned their guns against her. In this, she is a model for all of us. The church absolutely must become a place of refuge and safety for the abused and not just for the abusers!
How many bitter enemies of the church have been created by the leadership of the church telling them to keep their pain quiet and not rock the boat, by believing their victimizers instead of them? This must stop.
We live in a world filled with victims of sexual abuse. Unfortunately, the church is not immune to that. Rachael Denhollander is a wonderful example of how we can respond – upholding the holiness of God, responding with grace and not bitterness, and advocating for the victim.
May her tribe increase…and decrease.
This interview woke me up, and I didn’t even realize I was asleep
The same principles apply regardless of the “species” of abuse – sexual, spousal, pastoral… One thing I would change in your remarks, Dave. You said:
“The church absolutely must become a place of refuge and safety for the abused and not just for the abusers!”
The church should NOT be a place of refuge and safety for the abusers. It SHOULD be a place of refuge and safety for repentant sinners.
I wasn’t meaning that the way you read it.
I think anyone who read my post would know I was not advocating protecting abusers. Did i not make that clear?
I did read the entire post, that is why the ambiguity of your statement surprised me. As written it could be understood to mean the church is presently a place of refuge and safety for abusers and should also become the same for the abused. I didn’t believe that was what you intended, hence my comment. Could you clarify what you intended to convey? Thanks.
Jonathan,
He meant it like this, as we read from 1st Cor. 6:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.
And might I add: nor abusers which some of us once were.
The problem is that in some churches, abusers are still them. And as you said, they need to repent.
I think we are all on the same page here.
I have an inquiry that may be off topic and if so, disregard.
Some say that forgiveness requires reconciliation.
Can i forgive a person who rejects reconciliation?
I say yes.
Many say there is no forgiveness.
My thought is that every sin is also against God. Forgiveness from Him requires reconciliation through Jesus and the Cross. But I can forgive a person w/o there desire of reconciliation.
What say all of you?
The simplest way to state it is that i must hold forgiveness in my heart but it cannot be applied and reconciliation take place until repentance occurs.
That’s how I see it, too.
Thank you, Dave Miller. Do you know how many people sit in church pews aghast, astonished and disgusted at what and whom churches strive to protect? The New York Times, in an article on Rachel’s lonely battle, unintentionally nailed it:
“Much of the hearing’s legacy will be a cautionary tale for anyone in power who finds it easier to look away than to confront a Dr. Nassar. It will be about negligence and the incalculable harm caused by institutions that seem to prize self-preservation above all.”
I told Rachael’s husband today that I genuinely believe the culture is changing.
Great post.
The broader culture is changing.
The church is, too, but as I have mentioned before, there are forces and mentalities in the church that retard that change.
The Reformed Evangelical crowd will remains stuck in my opinion until it really deals with facts in the SGM matters.
As long as CJ Mahaney and SGM continue to live in denial, enabled by the Evangelical culture, there will be a blot in this group.
Even with this article in CT, I expect that plan will be to hunker down and ignore it.
“The Reformed Evangelical crowd will remain stuck in my opinion until it really deals with facts in the SGM matters. As long as CJ Mahaney and SGM continue to live in denial, enabled by the Evangelical culture, there will be a blot in this group.”
In the meantime, let’s all sign up for the T4G conference and go hear Mahaney speak! Surely, the “Fab Four” must have signed a blood pact to keep enabling and promoting Mahaney to the bitter end, while the cries of the abused in SGM under Mahaney’s leadership are largely ignored.
I found, in the church and with pastors, mostly ignorance in dealing with the effects on me of having been sexually abused by a pastor. The abuse had left some real issues with my view of myself, God, pastors, and church in general. The pastors I would talk with would tell me to forgive the guy, but wouldn’t do much to make sure that I myself was okay. This reinforced the negative views I had of things, rather than helping me. I mean, forgiveness is important, but it’s more important to deal with the issues an abusive pastor left first. Also, the pastor who abused me had used forgiveness as a shield; if you truly forgive, you will have no problem keeping me as a pastor. This is common with abusive pastors; twist forgiveness to mean no accountability. And then, subsequent pastors, not knowing the guy and not knowing the whole situation, just my point of view, would pile more on me by not wanting to judge.
