March 15, 2007 2:56 PM
Doug Phillips reconciliation breakdown
For those following the Doug Phillips controversy, Jen Epstein has reposted her story - which she had taken down in a sincere effort to work on reconciliation with Doug Phillips following her "excommunicaton" (remind me again why Protestants left the Catholic Church - was it abuse of power?).
Apparently the reconciliation effort broke down. I'm not surprised. I figured this was the way it would go.....
Having spent 18 months with a Christian guru and his slavishly devoted following (1989-1990 Marin Christian Life Church), and having been shunned and marginalized upon leaving, I figured there wouldn't be the humility necessary to "submit" to reconciliation efforts. Still I hoped and prayed for the best.
By this sign shall you know a Christian guru: submission applies to everyone but him.
Posted in Church Issues, Spiritual abuse | Permalink
Comments
Wow. I read the story that Jen posted and found the whole affair very, very sad. I think it's important not to take "sides" but to remember that we are reading one side of the story at a time, written by people we don't even (personally) know. It underscores the responsibility we have to read the Bible for ourselves, and to test all we hear. In the meantime, prayer for both parties is never a bad idea. Nothing, especially reconciliation, is impossible for God.
Keri
Posted by: Keri | March 15, 2007 9:28 PM
It is an incredibly sad affair but I have to agree with Keri. We are only getting one side of the story here as to why reconcilliation broke down - and sometimes even having two sides of the story doesn't add up to the whole picture. I would very much like to hear what the mediators involved have to say on this as they too have now come under criticism. Not knowing all the facts, however, does not and should not stop us from praying for all those involved. God's heart is always for reconciliation of brothers and sisters in Christ.
Michelle
Posted by: Baleboosteh | March 16, 2007 4:15 AM
I understand there are two sides to the story. Still, I give Jen the benefit of a doubt. There is entirely too much power-tripping in the church and "little people" are being abused by those who are supposed to be servant/leaders rather than gurus. This goies on so much that there are many books on the subject of spiritual abuse - which I will link to under Barbara's Picks as a resource for anyone who needs them.
Posted by: barbara | March 16, 2007 7:47 AM
We are not merely getting one side of the story. Mark and Jen's former church put up a pathetic statement about her church discipline. There was nothing of substance in it, except to say Jen believes in "sinless perfection." What a joke. She said this to them when she said she hadn't sinned against the guidelines they gave her as part of her church discipline. She said she denies the doctrine of sinless perfection.
Mark and Jen have posted a detailed chronology, which hasn't been answered.
Doug Phillips really needs to answer for why he thinks it is OK to breach pastoral confidentiality -- because things Mark and Jen shared in private, things which had NOTHING to do with church discipline -- were shared to the congregation, and have subsequently been leaked all over the internet. This is atrocious.
Jen has also posted, not only her story, but multiple primary documents of church discipline, which include what I consider to be very interesting advice.
For example, in one primary document, Jen was advised that if she saw her husband is doing something which will be injurious to herself or her children, she was to wait to appeal to him in private, saying, "may I appeal?"
Can you imagine? "May I appeal to you for shoving me into the wall?" Not that her husband did that, but that is how she was told to deal with physical abuse, or something that would result in injury to her or her children.
We have both sides on this issue. It's just that Mark and Jen's side is very well documented, and on Doug Phillips' side we have the BCA statement, and Matt Chancey's ridiculous mrsbinoculars site, which is a real circus treat of illogical guilt by association and diversionary tactics.
Posted by: Lynn | March 16, 2007 9:15 PM
And saddest of all is the broken hearts of Jen and Marks children.
The adults who are put in place by God to NURTURE and PROTECT and SHOW CHRIST'S LOVE and HUMILITY (Phil 2) have neglected to do the basics when it was most uncomfortable. The elders of this 'fellowship' will be held accountable in eternity for the burdens of scars they have required these children to bear.
Even though Moses was given permission by God to permit divorce by reason of "the hardness of their hearts", it was not required.( Jen and Mark found their way to FORGIVENESS by not using a completely understandable reason for divorce.) These leaders are choosing "the hardness of their hearts" to make reconciliation impossible.
Only God can change what to man looks like the impossible!
My prayers are for this family and these children.
Posted by: Carolyne Carrick | March 17, 2007 2:15 AM
Barbara, I've been thinking about this for more than a week now, read Jen's writing, and browsed minstrywatchman.com, mrsbinoculars, and various sites defending Jen.
I know you've seen the ecclesiastical tyrant, but have you never seen the ecclesiastical victim before? I imagine the personalities are similar, but this person is always crusading against "abuse" in institutions. They write exposes which, while factually accurate, paint those in authority in the most negative light. They, on the other hand, are always in the right, always have the best motivations and their errors are only slight. Their stories are completely credible, seemingly righteous, and they are completely sincere. But in truth they are manipulative, selfish, self righteous, hypocrites who magnify other people's sins and are totally blind to the fact that they have huge logs in their own eyes.
Without knowing the facts of the case better, and without knowing the personalities involved better, I think it's just as possible that Jen is such a person as it is that Doug is an arrogant monster. Or perhaps both are true. I certainly can't make the call.
Posted by: Danielle | March 24, 2007 6:12 AM
Danielle, you ask
I know you've seen the ecclesiastical tyrant, but have you never seen the ecclesiastical victim before?
No, I haven't. Have you? I've been a Christian for 20 years and been to many different churches and met thousands of people, but I've never met the person you describe.
There are also many books out there on spiritual abuse and we are constantly reminded of the weakness of arrogant leaders - especially when they fall dramatically after years of being defended by their followers against any criticism or correction.
I don't know of any books about the mental illness you describe. I do know that when women and children are sexually abused that quite often the tables are turned on them when they speak the truth and they become victims a second time as defenders rush in to say the abuser couldn't possibly have done anything wrong and the victim must be lying.
I do not pretend to know everything about this case and I'm not going to make a career out of investigating it. But having been in a similar situation and having been hurt by people like you who decided I was less credible simply because I was a nobody, and having been moved to document our family's experience in a supernatural way (meaning that I was not a writer at the time and it took a lot of energy) - and having counseled many people over the years who'd been through the same thing - I am giving Jen what you don't think she should have - the benefit of a doubt.
When you say:
I imagine the personalities are similar,
"imagine" is the key word. You have created a hypothetical to make your point. I just don't think it works.
Posted by: barbara | March 24, 2007 6:33 AM
