One of the “Jane Doe’s” in the recently dismissed lawsuit, Emily Jaeger, posted a personal statement on Spiritual Sounding Board besides the general statement presented by all the former plaintiffs.
Bill contacted us and asked if we would post his response. It is provided below:
Response to Emily Jaeger
After reading your response to your lawyers dropping your lawsuit, I want you to know that you cannot say or do anything that will diminish my life-long commitment to serve you and your family in whatever ways I can. I believe that the best way I can serve you right now is to remind you of the real motives behind my attempts to help you.
According to your affidavit, you met me in 2006 at the Total Health Conference in Indianapolis, Indiana when you were 13 years old. You and your mother attended this conference because you were suffering from severe Crohn’s Disease. You were also trying to “cope with the turmoil as a result of abuse” in your family.
Four years later, in 2010, I wrote the following entry in my journal: “I met Emily Jaeger. She was sitting in the hallway in tears. When I asked her what was wrong, she told me about her Crohn’s Disease and the medical complications from it. She also explained that she was having major conflicts with her father. I pointed out the need for her to get away stress because that is a major contributor to Crohn’s Disease. I also emphasized the need to resolve her conflicts with her father.”
Crohn’s Disease is no small matter. It is a life-threatening condition. In 2006, your parent’s requested a scholarship for the ATI program because of ”our 13-year-old daughter Emily’s ongoing illnesses…The doctors said it was the second severest case of Crohn’s Disease they had seen in five years”. The next year, 2007, they renewed their request for a scholarship stating, “the reason for our continual financial duress is our daughter Emily’s physical battle with Crohn’s disease…we have costs that have averaged $2,400.00 per month…last year we paid over $28,000.00 worth of medical expenses not covered by insurance.”
Each year I would see you and your mother at the Regional Conference in Indianapolis, and each year you would report the same problems. Finally, in 2011, when you were 18 years old, I offered to call your father to see if we could work out a plan that would resolve your stress and rebuild your relationship with him. Based on that phone call, you and your mother visited the headquarters for ten days.
During that time, I met with you and your mother, contacted two health professionals who had success with Crohn’s Disease, and bought and paid $1,000.00 for products that would boost your immune system. Once again, I called your father and discussed the need for you to resolve your stress and restore your relationship him.
At the end of that ten days your mother wrote,
“Dear Mr. Gothard,
Thank you, indeed, for sharing God’s love with us for the week we were at IBLP Headquarters. Your sensitivity to our needs and time from your busy schedule to talk with us is greatly appreciated. It is by God’s grace and the influence of your teaching in the Seminars since 1973 for me have been what has kept us together thus far.
In Christ’s Love,
Can you imagine the shock I experienced when you posted your negative account of our contacts under the headline of “sexual harassment”? None of the above factors were included in your story. I brought this to your attention in a phone conference with you and your mother. You both agreed that the article gave the wrong impression and asked the website to remove it.
On May 28, 2012, your mother wrote the following email to the RG website explaining why she and you wanted your story removed:
“First of all, neither Emily nor I ever felt like she was being sexual harassed in any instance. The fact that her post was made under the original article about sexual harassment gives people the impression.”
Then you wrote an additional letter to me stating,
“I want to apologize again for ever posting on RG. I will always regret it. Now that I understand a little more about RG, I am deeply disappointed in what they are doing.”
With all of this as background, can you imagine my greater shock when you became one of the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit that has the goal of destroying me and the entire seminar ministry? My first concern was how this was going to affect your health. I continue to pray for you and your family and would be thrilled to hear from you.
Through Christ our Lord,
I am unsure as to how we are supposed to trust Bill’s version of events as he has given absolutely no proof for the claims he makes. I would love to see proof.
Thanks, Sharlott. I know who you are, you know who I am, so could judge if I would lie. I have the entire emails back and forth between Emily, her mother, Bill, and Recovering Grace . . . and the resurrected posts that had been deleted on RG. If this is material to you I can show them to you privately. I had no problem posting this response because I know that all the facts he stated there are backed by the evidence. We have no desire to make Emily’s life any more stressful than it is, but it is vitally important that some of these things get resolved. The bottom line is that Emily, freely from all I can tell from the emails as written, made it clear that her experience in those few weeks she was with Bill, was not a matter of “sexual harassment”. Later she was recruited into the lawsuit, and changed the story, suing Bill and IBLP for $450,000. She was, in fact, going to be a target of a counter-suit should things have proceeded (the defense cannot sue without an active suit to sue against because the statute of limitations, expired, is only waived in that instance). I am grateful that that ugly mess was avoided. Lawsuits are not a game.
I would like to see the evidence if it is legal for you to show me.
And yes, I don’t believe you would lie, but that doesn’t mean that Gothard hasn’t deceived you.
Our interactions have been first and primarily with the lawyers these last few months particularly. Lawyers are not interested in people’s feelings and cutting through any deceit is key to understanding fully what they have to work with to get the job done. The lawyer asked me to sit with Bill as he responded to interrogatories, for example. Part of that was a sanity check and a double-check that Bill not impeach himself by forgetting key details. So, all of that would give a high level of confidence that we are, in fact, not deceived.
So that’s why the plaintiffs dropped the suit–Bill was threatening to countersue. Interesting that Bill didn’t mention that in his statement on Facebook about his “victory.” Thanks for clarifying!
Well, if you see our much fuller explantion here: http://www.discoveringgrace.com/2018/02/26/the-suit-is-retired/ We give 5 reasons, one of which being the one that Bill highlighted.
I would love to know how the moderator, who is not any party involved in the suit or issues in it seems to have very personal information? This would seem to be a violation of assumed privacy since I am sure non of those emails are address to the mod.
This is extremely disturbing to me. I am sure the Mod will respond with a complete explanation of how he feels justified to have inserted himself into all these things but I won’t agree. I also question who wrote that response as well as any posts on Bill’s facebook. My guess is that he has someone assigned to do those things for him especially if it’s social media. Not stating fact simply my opinion.
Thanks for taking us up on our offer, Carol. Several of us, me included, are an adjunct part of the legal team that has been defending Bill. Worker bees. As such is has been our responsibility to research the tens of thousands of pages of documents that the 17 plaintiffs turned over as part of discovering. So this is first hand information, to start. We take privacy concerns quite seriously, but becoming part of a lawsuit does strip away a lot of expectation of privacy. You will not see us often tying specific quotes to specific plaintiffs, but in this case she has taken the initiative to go public, and using information that is either public or Bill’s, the answer is given.
Wow, you did just as I said you would.
I definitely want the in on how to become an adjunct part of a legal team with zero legal training simply because I want all the trash on the other side!
Please message me with how to do that, your an expert!
With all seriousness your use of this info in responses is shocking and sickening! I wish it was possible to sue you for calluses disregard in using personal info!
I also don’t believe for a second that Bill does much for himself on social media much less writing a response like that. His age and seeming focus on publishing definitely point to very limited knowledge of this area.
I will not lie to you. That is a promise – you believe me or you don’t. That having been said, every word in the response is at is was given to us by Bill, except we straightened out one sentence about 30,000 vs. tens of thousands. Unlike us, he did not go over the documents. If you are asking whether Bill is moderating this or his Facebook page, you are right, all the moderators are people he trusts. But he has actually learned to create emails in the last year and a half and now responds himself. We are so proud of him.