I do think things are changing. We are now, both pastors and lay people, understanding more of the pastor-congregant power dynamic and pastoral sexual abuse has devastating effects. I also think that we do have a long way to go. I think that the enabling of Mahaney did a lot of damage to a lot of people.
“twist forgiveness to mean no accountability”
I’m sorry Beth that you encountered this in church. Unfortunately, what you say about forgiveness superseding accountability is far too common in the American church. We are seeing this play out once again in the Andy Savage situation, where “forgiveness” was granted by the church in Texas and he was then passed to other congregations in Tennessee without being fully accountable to the one he had abused, the State of Texas, nor subsequent church congregations.
What Max said
Max:
There is a terrible irony here that is painful for me to observe.
CJ Mahaney could actually have some things to say that would be very valuable to the people who hear him speak and read his books. He was unlearned when he co-founded the movement that eventually morphed and rebranded as SGM. It was Jesus-people like stuff.
It’s no wonder that out of that time these churches arose that distrusted government and viewed forgiveness and
Christian community, and church authority in a certain way that resulted in two things relative to sexual abuse in the church.
1 – Handle it in house. Try to rehabilitate the offender, and try to get the abused and family to forgive, and
2 – Use the authority of spiritual leaders in the church to direct this process, and tell people who would not go along that they were violating God’s instructions by not submitting to the elders of the church.
This led to perpetrators getting away, and not facing the legal consequences that needed to occur. And it probably denied the perpetrators access to psychological services that may have actually helped them.
It also led to the abuse of scores of people in SGM churches. I know SGM and their supporters dismissed it all as bitter people etc. But it truly is unusual to see websites organically sprout that were based on abuse suffered in a family of churches through heavy-handed shepherding on a variety of issues, including sexual abuse.
And worst of all, it led to further abuse, as unpunished perpetrators moved on to other fields to abuse again.
We all learn from our mistakes more than our successes. Mahaney could be such a help to people by admitting these mistakes and sharing what he would not do again.
I believe his failure to do so, and the Reformed movement’s failure to address it, but instead circle the wagons to defend someone who had good Reformed theology, was not only missed opportunity, but also led a generation of young pastors down the wrong road.
The Village Church and Matt Chandler’s debacle of the pedophile situation in their church has the fingerprints of this thinking on it.
This is another reason why I have been so concerned about some of the Church Discipline material that has been written by Jonathan Leeman. I don’t have the time to dig up the quote from the Chapter on Church Authority in his book, but he says that the church member should submit themselves spiritually, socially, financially etc. to the church. And of course the authority is exercised by elders (ostensibly, the congregation, but with information and a history provided by elders).
There needs to be a corrective here. But with the age of most of these people, the bashing for many years of those who were sounding the alarms within SGM, and the all that is at stake, there will not be a corrective. There may be a slow shift to other issues, other matters, a slow ignoring of what all happened. But no real repentance, no clear corrective.
That will leave a generation of pastors, churches, and congregants much poorer and ill-prepared than they otherwise would have been.
And lest we think it’s only the Reformed guys, think of Prestonwood and now the Andy Savage matter.
I don’t think either of those churches back in the day were taking their cues from guys like Mahaney and Leeman. I think they were just doing plain old damage control, and trying to keep things “private” for all concerned.
But the outcome was the same, unfortunately.
At least in those matters, some truth is coming out about basic facts.
In the SGM matters, because of the deny, deny, deny mentality, and a refusal to discuss facts, the picture is more complex.
Louis, you paint the sad picture well.
Church leaders who address sexual abuse by handling it in-house via an overlord authoritarian style are ignoring the seriousness of this transgression and not fulfilling their legal obligation as mandated reporters. Sexual abuse is a crime – call 911.
“… unpunished perpetrators moved on to other fields to abuse again.”
I shudder to think how many “pastors” are in American churches who were caught lying, cheating, mishandling funds, fornicating, and other assorted sins … then “forgiven” by church leaders, allowed to “resign”, and passed to other churches. Perhaps they are preaching in a church near you!
