I finished reading Wade Mullen's book Something's Not Right: Decoding the Hidden Tactics of Abuse--and Freeing Yourself from Its Power and was struck by how many of the impression management tactics listed in the book I've seen the elders employ at Bethlehem. We alluded to this in our open letter, but at that point Mickey had read the whole book, while I had only dipped into it. I finished reading it, pen in hand, and wanted to share a list of examples I found. I fully agree with Mickey's assessment that the playbook is eerily similar to the tactics we've seen used at Bethlehem. I encourage everyone to read Wade Mullen's book in full.
A few caveats. First, this is just my list from the last 9 months. And these are just examples that jumped out at me on a first reading. I'm sure other ex-Bethlehemers could easily write their own list. Second, the book describes a range of types of abuse (spiritual, sexual, etc.). I'm not aware of sexual abuse happening at Bethlehem. When I share quotes, I'm writing about spiritual abuse, even if some quotes are used in the book in regard to sexual abuse. Third, I'm not crazy about the word abuser. At this point I prefer to use it as an adjective ("abusive behavior") rather than a noun ("the abuser") but it does show up below in the quotes from Wade Mullen. Fourth, as we've said many times, what we're concerned about is the pattern. Some of these examples are small things, and many may not be wrong in and of themselves. But we're trying to show a pattern of institutional protection.
Why do I care about this? I think the elders have used image protection in order to hide wrongdoing and make it seem that all is well at Bethlehem. I want people to have tools to see what is happening. Mullen writes, "In being able to recognize, label, and describe the tactics of deception, you might be able to resist the ways in which such behaviors can be used to manipulate you." (p.5). This is my hope for people at Bethlehem.
I'm starting with the example that made my jaw drop and prompted me to write this post:
"Abusers often plead for help by comparing themselves and their situation to infamous acts of injustice. The accused who cries, 'Witch hunt!' invokes images of innocent people being pursued and burned at the stake over false beliefs, shaping people's perception of both the accused and the accusers." (93)
At the 11/14 Q&A, Kenny Stokes drew a comparison between our letter and the prosecutors in the Salem Witch Trials, who "demanded repentance more than truth." Kenny made that comparison again in a Zoom call with global partners that week, so it was not an accidental comparison. At the time, I thought it was a total coincidence, that he just happened to be listening to a podcast about the Salem Witch Trials that week. I had no idea that drawing comparisons to witch hunts is a common tactic to divert attention from accusations. (You can read more about what Kenny said that day in our retrospective or listen to the recording of the 11/14 meeting here.)
"They are crisis managers, first and foremost, not truth seekers" (127)
We didn't start with an open letter; we started with a letter to the elders. We sent our letter to the elders on September 28. One South campus elder reached out, but he confirmed he was doing so as a friend, and not as an elder. Other than that, we received zero response from the 40 elders. Not even a "we received your letter; we're busy now but will get to it in three months." Nothing. Then, on October 20, we told them we were planning to share our letter publicly and asked if they had any corrections they'd like us to make. Instantly, multiple elders reached out, wanting to meet with us. That communicated to us. It communicated that the priority was crisis management (e.g. how can we stop this letter going public) rather than truth-seeking (e.g. caring about the concerns). This grieves me.
"Again, sometimes there is a need to recognize the limitations of authority. However, it is always necessary to ask, 'Is this a legitimate excuse for this situation?'" (110)
I've been fascinated by how often the elders have said, "we're not going to do a 3rd party investigation because the congregation voted not to on 7/25." We've heard this from Ken Currie, Tim Johnson, and Kenny Stokes.
I can't think of any other time when the elders have presented themselves as hamstrung by what the congregation has done. Instead, they usually lead from the front. They propose a budget, they choose a location for South campus, they decide what sermon series to do next, they hire staff, they initiate church discipline decisions, etc. They lead, and the congregation follows. We are all used to that model of leadership at Bethlehem. And yet, in this case, they appeal to that vote as though they are powerless. If they thought an investigation was warranted, all they'd have to do would be to pitch it to the congregation, give their reasons, and the congregation would probably go along with it. Bethlehem has a very strong "just trust the elders" mentality, so this would not be a problem. And yet they appeal to the vote as an excuse to not pursue an investigation.
Limiting Information
"...It is always easier for abusers to control others when truth remains elusive and confusion abounds..." (31)
The elders have framed the resignations as just a reconciliation issue, even though that's not how the pastors who resigned see it. The elders have focused on culture war issues. They have hidden information and made things confusing. It's far easier for congregants to conclude, "I guess I'll just trust the elders" than to have to go and dig out all the information.
"They achieve control by making sure the people do not have access to perspectives or information that would spoil their view of the government [or in this case, the elders]" (76)
The elders did all they could to squelch Ming-Jinn from sharing why he resigned. He was ready in early July 2021 to share with the congregation, and an elder pressured him into silence. (Ming-Jinn wrote about that in this post on church hurt.) And they were very successful; many people still have not heard Ming-Jinn's story.