I am known for having researched Gothard-bashing for over 10+ years, starting with Don Veinot’s book. I spent years on the “Metochoi” “Bill Gothard Discussion List” on Yahoo!, years on Recovering Grace, and now this. I have a lot of contacts and research at my disposal as a result. Because of this Bill’s lawyers tapped me for help early on and, once it became clear we could work together, agreed to pay me a small stipend for services. I make regular trips to meet with the team and communicate extensively by phone and email. I get courtesy copies of most of the documents in the case. Because we – several others being recruited for this task – have combed through 30,000+ pages of communications, gathering help for the case, we are pretty well versed on that area, “Discovery”. Honestly, it was pretty clear that the plaintiff lawyers were banking on our side not finding the secret forums because they knew they were in trouble. The one RG created was called “R2D2”, supposedly to throw us off. Which is strange, because we can’t see it anyway, being a secret Facebook forum. The team asked for that forum, overtly called a “plaintiff forum” multiple times, and were given “stuff”. Including many useless chats histories where we got to live the evolution of Jamberry for an entire decade. Each time the fabled R2D2 failed to show up. What did show up is plaintiffs worrying about getting stuff they wanted off before deleting it. THAT is a very bad thing to do with a lawsuit. The date to deliver that, and the “BG Girls Forum”, another secret RG forum for all the women claiming “harassment” by Bill, and portions of “The Crossings” that applied, and parts of ATI Survivors and ATI Recovery groups that involve the plaintiffs, their claims, the case, by last Monday. It was to be a red letter day for the defense, because as fruitful as the normal Facebook chats were in exposing what was going on, this was likely to be twice as much data, all directly applicable. When you speak freely you may have to be concerned with later discovery because of things like misstatements . . . but the air of genuineness would be very convincing to a jury IF you have nothing to hide. IF, however, you are colluding and conspiring, deleting, trading stories, openly questioning things that the lawyers or other plaintiffs are saying, that would decimate your case. We were quite sure that this would be all that we found on steroids. Plus the certain disposition of sanctions if some of the forum data was deleted. All happening on Monday. Instead, we got a quiet, sudden, precipitous exit from the case.
The plaintiffs mentioned the Statutes of Limitations. That also loomed large, as last Monday was the drop dead date for turning over their medical records to prove that they indeed had the condition they told the judge they had, lack of memory or comprehension of abuse until a few years ago. But please note that Gretchen, Melody, Joy, Daniel, Carmen all disappeared last year, long before that matter was up for consideration. THAT cliff was “interrogatories”, lots of pointed questions on claims. People who lie have trouble with that, because if they give a different story during depositions than interrogatories – and skillful lawyers know how to get you there – then they impeach themselves. At least one that left last year had pressing personal issues that had nothing to do with the case. It happens. At least one cited interrogatories at the reason for leaving. Gretchen with all her public claims and boasts and slander may not have wanted to play. She never said why she left, so we are free to draw our own conclusions.
I so wish it would have gone to litigation and a counter suit was filed. How sweet it would be to see Bill Gothard cross examined by a gifted litigator.
With respect to the plaintiffs there was more than Emily and will 34 women saying the same thing I have to believe their is truth there. Additionally what Gary Smalley and others witnessed over the years say much.
Truthful the statue of limitations saved Bill’s butt and anyone that is honest in their review of the matter would conclude that pretty quick.
Hopefully Bill suddenly gets honest and repents. Otherwise a warm spot in hell will be is just reward.
Well, I guess we will never know . . . About Bill on the witness stand. I have a feeling that, like with about everything else with this suit, it may not have gone the way his enemies hoped.
It is easy for 34 or 60 women to say the same things when they are trading information back and forth. We have the endless chats, hosted by RG or participated in by them, where they did just that. How are your memories after 20 years? Can you tell the differences between what happened and what you thought about what happened and what others have said about what happened? If you don’t see a problem, you are not thinking or not being honest.
And we had the best of the 34 or 60 women in the lawsuit. This was not 1 or 2, it was . . . 17. So whatever applies to them may well apply to the rest. Pretty sure it does. There was nothing in their claims that gave the law firms hope that they could prevail. I have laughed from time to time, wondering what these folks who are used to the junk they see all the time thought when dealing with women saying, “He ALMOST kissed me!” . . . And “He touched my shoulder” . . . Or “He had his legs apart, pretty sure he was exposing himself.”
Do not comfort yourself that SOL saved the day. That was not even on the docket at the point they quit. In fact, it was even further from consideration last fall when Gretchen and 4 others quietly asked to be excused. They left before submitting “interrogatories”. Lawyers love interrogatories, because liars impeach themselves. They give one version of their tale in these sworn statements, then the lawyer gets to take them other places where, unless they have the mind of a computer, they will materially impeach themselves. People who tell the truth have little to worry about.
SOL is a cover story. The judge clearly was willing to do backflips on that. After all that time, all that money, any law firm with that much on the line is going to convince the good cases to hang around and let them do their magic. Once through to jury, it is anybody’s guess what will happen.
As to being honest and repenting, after what we saw in discovery may the Lord speak to the plaintiffs to get their conscience clear. In fact . . . I would offer this challenge, may formalize it further:
IF any of the plaintiffs believes her statements in the suit pleadings are factual and accurate, provable in a court of law, then say so. “Everything I said in the suit is true”. We don’t think so, at least for the ones that allege actual crimes, not things like “He almost kissed me”, which is pretty hard to prove either way.
If they are willing to do so, and we believe that the claims are false or materially exaggerated, this will allow Bill and IBLP to sue them for defamation. See, they can’t sue over lies in the suit, unless such an outside statement in public makes it current. At that point, for one year from the point of the statement publication, they can be sued for defamation for a lie. So survive such a suit all they have to do is prove the statements in the suit true. That or prove that they have no personal malice against Bill, i.e. didn’t lie to hurt him.
So . . . That is my challenge. Any takers?
Does that challenge also apply to Bill too? Did Bill make statements about Tony, Bill Wood and myself on or after January 10, 2014 that were not true? Untrue statements that were meant to defame us, which was in response to a reconciliation request Bill had made on August 24, 2013. Maybe we should have sued, no that wasn’t our goal, we were looking for repentance that could possibility lead to some sort of reconciliation with everybody. However, reconciliation is never required in scripture just forgiveness and repentance. Forgiveness is to set the offended free and repentance to set the offender free. I’m free but the actions of Bill tell me he is not free.
Hey, do me a favor . . . And send me a list of those statements. I will follow up. He must be above reproach. I HAVE read the “Agent” letter against Tony, and frankly saw little that could be called “false”.
Alfred, when you have the ability to read something about Bill without rose colored glasses come talk with me. Just your comment about the “Agent of Satan” letter regarding Tony shows your inability to see truth. First you have never met Tony in person, lived with him, worshiped with him, seen him live his faith day to day. Seen the man who would drop everything to help someone. You were never part of the IBYC staff that endured the scandal and the evil of the coverup. Yes, you did correspond with him for years, but he didn’t tell you what you wanted to hear. By Bill’s spiritual gift definition Tony is a prophet, proclaimer of truth and that does not fit under Bill umbrella very well. All you really know about the Tony of the “Agent of Satan” letter, that Bill wrote, is what Bill told you. You are not an expert on any of us or our story let alone the context of that story. Your laser focus on one part of a document or story at the expense of context of the whole is similar to Bill’s interpretation of Scripture. You see only what you want to.
In a discussion with my one of my pastors last week, we were talking about Matthew 18:15-17, while in complete agreement he added one element to the verses instruction. He said first, we must apply Matthew 7:1-5, regarding the log/speck, to our lives. As I was reading the verses I noticed verse 6 sits there by itself before the next section starts, “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.” The whole aim of the process of Matthew 18 revolves around forgiveness and repentance, similar to what Christ did for us on the cross, He forgave us, but we still need to repent. That makes this process Holy. What I read in verse six is don’t waste this Holy process on deaf ears, hardened hearts of those with scales on their eyes. I will remain open to Bill if he truly wants to repent but I am done throwing my pearls to the swine. (just quoting scripture, don’t take that personally)
I’m thinking of writing a book which I will call “A modern tale of Balak”, or “What happen when a people follow a false prophet”, but maybe the best would be, “How Tel Dan and Beit El relive the modern story of IBYC/IBLP” (1 Kings 12). (Twelve days ago, I explored both of those sites, today both ruins because of their sin. Beit El or Bethel was the place of Abram’s altar and where God gave him all the land from the North, South, East and West, Jacob’s ladder, and a host of other Godly interactions, but in the end, it became a place of idolatry-based sin and God eternally punished it to a heap of ruin. )
Larne, you have have your own goggles, just of a different color. The evidence points in some other directions. As has been pointed out, for starters Bill never called Tony an “Agent of Satan”. He stated that Tony was either an Agent of the Lord Jesus, or and Agent of Satan, and encouraged the reader to decide, subsequently referring to him as “The Agent”. As to the complaints . . . I find them compelling. Was getting ready to copy back in “The Post That Got Alfred Banned on Recovering Grace” which dealt with Tony in the context of Jim Sammons summarily rejecting his demand that Jim, as a former Board member, join him in condemning Bill 4-5 years ago. But, maybe it is time to move on.