“CJ Mahaney could actually have some things to say that would be very valuable to the people who hear him speak and read his books.”
Yet, what he is not saying continues to cry out against him. “Go put your creed into your deed.” (Ralph Waldo Emerson)
I haven’t followed this article of Dave’s very closely but your comment is thorough and right on target.
Inexcusable admission there, William!
I hope everyone will also read this – Rachel’s church experiences, both her own & other victims’.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2018/january-web-only/rachael-denhollander-larry-nassar-forgiveness-gospel.html
I’ve seen the same forgiveness-focused theology in a former church, a ‘moderate’ Baptist church. In those cases (all involving staff, and not child sex abuse), church members were urged to quickly forgive ‘mistakes,’ trust the church insiders to handle things, and not ask too many questions. The church theology was to forgive, forget & move on. The central Scripture was Phil. 3:13-14. I think this was the church’s own perception of grace & positivity & letting go of the past – the Christian thing to do. It wasn’t anything at all about patriarchy or heavy-handed reform theology. Quite the opposite. In addition, we were told that since Baptists do not believe in group sin, confession, repentance or healing, each member must deal with that on his/her own, individually before God. No collectively addressing the matter at this time. And no church ‘statements.’ The church is moving on.
Rachel said in Christianity Today: “The ultimate reality that I live with is that if my abuser had been Nathaniel Morales instead of Larry Nassar, if my enabler had been [an SGM pastor] instead of [MSU gymnastics coach] Kathie Klages, if the organization I was speaking out against was Sovereign Grace under the leadership of [Mahaney] instead of MSU under the leadership of Lou Anna Simon, I would not only not have evangelical support, I would be actively vilified and lied about by every single evangelical leader out there. The only reason I am able to have the support of these leaders now is because I am speaking out against an organization not within their community. Had I been so unfortunate so as to have been victimized by someone in their community, someone in the Sovereign Grace network, I would not only not have their support, I would be massively shunned. That’s the reality.”
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2018/january-web-only/rachael-denhollander-larry-nassar-forgiveness-gospel.html
Here Rachel comments on SGM and concerns about CJ Mahaney that Al Molher joked about https://www.facebook.com/notes/rachael-denhollander/public-response-to-sovereign-grace-churches/1694664773947169/?hc_location=ufi
Can we stop attempting to impugn Mohler by suggesting he joked about sexual abuse? Please? Multiple people are seeming to spread this talking point.
I’ve stated I don’t remember hearing an elephant in the room type comment/joke about “reading about our next speaker internet” at t4g16 but others who were there have affirmed that it did happen – even so – to intimate that Dr. Mohler was making light of allegations themselves (which *seems* to be the intent of invoking it) is quite the stretch.
You can hear it here at the two minute mark https://soundcloud.com/watchkeep/albert-mohler-and-cj-mahaney
People were protesting Mahaney’s being there. If Mohler had googled him he would have found out the concerns I linked to above. What else would Molher be joking about finding out about Mahoney in a Google search? And the audience laughed, they got the joke. Do a Google search yourself with “CJ Mahaney” and see what you find on the first page.
If you didn’t know, Mahaney was accused as a church leader of mishandling reports of, and not reporting to the police, child molestation. He was NOT accused of doing it. So those are the accusations that Molher would’ve been referring to.
First of all I’m very familiar with the allegations so I don’t need a google education, thank you though.
Secondly thank you for linking that. Since I did not hear the joke originally I appreciate you sharing it so that I can actually hear what everyone is talking about… That Mohler “joke” first of all did not reference in any shape form or fashion the allegations against sovereign Grace ministries… The joke Mohler made was related to long-standing frivolity regarding the differences between CJ Mahaney‘s avid and intense sports following and Mohler’s, well not…it’s been a topic of humor between almost all the other speakers and Mohler. Mohler is not a sports fan. I remember comments in years past about John MacArthur and CJ taking on Mohler and a player of his choice in a basketball game.
Context people.