Very little was communicated to the congregation in all-church formats (e.g. Sunday morning services or the email lists). Most information about the resignations (and it was very minimal) was shared only in meetings, so if you weren't at the meeting, you missed it. And there are many, many people who don't attend the meetings. They are still entitled to know why the 3 pastors resigned.
Attacking
"Investigative journalists represent one institutional support that is often stigmatized by abusive individuals and organizations." (70)
We've seen Bethlehem leaders speak negatively about Julie Roys so many times. This happened in our meeting with Bud Burk and Jared Wass, Kenny Stokes did this at length at the 11/6 Q&A, an elder's wife did this on facebook, etc. I wish leaders at Bethlehem would engage with the content she has written (especially all the primary source documents she posted!), rather than criticizing her.
"Often, if you raise an accusation or question about an abuser's behavior, the first line of defense is a denial that leads people to doubt the merits of the accusation -or you as the victim....Suddenly the focus of investigation is on the accuser and not the accused." (104-105)
At the 11/6 Q&A, when someone asked how the elders would deal with the concerns raised in our open letter, Kenny spent a lot of time criticizing Julie Roys, and a lot of time criticizing us and the fact that we had gone public. This took the focus off the concerns in our letter, which is what the person with the question was asking, and put the focus onto our actions. In fact, Kenny never addressed the concerns in our letter.
Keeping Things Internal
"Talking without administering consequences made it clear to the professor that he could get away with his abusive behavior because the leadership would cover for him." (14)
It seems that this is how BCS has responded to Andy Naselli. They are covering for him. (For more of Naselli's perspective on abuse, you can read his article "Ten Resources That Have Helped Me Make Sense of Our Current Culture and How Christians Are Responding to It")
"For example, many victims have found that their report of abuse to an organization was handled by a dedicated response team or kept within a small group of board members instead of shared with the entire board." (18)
The many student complaints and concerns about Naselli were siloed by Brian Tabb (the Academic Dean) and effectively ignored. We talked to several former students who had very difficult experiences with Naselli. They shared their stories with Brian Tabb, in the hopes that things could improve for future students. But Tabb did not adequately address their concerns.
"Consciously or not, people end up working together to protect secrets, often by managing the flow of information...[they] omit or undercommunicate what Goffman calls 'disruptive information'." (16)
The elders didn't share Jason's resignation letter until the Meyers released it themselves. They didn't tell the congregation why Ming-Jinn or Bryan resigned. They would not let Ming-Jinn release his full resignation statement to the congregation.
Shutting Down Questions
"conditioning them to believe that to remain silent is to be a good follower." (80)
The World article quoted a Bethlehem congregant as saying this: "to dig further would be sinful."
"Responses like the ones this young woman received teach followers not to question the decisions of their leaders." (106)
On a Zoom call with Global Partners last November, Kenny Stokes asked them not to send their questions in to be read aloud at public Q&As (because it was making members concerned), but to ask them privately instead.
Blame Shifting
"an excuse will stop short of accepting personal responsibility for the harm caused" (106)
I still feel like I haven't heard any repenting from the elders. Just explanations or acknowledgements. I keep waiting for them to own what they have done.
"The person in the wrong points their finger at someone else" (111)
The elders have obliquely blamed the 3 pastors who resigned, as if this all could have been worked out if they had just stayed at the table.
Minimizing/Comparisons
"Comparison can seem like a strong wall to hide behind. A deceptive offender might catalog more serious examples of wrongs, then boast how they are not like those who committed such acts....By minimizing their own actions in comparison to the more horrific wrongs, the abuser's goal is to lead you to believe that just as they are not connected to the more serious actions they describe, so they should not be connected to the less serious actions they are accused of." (114)
In our meeting with elders Kenny Stokes and Chad Geyen (before we went public), they drew comparisons to Harvey Weinstein and reassured us "there's no man behind the curtain" at Bethlehem.
"[they] drew comparisons to what they believed (or wanted others to believe) were normal behaviors within a particular culture." (116)
Tom Lutz described the April tribunal as normal, iron-sharpening-iron dynamics.
Buttressing Support
"The more people favor the people the abuser is positively connected to, the more likely they are to support the abuser's arguments" (119)
Bethlehem is connected to many well-regarded people and institutions. For example, it has connections to John Piper (whom the elders have brought in to preach multiple times since the turmoil, far more than usual). It also has connections to TGC, TLI, the Treasuring Christ Together church planting network, so many prominent Reformed pastors, etc. All these connections mean that the elders' version of events carries a ton of weight.