So, while I like Matthew 7 I see that you are attempting to declaw the clear commands of chapter 18 with it. There is nothing of the sort of requirement that I think you are stipulating. Here is a bottom line statement:
Luke 17:4. “And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.”
Apparently saying, “I AM SORRY” is all Jesus requires for us to forgive someone. That takes away from us the need to demand “full repentance” before we forgive which I expect we are unable to correctly discern.
You write: “He stated that Tony was either an Agent of the Lord Jesus, or and Agent of Satan, and encouraged the reader to decide, subsequently referring to him as “The Agent”. As to the complaints . . . I find them compelling.”
We have had this discussion before but let’s not forget Bill writes a 19-page letter full of negative lies but the overwhelming implication is he is an Agent of Satan. You would have to be an idiot not to interpret it as Agent of Satan if you believed anything Bill wrote. But I ask, if you go back to Matthew 7:1-5 maybe the writer was really looking in the mirror at himself when he asked that question.
Your write: ”Luke 17:4. “And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.”…. Apparently saying, “I AM SORRY” is all Jesus requires for us to forgive someone. That takes away from us the need to demand “full repentance” before we forgive which I expect we are unable to correctly discern.”
I think you are confused on forgiveness and reconciliation. There are two parts to forgiveness, the first is between the offended person and God and the second is between the offender and the offended. Just as Christ forgave us we are commanded to forgive our neighbor, that forgiveness is taking the hook he has out of my emotions and giving it to God, it frees me from the emotional entanglement and control the offender has over me. Regardless of the offender’s actions.
The second is the forgiveness of the offended in an interaction with the offender. This requires a verbal interaction of the offender repenting for what he has done. Not just “I AM SORRY” but specifically what they did other wise its an empty statement. (Cheat on your wife and just say “I AM SORRY” and see how far that gets you! For years Bill has been teaching this and I think for a reason, it personally gets him off the hook of having to be specific about his offenses.) We don’t use just “I AM SORRY” in a conversion prayer, we admit we are sinners, in other words, good for nothing dirt bags who deserve nothing of God Grace, we acknowledge what Christ did for us on the cross, of dying for our sins and we invite him into our lives to be Lord of our lives and that Salvation only comes through Him. That’s specific in salvation and should be in our interpersonal repentance to another. Ask any Biblical Counselor. Just saying “I AM SORRY” can not be translated from the “I REPENT” in Luke 17:4. “Sorry” says nothing but “repent” acknowledges wrong doing or in other words sin against a person. I have heard Bill say “I’m Sorry” for what happen in 1980 many times but what does that mean, to us it means he’s sorry his cash cow of the Basic Seminar died, that his reputation was destroyed, that the comfort of his position in the community and Christian world was darkened. What he never said was admitting the intentional damage he did to those who trusted him.
The goal of forgiveness should be reconciliation which would come after the interpersonal repentance and forgiveness but no where in the Bible is reconciliation required. However, in all the years since the 1980 scandal in at least six calls from Bill he has called to start reconciliation with no mention of repentance. In Bill’s case reconciliation can never happen till repentance begins. In Hebrews 12:6 it says “For the Lord disciplines the one he loves, and chastises every son whom he receives.” Did you ever consider this is what has been happening to Bill over the last 6 or 7 years is that God raised up watchmen, best described in Ezequiel 3:17-21, 17 “Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel. Whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me. 18 If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for[d] his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. 19 But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul. 20 Again, if a righteous person turns from his righteousness and commits injustice, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die. Because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds that he has done shall not be remembered, but his blood I will require at your hand. 21 But if you warn the righteous person not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning, and you will have delivered your soul.”
I have forgiven Bill in my heart before God, Bill does not have a hook in me anymore. I have even forgiven him in person and before witnesses when all he said was “I don’t remember that, but if you say I did it I guess I did, I’m sorry will you please forgive me.” With the end of each “please for me” was the unspoken NEXT and the process was repeated. It was the most insincere conversation I have ever encountered. But because we saw no change in behavior or attitude there will be no reconciliation. He’s forgiven but I care for his soul and will continue to seek his repentance. You see Alfred, Bill wants reconciliation without the cost of repentance, but they go hand in hand. When David was confronted by Nathan and admitted his sin he cried out to God in Psalm 51. One of the most beautiful Psalms where he was calling for reconciliation with God that was based in his repentance.
I can go on, but in 1 Corinthians 5:12-13, “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”” This verse along with the watchman section from Ezequiel are what we have been called to do. In June of 1980 standing outside Bill’s office just before I drove away for the last time I told Bill that the world was looking for someone who was willing to admit and turn away from their sin and in that new message it could bring change to the world. Bill chose a different path, he continued to cover sin and today we see what it has wrought. He is not being persecuted, just held accountable by God who has used His watchmen to proclaim truth and obedience to their God.
Just going to have to disagree on that. Interesting, had a 2 hour chat today with someone who was intimately involved in all of those matters, and Tony. His perceptions aligned with mine.
Forgiveness is defined in the last part of Matthew 18. It is as simple as this:
“Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee?”
Whatever God does for us, THAT is what we are to do, from the heart, for our failing fellow servants. We tend to always attach human conditions to our absolute and final forgiveness. The man came to the king, he asked for forgiveness, the king “frankly forgave him” . . . Everthing. We sin against the Lord to continue to keep those that owe us debts in jail, until they pay. Let them out, let them free from our legal claim on the Lord’s judgements on them, without a condition other than that they appologize.
Every person has the power to hold another in prison for as long as they see fit. Wives hold their husbands in jail for far lesser offenses :-). Or release them quickly. Interesting that God calls us “adulterers and adultresses” because of our infatuation with the world. So . . . You are a purveyor of Grace, as in “Recovering Grace”. How long is the road back to the Lord once our adultery is uncovered?
WHERE do you get a “conversion prayer” from, in Scripture, or any steps required in it? If you cite the publican in, “Have mercy on me, the sinner”, I accept that. But I never uttered those words, and I know many, MANY who uttered no words the day they trusted Christ. We are adding to the Word of God here, as important as some of the issues you cite, are. Again, if a pagan shows up at RG’s door, asking for counsel on how to be saved, with how many steps and with what intensity will they be greeted? Or will it be simple, short and sweet? We are confused and confusing people. What is good for the atheist, the drunk, the moral wretch . . . In not good enough for Bill?
From where I sit, you appear obsessed with Bill. Which prompted the comments. Brother, I know about comings and goings of various folk during the lawsuit. I see your emails to Bill. I do not want to embarrass you. And again, whatever I say, I return to, “It is your call, you certainly have earned the moral right to proceed however you choose.” But . . . I see you going to your meeting with Jesus with Bill on your mind. Am I wrong?
Like Emily’s “forgiveness”. Years after the proclamation, she still speaks of intense stress, and has to make it again. Perhaps the lawsuit ending will solve that. If she is still longing for vengeance, it will not happen. I believe she is getting good counsel in her quest for freedom.
There appears to be no end in sight or of any chance of unity, the warnings have been made and we can either choose to worship the God who is the Creator or a man His creation. But just a couple of final things, no one owes me a debt, because that was paid for on Calvary for all, but only applied to those that believe. I stand by my understanding of Ezequiel 3:17-21 of being a Watchman and proclaiming truth. My story never changes. I have sought the counsel of many who were there with me in 1980. In your case few were left except those who gladly accepted vacated positions and only listened to Bill side, their choice.