This is much ado about nothing. In that clip Mohler made no joke that had any connection whatsoever to do with the accusations against Sovereign Grace ministries or CJ Mahaney. Of people laughed because regular attenders of T4 G would have understood the joke in its proper context… And therefore laughed….
Thank you for helping us clear that up!
*of course
Further, to place that joke and I little more context, Sorry I do not remember all the details perhaps someone else might… But I seem to remember something about Mohler contacting Mahaney years ago to get some kind of help in making a Sports reference in a blog or sermon or something… And Mahaney as a joke gave him information that was completely wrong…..Something about pretending to explain to him one sport and Actually giving him the rules of another…. The prank led to some embarrassment for Mohler or something… Like I said that was shared several years ago so I don’t remember all the details… But the point is the avid sports following by Mahaney and the lack of it by Mohler is a source of Reoccurring Humor between them…
David C: If you were to google CJ Mahaney, even when Al Mohler gave this speech, the very top stories are the Wartburg Watch story on sexual abuse at SGM and Mahaney’s handling of it. One couldn’t help but see these articles as they are and were numerous at the very top of the google search pages.
During the time of Al Mohler’s speech and joke was the height of this scandal as I think you know. It sounds as if Mohler is joking about these articles. I had a hard time wanting to believe it myself as I did respect Al Mohler, but I also believe in facing truth as a Christian, as hard as it is, it was inappropriate and a slap down to the victims in this case.
At the time, it may be that Al Mohler didn’t believe these articles as we know how difficult it is to believe something so horrendous about a close friend. But I believe Al Mohler knew about the accusations and this was what he was referring to. I could be wrong, but listening again to the tapes, it’s hard not to think that he is alluding to the scandal.
If that’s what you want to hear you will hear him alluding to the scandal…
Do you know what he is alluding to you would have to know his motives… Do you pretend to know those?
Going by his actual words we have no basis on which to assume that.
However if one is going to assume that he was making reference to something… It might be possible to assume that he was making reference to the inordinate and copious amount of Internet stories – Which I think even you would have to admit were of varying degrees of veracity.
I’m just not willing to assume as many have and even articulated on this blog that Mohler made jokes about the accusations themselves… That is just not true… At worst he made an “elephant in the room” joke about Internet traffic.
I guess we might be talking about two different things… I am holding the position that Al Mohler did not make jokes about the accusations or make light of the accusations… You seem to be contending that his reference to the Internet was an Underhanded slight toward the accusers… if that’s what you and others here are suggesting – I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. 🙂
Brother, A thought experiment might clarify the issue.
You know the top results of a Google search of a well known church leader would reveal accusations of mishandling child molestation in the church and not reporting it to the police.
You know this is a big controversy at the time.
There are protesters outside protesting his sharing the stage with you because of the accusations. http://www.wdrb.com/story/31705423/sexual-abuse-survivors-families-protest-protestant-pastors-conference-in-downtown-louisville
Again, you know the top google search results will reveal accusations of covering up and not reporting child molestation to the police.
Would you make a joke making light of what a Google search reveals?
What would you think the audience (Many who probably walked past the protesters) would think you were referring to?
If you did make a joke making light of a Google search what would you be referring to?
Remember, Dr. Mohler wasn’t some newbie stumbling over his words the first time in front of a big audience. This was a well-thought-out joke by a master communicator.
I do not need nor desire your thought experiments – but thanks anyway.
Let’s Agree to disagree and move on.
I just do not see it as you do.
I was at T4G16 and was bothered by the timing of this joke. I see what you are saying Dave, that it’s possible that he was making a sport joke/reference. But I tend to agree with Paul that this was a statement by a master communicator. Notice that at the 2:48 mark he says, “but I know that to be true because I read it about CJ” and then he moves into how he knows CJ. It was a way of saying “you cannot trust what you read on the internet” but I know CJ personally.
I was very disappointed in the “so I thought I’d Google CJ”. I think it was a cheap joke. But I could see myself doing something similar. I’ve had times when my tongue got out in front of my brain. I don’t know that the joke was meant to harm victims or to make light of the situation as much as it was just making a cheap joke. It was irresponsible but I don’t believe necessarily nefarious.