"These industry networks of endorsers provide abusers with a powerful base from which their narratives can be promulgated. Judith Herman wrote, 'The more powerful the perpetrator, the greater is his prerogative to name and define reality, and the more completely his arguments prevail'." (119)
The elders have gotten to frame the issue as they see it. Kenny has said that this is a reconciliation issue. That is not how the 3 pastors who resigned see it. But Kenny and Bethlehem have the clout, so their version wins. When Piper preached for Global Focus last fall, he said, "Bethlehem has been through far worse." He gets to frame it his way, and his voice carries so much clout. He has been preaching once a month recently. It's hard to not see this as more impression management, wanting to send the message, "John Piper endorses what's happening at Bethlehem."
Regarding the deception at the 7/11 meeting:
"The winds of deception are fiercest and most destructive when truth is close at hand. It is at this point that the deceiver goes on the defensive, and the tactics used to evade exposure are usually greater in number and complexity than the tactics used to groom others for abuse." (102)
We saw this at the 6-hour 7/11 Q&A. This was the first public opportunity for questions after 3 pastoral resignations, and there were multiple misleading statements and half-truths spoken by elders that night. (We document some in our open letter, and what we've learned since has brought more to light.)
Side note: it pains me that they took away an open mic question time at the Sept 2021 and Dec 2021 downtown family meetings. Q&As are helpful for letting the truth come out, but that can't happen if there is no chance to ask questions at the mic.
"It was obscurity disguised as transparency." (16)
Brian Tabb's clarifying statement explaining his seeming lie on 7/11 contained so much obfuscation that it just muddied the waters. (See this post for more details.)
"people tend to excuse innocent mistakes" (135)
E.g. Tabb's claim that "I misunderstood the question" in his clarifying statement on 7/11.
"Yet as soon as others come close to discovering the truth, the abuser pleads for help. 'I'm overwhelmed by the work...'." (89)
At the 7/11 Q&A, Brian Tabb talked about how difficult it was to sit on stage fielding questions for hours and said "these chairs are hard."
"When faced with an image-threatening event, the tribe is more likely to cover up wrong in order to protect their own-to circle the wagons, as it were." (29)
When Ken Currie lied on July 11, the other elders covered for him. The other organizational elders present that night (who had heard the discussion that contradicted what Ken was saying) didn't speak up. All the elders present that night had an email in their inbox that contradicted what Pastor Ken said, and they didn't speak up either. And then when there were smaller Q&As held in August, they walked back the lie so subtly that it wasn't clear they were even correcting what Ken had said. (See this post for more info.)
"this apoloscuse removes the apologizer from the language of the apology" (135)
When Janette Takata posted the email proof that Ken Currie had lied, he "apologized" to her, but he said, "you have shared a contradiction" rather than "I told a lie."
"A truth-filled apology will contain a majestic quality. A concession, on the other hand, will lack that freeing quality ... A concession is frustrating because it makes you wonder if they really 'get it'." (131)
Mickey has written more about Ken Currie's concession to Janette Takata here. This description rings true. I'm still hoping that Pastor Ken will apologize to the congregation, as it was not an offense against Janette, but rather an offense against the hundreds of people present on 7/11.
Avoidance
"They may warn us that we risk destroying the godly work that has been accomplished by giving voice to our concerns" (xv)
We heard this in emails from two or three different elders.
"Rather than address the details of their behavior, they spotlight their life in general because it is easier to defend." (119)
Rather than engage with our concerns, these elders appealed to the many good things happening at Bethlehem. (See my post on "But look at the fruit".)
"More important than these, though, you should be on the lookout for what isn't said. What did you expect to hear and want to hear but didn't?" (132)
Mullen is writing here about apologies, but this sentence captures how I feel about the turmoil in general. For all the meetings, Q&As, emails, personal emails with elders, etc, I kept waiting for them to own things and repent of wrongdoing. And I have yet to hear an apology or any sense that they own any share in wrongoing.
Moving On
"Victims, pushed to the margins, are left to watch the victory of hypocrisy. At this point, there is nothing left for them to do. They've done what they could, and it wasn't enough." (156)
I think there's been a slow trail of bodies behind the Bethlehem bus. People who have been hurt, people who have raised concerns, people who have pushed for change. And at some point they each give up and limp away bleeding. And it's so discouraging to see the bus roll on. And it's especially painful knowing that more people will be hurt.
"The overconfident will shun outside help from experts because they believe they already know what they need to know-how could someone from the outside be more of an expert? Concerned only about appearances, they refuse to engage with outsiders who might inform their initiatives and expose any blind spots. They stay far away from those who might reveal their limitations." (163)
For the January 2022 elder summit (on congregationalism and spiritual abuse), why did the elders invite Jonathan Leeman to lead it, rather than a spiritual abuse expert? Jonathan Leeman shares many of Bethlehem's strengths and weaknesses, and what was needed here was someone who can see Bethlehem's blindspots and speak to those. Also, Leeman is a good friend of Andy Naselli. Why not bring in a neutral outsider? There are many experts on spiritual abuse, and it would have been really helpful to hear from one of them.
In conclusion, I highly recommend Wade Mullen's book. As he says, once you have language for things, they start to lose their power.
No comments:
Post a Comment