But I am really puzzled by your statement “….So . . . You are a purveyor of Grace, as in “Recovering Grace”. How long is the road back to the Lord once our adultery is uncovered?” What are you trying to say? Are you equating God unmerited favor “Grace” with “Recovering Grace” a website, and calling “Grace” adultery? That’s the way it sounds to me. If that is the case, you should avoid going out during a lightning storm. Than even more bazar is, ”How long is the road back to the Lord once our adultery is uncovered?” What was uncovered or hidden? Clue me in, because I think you are speaking Klingon riddles. Are you saying that Recovering Grace is completely of Satan and everyone who posted on it are all going to hell? It that what you believe? Is your long road back an invitation to salvation, if so thanks but I have assurance of my Salvation? If so I will pray all the more for you and Bill because you have hardened heart and scales seem on your eyes? I can’t speak for everybody that posts on RG, but I chose to seek out the leadership, break bread with them and see what there were about. What I found were men and women that love the Lord and are seeking to follow Him. Unfortunately, that more than I can say for Bill from our year of interaction.
But if you’re talking about Sanctification, believers are Positionally Sanctified at the moment of Salivation. Even though forgiven at this point we still have a sin nature but the indwelling of the Holy Spirit begins the continuing process of Progressive Sanctification as we seek to become more like Christ and He gives us the ability to overcome sin. That process should never end till we die.
Lastly, you say: “From where I sit, you appear obsessed with Bill. Which prompted the comments. Brother, I know about comings and goings of various folk during the lawsuit. I see your emails to Bill. I do not want to embarrass you.”
Actually, my comments were prompted by your attack on Emily and the women of the lawsuit. I found them a “curse” and not a “blessing”. (Remember your chide against me?) you said we are to Bless, Bless ect. I’m yanking your chain, because you are not living by what you demand of others. Regarding the lawsuit you state how can memories from far back be accurate (some case 5, 10 or 15 years others longer), yet you live by Bill’s memories when they are convenient (denying something important like a conversation with Ruth over 40 years ago.) and allow sloppy memories when that suit the story (What Gary told Bill in 1976). Or in the case of whoever you talked to today for two hours was recalling something 38 years ago and probably that person was not on staff before June of 1980 and was repeating what Bill told him. So, their old memories are OK but newer memories of the plaintiffs are not. Alfred you can’t have it both ways! My discussion is about my story not the plaintiffs but the injustice, cruelty and “cursing” I saw in you post prompted be to respond. You and Bill could have “blessed” them when the case was dismissed, regardless of what they did, but you took a different path, opposite the high road and then you didn’t follow your own demands. Next time you choose to attack read Matthew 7:1-5 first.
Grace, grace . . . all I hear from “Recovering Grace” and those that support “it” is . . . “GRACE”! 🙂 So . . . if we are guilty of spiritual adultery, and are “in trouble” with the Lord because of loving the world, getting into the world, deeply offending our spiritual bridegroom . . . How long would it take, would those that love this “Grace” say, to be restored to Jesus in that circumstance. Recovering Grace does not own grace, but profess to be experts of it, perhaps you too. So . . . how long does it take before this “unmerited favor” gets us back to the Lord and His loving favor after a bout with adultery?
I am talking code for “I know what individuals were actively supporting the lawsuit because I saw many, many references to their involvement and activities in the discovery chats”. I just find it hard to believe that you do not believe yourself obsessed with Bill and finding vengeance to execute on him. There is a time to curse, and there is a time to bless. But if all we do is curse someone, every chance we get, something is wrong. Psalm 109:17 “As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him.” Curses have a way of souring our lives, putting stress on that we don’t necessarily recognize. Yes, I can see some of that in me at times. The solution is GRACE, glorious GRACE! When we surrender our adversaries to the Lord, we get free to pray for them and bless them, and walk away happy.
re: your 3/3 post. It’s not too late. The sweet spectacle of Bill Gothard squirming under expert cross examination is still available to you.
Now that Round One has fallen short, all you have to do is file a lawsuit against Gothard which has enough substance to get that far. Simple but not easy.
Larne, I’m still waiting for Bill to sue IBLP for defamation, etc.. Bill issued a similar challenge several years ago, in that he wasn’t going to admit any wrongdoing and step down from ministry. So David Gibbs II and IBLP talked to him about it, and talked to various women and other witnesses about it, and for even the “lesser” allegations he was found to have been far enough in the wrong that IBLP removed him. He did not sue as he and Alfred are threatening here, so by logic corollary to Alfred’s comment posted above…Bill proves his own guilt.
Alfred, speaking of IBLP’s internal investigation, please share with us what you read in the report. (Not what you’ve heard about it, but what you read firsthand.) And where we can find it. No doubt that was made public during discovery?
Since you are being so honest with us, please also tell us about the other answers and communications/materials that IBLP and Bill provided during their interrogatories and discovery. Although not to your complete satisfaction, the women provided the information requested. To claim to be above them morally, IBLP and Bill must have provided at least the same effort. (I know it’s a court case and attorneys want to be stingy with info, but you insist IBLP and Bill have nothing to hide.) So please share with us where we can find that public information. If they did not share, then we will have to assume there was damaging info. If the info was not damaging, they would want to bury the plaintiffs with the legal cost of sorting through it all like you had to. Which is strange in itself.
First of all, we are limited with what we can share, as you can imagine. We are permitted to lift quotes out of discovery if they cannot be linked to a specific plaintiff. There are no public documents for discovery or interrogatories – believe me, we have asked.
Having said that, while I have not seen everything, I have seen NOTHING incriminating coming from IBLP. Or Bill. No hidden stories, no abuse . . . Nothing.
The plaintiff lawyers saw EVERYTHING in the suit, more than we did. Do you think they would allow all 17 to just walk away from any reasonable hope of a payday, from AT LEAST paying legal costs? Right, not going to happen. They let it go because it was a bust from start to finish.
That having been said, the CLA generated documents that you are likely interested in, related to internal IBLP investigations, were privileged from discovery, and we have not seen. We do know some of what is in there from interviews we have conducted. We are still unaware of a basis for the Board to act against Bill – and you will recall that it was Bill who resigned, so he could go about fixing this as he felt the Lord leading. If there were, surely the best of it would be part of the lawsuit, right? If the best that RG could come up with failed to provide a basis of a single charge of even “negligence” on the part of Bill or IBLP, let alone criminal charges, what would raise your confidence that other much worse data exists? IBLP did state that their secret documents revealed that Bill had done nothing criminal. Sexual touching of minors or employees in general is criminal. So they have no evidence of that. Some of the plaintiffs claimed that, yet apparently no one in any “secret document” that IBLP has, claimed that. That leaves us with much lesser matters, albeit important to the Board.
We did go to IBLP leadership and specifically asked for their worst. We were graciously given a couple of intense interviews and we worked through the things they provided, leaving us unmoved in our conviction. What we were given was not worse than non-criminal issues that some of the plaintiffs also attested to. At this point we have no wish to challenge or embarrass IBLP, so we will leave it at that for now.
From the little I know, it seems that any “privilege” attaching to internal investigations is due to attorney-client communication between Gibbs II and IBLP (or attorney work product in preparing a legal defense against the accusers). The privilege can be waived by IBLP. Period. As an attorney, I understand protecting that information from discovery. It is their right and lawsuits are about rights, even for people who preach the spiritual benefits yielding rights.
Now that the suits are over, if there is nothing damning or suspicious there, then they should waive the privilege and publish Gibbs’ full report. The IBLP community, especially those like you who have defended to the end, have a right to be fully informed. There should be no secrets. There should be nothing hidden.