However, my biggest concern and what makes me most uncomfortable are the things which were said and the way stuff with Mahaney has not really been addressed within the T4G community. But I’ll leave that for another day.
Mike,
I respect your position. You didn’t like the joke – you thought it was inappropriate… and I do see that perspective… That it was a cheap joke… Not sure I totally agree but I do see your perspective.
I appreciate you affirming that it was not Nefarious that is the larger point I am trying to make… though Perhaps badly.
I think it’s unfair to try to impugn Mohler’s character, motive and feelings toward those legitimately abused based on a lame joke – Or whatever we want to say it was.
As far as T4G addressing it… Didn’t they address it when it first came out… It seems like I remember some kind of formal statement.
The audience at the least thought he was, I think based on the timing of the laughter. Laughter that I also believe was a slap to the victims.
If it’s allowed by the moderators I’d like to post this response issued by Sovereign Grace Churches leadership team. As a personal friend of CJ and many SGC pastors, one of CJ’s former pastoral interns, a founding member of SGC Louisville, and their first messenger to the SBC annual meeting where I also served as a member of the Tellers Committee in Columbus I feel it is my responsibility to post this. I hope that it convinces those who have attacked CJ and SGC in the past that CJ and SGC were not in the wrong and followed the law perfectly when allegations arose. http://www.sovereigngrace.com/sovereign-grace-blog/post/a-response-to-allegations-against-sovereign-grace-churches
James Forbis: I am not convinced. Testimony by the victims and the evidence given is just too strong to not be convinced that CJ Mahaney and Sovereign Grace handled this atrociously.
Debbie,
I believe we’ll just have to agree to disagree. I believe and trust CJ’s testimony. What happened to the victims was horrible and atrocious, but CJ is not at fault. I believe he acted accordingly and followed the law. His testimony and subsequent conversations I’ve had with him and other SGC pastors has convinced me of his innocence.
James Forbis: I appreciate that Sovereign Grace is finally speaking to these issues in greater detail, albeit way late in this, but my main problem is these were children. Children James. They should have been protected regardless if any policy was in place or not. Sovereign Grace admits they “didn’t handle the situation as we would today”, but it’s more than that. In my view, it was adding abuse already onto an abused victim.
That should be “it was adding abuse onto an already abused victim.”
James, thanks for the link. It’s good to get both sides. Here is Rachel’s response
https://www.facebook.com/notes/rachael-denhollander/response-to-sovereign-grace-churches/1720170721396574/
The issues with SGM and how they handled the reality of sexual abuse in their churches is obviously complicated. I have read the SGM statement linked above and Ms. Denhollander’s response.
How shall we err? On the side of the organization or on the side of the victims? I am no fan of picking sides based on our identities or the identities of the victims. I am no fan of picking sides based on someone’s theology or attractiveness.
However SGM needs to resolve these matters and an independent inquiry is the only way that it can be.
Denhollander’s response is significant and should be read by everyone who’s been following this issue. I think she raises some important questions that need to be addressed more fully than the most recent SGM statement. I tend to agree that an independent investigation is needed, especially after reading her long, detailed summary of the events.
The issue of forgiveness came up a lot.
Some seem to be against any kind of “forgiveness” for the abuser. Had it been my daughter–at least two men would need forgiveness.
I think grace coves sexual abusers. If it doesn’t, then I’d suggest it ain’t much good to any of us.
Forgiveness does NOT however, eradicate consequences. If someone is truly repentant, one can receive forgiveness, and should then graciously accept the punishment of the judicial system.
As I said, if this had been my daughter, I’d likely be following my own advice and doing time. I’d like to think I’m a better man than to respond out of rage and anger . . . but, I’m not so sure in a case like this.
Forgiveness is what God provides. Jail is what the courts provide (Rom. 13).
Also, I’d like to extend a thank you to Voices for a balanced civil approach to this issue. It is not often discussed other places. It is discussed even less in other places with the kind of civility–yet diversity and honesty here.
Thank you.
Part Time Reader