Moreoever, if I recall, most of the serious accusers refused to talk to Gibbs during his investigation, so little about those allegations would be evidenced in his investigation. Yet, after the investigation, Bill was fired. Likely, the things he admitted including stroking hair, footsie, etc., are confirmed in the report, making confession easy. It is funny how politicians and their ilk always confess only what has already been proven beyond a doubt but never what has yet to be proven. And their apologies tend to focus on the consequences rather than the wrong: “I am sorry you were offended by my tender attentions.” “I am sorry some were offended by my poor choice of words.” In the news every day.
Finally, Larne has the better of your dispute above. While you defend Bill to the end, your demand for grace after saying “sorry” for uncovered adultery admits that wrongful conduct has been uncovered. You have spent years minimizing it (lap sitting, etc.) but can’t disprove it. You don’t demand forgiveness from those you have not sinned against. You pray for them to get over their delusions and you forgive them. (A humble repentance does not demand forgiveness or restoration but only to be treated like low servant.)
We are all a bit fixated on B.G. He assumed an prominent place in our lives and influenced us for good and for ill. Larne’s life was greatly influenced, particularly by Bill’s earlier mistreatment of he and his wife. I find his expressed attitude toward Bill loving and patient. I believe you do too as you demand only greater mercy, not any change of heart. How many times have you said to Larne (or any accuser), “you are right about that”. Yet you seek forgiveness of uncovered sin.
IF the report is the reason for them condemning Bill, then, yes, it must be addressed in a transparent way. We are aware that some women entering their tales into the investigation did so on condition of anonymity. At least one has requested her story be excised for fear of disclosure. So that may complicate things. It remains that they owe it to Bill and to the church at large, including 2.7 million alumni, to bring this out of the darkness into the light.
As a technical point, he resigned, but it seems likely to us that he would have been forced subsequently. We have spoken at length with IBLP leadership and Board members and we are absolutely convinced that it was an unjustified rush to judgment. Evidence of this has been multiple conversations which have started on one topic, say “footsie” and, when the known facts have been presented, then moved quickly to many other topics which do not relate to women at all. One is left with the sense that the explosion of RG and the many voices raised against Bill was simply a good excuse to divest from Bill, too much trouble.
So let’s again clarify a few things. Bill has never confessed to stroking hair or playing footsie. As you know “footsie” is a sexually charged term, and that most emphatically never happened. We have first-hand testimonies from “other” women that got their feet “tapped”, as Bill has done for 50 years, and are angry at the attempt to make it sexual. Bill on at least one occasion that was reported to us did that to his male assistant on a van ride . . . so unless you are willing to go down an even weirder route, that term – “footsie” – needs to stop being used. During interrogatories, with yours truly sitting across the table from him and his lawyer, he could only recall a single incident of touching a girl’s hair, and that was NOT Rachel Frost (she called an event of roughly grabbing her hair “sexual abuse”). We worked hard to help him recall each and every event, as that is, of course, delivered under oath. The one event involved flipping a young lady’s hair out from inside her coat, and a young man telling him it was wrong. The young lady was later asked and said she thought nothing of it. So . . . “stroking of hair” is also not something he did. He did give hugs on occasion, usually initiated by the young lady. The one women I spoke with said he hugged her twice when he thought she was hurting due to a life event, and, to her, it was a most wooden, uncomfortable thing. Hands he did hold, long, clasping in both of his as he would speak to the young lady’s heart much as a father or grandfather would do. And even the tales on RG confirm that he regularly did that in front of the entire assembled staff, or smaller groups, i.e. . . . it clearly was not a bad, intimate thing, to him.
No, the ONLY thing Bill confessed to was his insensitivity to boundary concerns of some young women, things he was completely unaware of. It was not wise for him to have done some things that, in this modern age, have been sexualized. The statement was immediately followed by his unequivocal assertion that it was never, remotely, sexual in nature. Nothing to confess, other than being clueless. Trust me that this was explored in great detail as it was initially viewed by the other side as one hook they could corner him on.
I reply somewhat blind, and you are attaching to some older comments. I think I found what you are referring to. My point being that EVEN if someone has gone that far off the deep end with the Lord, there is a short path back . . . right? People are not so quick to forgive, but we believe that Jesus is. Right? We commit adultery with the world . . . we expect Him to forgive us quickly when we come back and say it was wrong. Nothing more. Am I right? THAT is my point. And if we expect that, why is it ridiculous to expect no less from one another?
I have made it clear that I believe there was lap sitting – I do not say “we” because others of our team disagree. Bill says he recalls once, and that was a spontaneous act on her part. What I hasten to say is that it was with a woman who, from multiple sources, considered her relationship with Bill far deeper than “just friends”, and Bill, according to Gary Smalley, told both him and the board that they were “dating”, or at a “third level relationship”. So . . . that being the case, I being one who held my sweetheart on my lap in her parent’s living room with them present with a clear conscience find it not so troubling. To others looking at the high standard proclaimed publicly, including formal process with parents, it would be troubling and a concern. Got it. But if that is as bad as Bill ever got, he did really good.
You have a number of posts pending, I will get to them as quickly as I can. Actually appreciate you posting, do respect you even while disagreeing with some of your conclusions. You, among many, can actually understand the legal issues here.
The burden of proof rests with the accuser, not the accused.
I’m very concerned with this response. It is very likely an illegal breach of privacy for which one could sue. I can’t imagine the woman he’s referring to gave Bill permission to release all this private family history to the public!
The documents are a matter of record these days. The postings on Recovering Grace anyone can find. The emails between Mom, daughters, and Bill are his, and he gave us permission to interact with them. Which he clearly has as well.
That is a huge leap for any of us to make that kind of assumption. You already said you had access to them so you obviously can say whatever you want about “What Bill said” in reguareds to permission. It’s all second hand and extremely questionable.
You are out to try and defame someone you see as an opponent and you feel you have ammo in all the documents you were misguidedlly given access to.
Your unwavering and blind devotion to a man has blinded you to reality. Your drive to do all you can to keep his image alive is honorable in your eyes only. It’s sickens all the rest of us who don’t have the billers of keeping the idol on the pedestal.
I am not sure if I need to respond to that or not? This is all first hand, and so, to us, unquestionable. I will connect with an independent third party and they can independently assess what we are looking at . . . would that help?
Umm, moderator, please leave me out of this. I am assessing the situation for my OWN peace of mind, not to convince anyone else of anything.
I do need to apologize to Sharlott, having inadvertently dragged her into a role she was not interested in. To whomever cares, I have known her for a number of years, never as a Gothard supporter, just as a good person. I figured she would be perfect to do this, still do. Apparently others spanked her for being part of our team, or something. This is the first we have interacted since long before the lawsuit and, no, I had not asked her before I suggested publically what a great idea this would be.
Alao, if they are a matter of record you must mean that anyone can find them then, right? Can you please show with link to source where they are public record and where in the law it says they are public record?
I don’t mean a trite reply but actual verifiable links and law please. If you can’t then I would definitely rethink talking any more about any info from the suit.
Well, we are getting some legal advice off to the side that blessed what we are doing. We do appreciate your concern and will continue with the abundance of caution.
There is the trite reply without substance or proof. Might I even say you have lied then? You say they are part of record as proof you have a right to mention and throw them in front of everyone yet you have no proof it is even legal to do so! Shameful from someone proclaiming to be Godly and truthful. Shameful!
This almost feels like straws being grasped, but I will take you very seriously. I have in my possession a document of correspondence between Emily and Liz Jaeger, and Bill. Also between the Jaegers and Recovering Grace moderators, as they gave this to Bill. Then we have the RG posts. The posts are public. The other documents are part of the legal process and are the property of Bill. I guess I can’t call them “public record”, so apologies on that. Like I said, we will have a blessed third party consider them and report back to you her conclusions on whether they support the narrative that Bill gave . . . which was blessed by his lawyer.
You are completely dodging my actual point. I was asking for “proof” in the form of legal documents and links to show that everything you are referring to is legally available as “public record” and where we can find them. I was not asking for you to try and prove you have documents you are more then happy to spead that all over public media (prideful and hawty much?) I am requesting you to prove that said “documents” are a part of public record and you are within the law (as in post said law here for all to see this law) to be quoting and paraphrasing documents that were part of a lawsuit. If you cannot give proof of specific laws showing you are allowed to do so I have the grounds to say you are lying when you simply respond to others saying it part of record so you can share.
If you are as smart as you want us all to believe then produce the requested documentation and law.
I also wonder if you open yourself up to possible litigation for sharing medical Information and personal correspondence. That is why I wonder if you ever know what you are and are not allowed to legally share out here in the cyber wasteland. Not that I care much about you breaking the law, please do!
I am grateful for your care for me. As stated multiple times, we actually have a real live lawyer giving advice. All I need to do it prove that I can legally publish Bill’s letter. And . . . I can! Let’s forget about public record. The lawsuit is public, but she didn’t talk about her health there. She and her mother DID talk about it on RG. I have records of it, but, guess what, RG has deleted it all. Even the Wayback Machine is devoid of anything for Recovering Grace for the first three years of its existence. Somebody is trying to cover their behind. A lot of my posts there have evaporated :-). So I can say, it WAS in the public and I have copies and so better should they, on the possibility they get sued. Deliberate destruction of evidence on the anticipation of legal action will bring trouble.
But why should the moderator be your clerk for free? Do your own internet searches.
But the real question/statement was did the women give permission for the private information and email content to be public? That answer was artfully evaded with “facts”.
No more than the women got permission from Bill before slandering him in public pleadings. Lawsuits are so intrusive. Lots of normal rules go out the door. If you defend yourself in public, or your job is to defend someone who is under legal action, you get to do all kinds of things you normally don’t. The fact that Emily chose to make a major public announcement about the case suddenly is making all of us focus on her. I am having to dig out statements and documents, things that are in the lawsuit, again “a matter of public record”, to address. She chooses to insert herself into the lawsuit, she chooses to attack Bill and declare her innocence – which implies that all her claims in the suit are true. Then we have to respond and much more of her private affairs get out in the open. I am writing a lot of words about Emily, so is Bill. Things that may get picked up in the press, for example, certainly will hang around in the world of archives for a long time. There are things you don’t do if you want to live a quiet life. Whoever told her that “Doe Status” would make none of that intrusion happen to her was lying.
Because Bill is not a licensed counselor or physician, he has no legal duty to keep personal medical information private. If he was under the authority of any church in an ordained capacity, he likely would have an ethical and contractual duty.Clearly, great autonomy arises from not being under authority! His bad example shows why we put such legal requirements on those licensed by law to help the vulnerable. Here, Bill Gothard publishes the personal private health information of another person for his own benefit. It is not illegal. But it makes him an unreliable counselor. (I don’t fault DG for republishing it. Blogging is just another form of journalism, naturlally trading on muckraking.)
Again, all that he cited was proclaimed by daughter AND Mom publicly, in RG posts. You can view what they said here. So what and whether are moot points. Bill is not one to spread private information about. And it certainly did not happen here, all the howling notwithstanding. I see that the plaintiffs have filed a motion for a protective order against disclosing private information. Part of the filing is Emily dumping our private chats, she and I. So . . . that is now a matter of public record. I am not bothered by it, and find her willingness to do so interesting. So I can, without her permission, put all that up at some point, legally. Funny how that works. In that you can see how I plead with her to get legal counsel. She is, as she was, her own worst enemy and witness. Once you step into the legal arena, you surrender your heartfelt desire to remain private and anonymous, especially if you go loud and rogue, as she has done.
5 Thus says the Lord:
“Cursed is the man who trusts in man
and makes flesh his strength,
whose heart turns away from the Lord.
He is like a shrub in the desert,
and shall not see any good come.
He shall dwell in the parched places of the wilderness,
in an uninhabited salt land.
“Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord,
whose trust is the Lord.
He is like a tree planted by water,
that sends out its roots by the stream,
and does not fear when heat comes,
for its leaves remain green,
and is not anxious in the year of drought,
for it does not cease to bear fruit.”
The heart is deceitful above all things,
and desperately sick;
who can understand it?
“I the Lord search the heart
and test the mind,
to give every man according to his ways,
according to the fruit of his deeds.”
This is not in reference to Emily, but to Bill and his followers. Verses 7 & 8 are the example we all need to follow, but not what I see in your statement above, “She was, in fact, going to be a target of a counter-suit should things have proceeded” what about Bill trusting the Lord if he is so innocent? What about turning the other cheek? The dismissal was “without merit” which means the accusations still stand and the suit can be refiled (probably won’t I guess). Just like Bill Wood case in 1982 the merit of the accusations were not disputed by the Judge at the point the suit was dismissed. The sad thing part to this is Bill has once again been given the opportunity to repent and with the dismissal the case just got kicked up to the eternal and final court and perfect Judge who knows our hearts. Personally I would rather deal with my sin here than when I stands in front of my Maker. Having personally known Bill for 45 years , worked for him, had him in my home and seen his personal attacks. I am not surprised by this post about Emily or the Facebook post about John Cornish, its his trademark actions. For you, I would look very closely with verses 5 & 6 they don’t fit you well, you might try to exhibit the “character qualities” of verses 7 & 8. I believe we are living in the end times, our efforts should be spent on making more and better disciples of our Lord and Savior.
Hello, Larne. You are right that it was “without prejudice”. What you are not interacting with is ALL the plaintiffs leaving this close to jury. There is no logical explanation other than that the case was in trouble for merit, and would have gone to “with prejudice”, likely “with sanctions”, a lot of money flowing into the IBLP legal fund from the plaintiffs, in a matter of time. 17 leaving “like that” is like lightening striking 17 times. Something else besides “weather” is going on.
There is also a possibility, on paper, that the Lord did something really incredible for Bill, here. You have to admit that he has escaped time and again from certain doom and innumerable enemies. There is the possibility that God, who sees all, knows all, judges all for sure, is seeing a lot more of the situation than you can see or will acknowledge. Being examined by the Lord is a prospect none of us would get too excited about. So I am going to stay out of matching curse with curse. Not that I can’t. I am just thrilled and relieved to be sitting here, with this conclusion, in the light of all that could have happened, and at one point seemed inevitable. I bear you no ill will, quite the opposite. You have earned the right to speak as you choose.
Alfred whatever we do we have to be completely honest in the assessment of the situation and provide all the facts, not just facts convenient for us. Bill’s attorney like any good attorney fought hard to get rid of key plantiffs, others had external pressure put on them, family, church etc so they didn’t just drop like a conspiratcy of flies. Regarding the conspiracy theory I think that mostly a matter of interpretation. Bill was talking about that four years ago when we met In Denver, before long before there was a lawsuit or even a thought of a lawsuit for that matter. I can even go back till 1980 and Bill was talking about conspiracies of his detractors from the 1980s scandal, it’s has proven the best way to garner support in the covering of his sins. Just say it’s the Democrats, the Republicans or Satan. It’s no different than what we read in the national news every day regarding politics, the “Russians”.
Lastly you state, “There is also a possibility, on paper, that the Lord did something really incredible for Bill,” maybe, then again there is an equal chance God has withdrawn Bill’s final chance at repentance.
Oh, this is most definitely a conspiracy. They brought up RICO repeatedly, you know, for taking down mobsters when you can’t make normal charges stick? Also talked openly with the plaintiffs before the suit was filed that they were unlikely to win, just a ploy to get the Board to blink, or to get Bill under oath, use that to destroy him. The end was always to “Kill Bill”, not to get relief for real damage for individual “victims”. I saw a lot of people in there helping the case, some you might recognize. I know you know that what I am saying is true.
Well I guess we disagree on “a conspiracy”. Have you never used an exaggeration in a group setting? Have you never been part of a group that went through something difficult together and relived it over and over again? Like storming the beach at Normandy, going through SEAL training or even basic training, fighting a battle, playing on a team, losing a SIDS child, spouse, parent, or friend. It the service its call a band of brother or comradeship. In the civilian world its called companionship or solidarity. In the Christian world its call living life together. Maybe things are said in a way that are misunderstood or out of context outside of the group but that does not make a conspiracy. I know what Bill did to the women and staff in 1980. It was the same but different. This has been Bill’s way for 50 years.
What I find interesting and revealing in your response, is the statement, “or to get Bill under oath, use that to destroy him”. Why would you say that with your complete trust and belief in Bill? If Bill it truthful that should never be an issue of worry regarding telling the truth in a deposition or at court. If I had ever been called on the stand, I’d have nothing to worry about because I’ve been telling the truth for the last 45 years I have personally known him. You see Alfred the truth never changes so you don’t have to worry about what you say if you always tell the truth. Why would there be a whole team of helpers to have him fill out his interrogatory? Bill is not a feble old man, he is calculating, controlling and full of himself, all while masquerading as the meek and mild “Clark Kent”.
What’s more important is the reason for Bill’s and your attack on the women now, if Bill was so interested in making more and better disciples for Christ there is plenty of work ahead for all of us without attacking the women, unless the attack is the prelude of bigger things to come. What could that be? That are two possibilities, first Bill will view this dismissal as proof of his innocence and will use it to try to regain his former position as CEO of the IBLP enterprise, the other possibility is to force IBLP to give him the Oak Brook property. As his trusted servant you would be is a position to be his right-hand man, just don’t get too comfortable in the position because you will be a liability for knowing too much and will soon find yourself on the outside.
To the rest of the Christian world Bill is a dismal footnote to sin, a joke, a Jim Baker, Jimmy Swaggard, Jim Jones and the list goes on. He could change all that with repentance and truth, I have continued to pray that will happen, so far, I’ve have been completely disappointed. Maybe God had hardened his heart for the judgement to come like he did with His people, I pray not!
Support in a social media setting is one thing. Using social media to plot to “take down” Bill with public stories and lawsuits as the tool, that is another. We saw repeated examples of plaintiffs pleading with others to give or confirm memories. “Did I go to Bill’s house? Do you remember if he looked at me weird, or if I went into his bedroom? Oh, my head hurts trying to remember”. We have people that were THERE telling them, “I admire your bravery, honey, and support you! But, no . . . I can’t remember anything.” Do you see the problem? So . . . When one comes up with a memory, others start coming up with similar things, they refine them with facts gleaned from others, and you suddenly have a tale to wag!
As to Bill on the witness stand, no, that would not be for fear of conviction. It would be to embarrass him. Your friend Tony published private details of Bill that remind me of Jesus, hanging naked on the cross. Lawyers love to get you to state things in an attempt to recollect, then impeach them with someone else’s testimony. After 40 years, 20 years even, he doesn’t remember. I have interacted with him enough to know that. Again, there are REASONS for statutes of limitations. It is amazing how creative our minds get mixing up real events with what we thought about what happened, or what others said.
As to my role, I want to laugh. I was never suited for a role in the past, and nothing about that has changed. What I am good at is getting into the backed up sewage of the venom and lies of others and opening the drains. That is my role. If and when that job is done, I will be a happy man and happily leave others to do the things God has suited them for.
And, brother Larne, stop cursing. We are to bless, and not curse. As I analyze what Bill’s enemies have gotten wrong, especially what should have kept them out of this disastrous lawsuit, it is the simple reality that GOD is judge, and vengeance is HIS. All of this has come about from those that feel that Bill should be judged, and because God is slow in executing that judgment, they are going to help Him along. That is wrong. Let God do His job. Release Bill to Him. Whatever is just and right, God is well aware of it.
Whether you believe it or not, I love you and my heart breaks for all you have endured. Just like the plaintiff who was crying out to the Lord for deliverance in the middle of chats that I was reading while I am desperately crying out to the Lord to deliver Bill. The Lord is big enough to sort it out and do right by all of us. These last 4-5 years have been a bloodbath of spankings for Bill. We all get it from time to time. He is not perfect, although not the evil man he has been portrayed as. God intended for him to learn some things this late in his life, and this was the only way. Maybe the Lord was thinking about Ruth and the whole mess, even as I remain convinced he had no deliberate part in what went wrong.
That having been said, the Lord spanks the most the ones He loves the most. There are few alive today, or from history, that have done as much for the kingdom of God as Bill Gothard. There is a reason he keeps escaping certain destruction in amazing ways. Bless, Larne, bless. Let God do His job.
You and I completely differ on Bill’s memory plus about everything else as far as that goes, it’s a convenient excuse of age and we found his memory was as sharp as a tack on the big issues. What we also found was he was not truthful.
Alfred you say,” And, brother Larne, stop cursing. We are to bless, and not curse…. simple reality that GOD is judge, and vengeance is HIS…… Bless, Larne, bless. Let God do His job.” Your right Alfred but God also calls us to warn our brothers about false teaching, Matthew 18:17 that’s why we have church discipline, I am not Bill judge nor to I want to be, I released him to God long ago, but God raised us up to proclaim truth which in not judging. I can’t bless a lie or a false prophet, but I can warn my brothers. Regarding the scandal, Bill did have a major role in what went wrong in 1980 and he was not truthful and covered sin for years.
In Denver he admitted to Gary Smalley’s question and the rest of us that he was unqualified to serve as a teacher/elder etc. based his previous actions, (as per Titus 1 and 1 Timothy 3). We have seen nothing that would change that position. He also admitted that he was aware of his brother’s immorality. The following year we spent working with him was one of the most frustrating in my life and as a result I don’t believe a word he says.
Of the verses below, I think the first is clear regarding a rebuke of a false teacher, the second is descriptive of them and the third and fourth are clear in how to deal with them. We are well within our scriptural bounds to warn our brothers and that has nothing to do with cursing and we are never to bless sin. Bill knew what he had to do to make things right, but he chose a different path which I believe lead to the lawsuit, it was the consequence of a long history of sin.
2 Timothy 4:14-15 “Alexander the coppersmith did me great harm; the Lord will repay him according to his deeds. 15 Beware of him yourself, for he strongly opposed our message.”
Acts 20:29-31 “I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. 31 So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears.”
Titus 2:15 “Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.”
Matthew 10:13-14 “And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. 14 And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town.”
God is the final judge and I have warned Bill of that repeatedly, I don’t seek to judge him because of the warning of Matthew 7:1-5 but just warn my brothers and to caution them of the idolatry of following a man. Right now, its not to late for Bill to repent and I pray that he does before it’s too late. (BTW the above is all based on my association with him and has nothing to do with the lawsuit but does reflect on a pattern of behavior I have observed in the 45 years I have known him, worked for him or associated with him. 1973-2018)
I considered your attestations of “not truthful” and disagreed with them. Particularly the pounding on him to finally confess that he did send secretaries to their moral harm knowing it was likely to happen. Which you know he as fervently rejects as you fervently believe.
You HAVE warned, over and over and over again. So . . . Now let God do His job, and start blessing. Matthew 18 is interesting as it occurs in the context of church leadership. You never once went to his pastor, did you, to take up your matters with him? The man has been ready for 5 years, so I am told. When you declared Bill a “heathen man and publican” on Recovering Grace . . . WHO did you think would feel bound by that? RG is not a church, we all have our own churches. And Bill’s church has not excommuncated him. If you want to go there, then do it right.
In the middle of that mess, with everyone arrayed against him, he was certainly trying to find his footing. See, everyone believed the tales on RG. With y’all pounding on him for much older scores to settle. Now those tales have, by means of this failed lawsuit, been shown for what they are, a coordinated mass of exaggerations and outright lies. Bill was attempting to humble himself, and took a lowly role. There are a fair number of us that believe he has emphatically NOT disqualified himself.
And during the time you were working with him my wife and I spent considerable time talking this through with him, multiple times. In the middle of the most intense part of his ministry, in two cities each week, jetting back and forth in the LearJet you and Mr. Johnson piloted, he is brought back to deal with a shocking matter with his brother and a secretary in his office. He is weary and frustrated and frankly not all there. To me he said he heard “naked” and got the fact that they were being lewd, a “show and tell” with no actual interaction. The word “fornication” was never used, however it was represented. He intently examined his brother and got a confession that involved stuff that fell short of the very act. I doubt that Smalley and others witnessed “the very act” either, right? Based on that he fired him from his position as VP and sent him up to the Northwoods to get right with Jesus. Subsequent checks convinced him, along with the deep and sincere attestations of the brother that he loved and had no reason not to trust, that the matter had been resolved.
He knew about his brother’s immorality, which meant he knew about stuff short of sex. That is immorality.
A “curse” is envisioning destruction on a person. Telling someone he is in imminent danger of judgement is a “curse”. We all need to let God do His job. Maybe I have as hard a time as anyone on this score.
You say: “Particularly the pounding on him to finally confess that he did send secretaries to their moral harm knowing it was likely to happen. Which you know he as fervently rejects as you fervently believe.”
If you can find where I said that good luck, what I have consistently said was “he sent the girls to the Northwoods (an isolated location with communal living) knowing of his brother’s history of immorality as told to him by Gary Smalley, Ken Nair and Ed Martin in 1976”. What that showed was poor judgment and leadership on his part. “What I also stated which I have in Ruth’s own words was that she told Bill at some point she was under moral pressure there.”
Your state: “You HAVE warned, over and over and over again. So . . . Now let God do His job and start blessing. Matthew 18 is interesting as it occurs in the context of church leadership. You never once went to his pastor, did you, to take up your matters with him? The man has been ready for 5 years, so I am told. When you declared Bill a “heathen man and publican” on Recovering Grace . . . WHO did you think would feel bound by that? RG is not a church, we all have our own churches. And Bill’s church has not excommuncated him. If you want to go there, then do it right.”
He we differ again, in the early 1980s Bill’s than church LBC was formally approached by Dr. Chuck Lynch they did not want to deal with it because they were starting a building project according to Pastor Hovey. Regarding his current church a decision was made not to contact them since Bill was not a member (by Bill’s own words) thus could not fall under church discipline as a member of that body. However, both before and after his resignation we did approach IBLP’s leadership and Board and that fell on deaf ears. We made it very clear to Bill to pass on our availability to conversation with his mentors and pastor.
You state: “In the middle of that mess, with everyone arrayed against him, he was certainly trying to find his footing. See, everyone believed the tales on RG. With y’all pounding on him for much older scores to settle. Now those tales have, by means of this failed lawsuit, been shown for what they are, a coordinated mass of exaggerations and outright lies. Bill was attempting to humble himself, and took a lowly role. There are a fair number of us that believe he has emphatically NOT disqualified himself.”
Is telling the truth pounding him, was Nathan pounding David or proclaiming truth? A little history here Alfred. In numerous conversations with Bill from about 1983-1990 Bill continually told Ruth and I that the board had changed the rules and he had little contact with the staff. His sister Laura was his secretary, he said it was a different world and he barely interacted with his staff. He went on to say, The events that lead to the scandal could never happen again. During this time frame there are enough consistent testimonies that this was not the case, Bill had many administrative assistants and traveling companions. (what happened between them was the focus of the lawsuit not that there was interaction) Yet Bill told us a different story. Bill has never humbled himself as evident by his Agent of Satan letter or calling Bill Wood’s pastor. Failed Lawsuit? Use the correct termination, “Voluntarily Dismissed” lawsuit. Do you know why or is it a guess? Don’t ask me? Regarding a score to settle, I put this whole thing to bed when I wrote my 26 page letter to Bill in 2006, it freed me from the Hook Bill had in me when I gave it to the Lord. But seven years later, after seven years of proven freedom, God brought me back into this mess as a Watchman (Ezequiel 3:17-21) to this day I am completely free of the hook but I will proclaim truth.
You state: “And during the time you were working with him my wife and I spent considerable time talking this through with him, multiple times. In the middle of the most intense part of his ministry, in two cities each week, jetting back and forth in the LearJet you and Mr. Johnson piloted, he is brought back to deal with a shocking matter with his brother and a secretary in his office. He is weary and frustrated and frankly not all there. To me he said he heard “naked” and got the fact that they were being lewd, a “show and tell” with no actual interaction. The word “fornication” was never used, however it was represented. He intently examined his brother and got a confession that involved stuff that fell short of the very act. I doubt that Smalley and others witnessed “the very act” either, right? Based on that he fired him from his position as VP and sent him up to the Northwoods to get right with Jesus. Subsequent checks convinced him, along with the deep and sincere attestations of the brother that he loved and had no reason not to trust, that the matter had been resolved. He knew about his brother’s immorality, which meant he knew about stuff short of sex. That is immorality.”
Let’s clear up a couple of things. John Johnson and I never worked together, I knew him from his seminar flights to Seattle as a fellow corporate pilot. He had returned to United Airlines in 1977 and he made a special trip to fly me in the turboprop MU-2 to the Northwood for my interview with Steve the first time I was asked to join staff in May 1977, but declined. The Lear Jet was not delivered till April of 1979 after I had joined staff, the Chief Pilot who they hired after my declining the offer in 1977 was Lin Entz we flew the Lear together.
Gary Smalley caught Bills brother having sex in his brother’s office. Gary stated to me that he was clear regarding the event. This was not the first time for his brother either. The woman was told to go back to work and keep her mouth shut. She was later sent to the Northwood and became part of the 1980 scandal. Alfred that why this is evil and why Bill has continually attacked Tony who initially Bill had directed to investigate the matter in early 1980ish but when it got too close to home Bill demanded he stop. Tony became that Ezequiel watchman and has remained that today.
I don’t seek to judge him
You state: A “curse” is envisioning destruction on a person. Telling someone he is in imminent danger of judgement is a “curse”. We all need to let God do His job. Maybe I have as hard a time as anyone on this score.
That would apply to Prophets, which I am not, but I think the verse in 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 would fit, “For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? 13 God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.” Pretty clear to me. I want to spend eternity in heaven with Bill even his brother. You see Alfred I don’t deserve heaven either, its availability is only through God’s Grace, His unmerited favor.
I am going to cherry pick here . . .
There was no version of the statement you demanded he sign that did not have him assuming responsibility for deliberately sending women into harm’s way. He could not, in good conscience, sign that. Negligence, lack of wisdom, such things he would admit to, not being perfect. But what he heard and believed to be true made him feel that his permission was the right thing to do for women that he certainly felt a personal responsibility for.
Just allow for differences of opinion here. Someone today who was there (not Bill) called one of those two a “master manipulator”. I rather think that we will never land that.
Yes, I do know why. It is so not “voluntary” as to elicit an involuntary and likely inappropriate laugh. Something akin to jumping off a runaway sled before it goes over a series of deeper and deeper cliffs. Is that voluntary? Think about two large legal firms, spending maybe $400,000? Money typically borrowed, or obtained from investors. The plaintiffs have not, nor ever will pay a dime of that. Under what circumstances do such firms allow their carefully protected and guided clients to just . . . Walk away “voluntarily”? Not ONE plaintiff hung on to?
I don’t believe you! Can you enlighten me, anything? That is the first time to hear such a charge. If that happened, I wanna know who said that. Someone other than the perpetrator, correct? There is NO chance that would NOT have made it into the lawsuits that were filed in 1980, right?
Count me among the aggrieved with Tony. HIS charges of Bill “fondling staff women” made it into Veinot’s book and the LA Times. And 10 years post first request, he finally tipped his hand, that it was based on the now completely discredited Cabin Story. AND the exploding soda incident on the LearJet. Irresponsible, and I will avoid saying more.
Unlike your forgiveness and grace, which must be earned by Bill in precise ways. You can see the irony I see.
Larne wrote: “he sent the girls to the Northwoods (an isolated location with communal living) knowing of his brother’s history of immorality as told to him by Gary Smalley, Ken Nair and Ed Martin in 1976”.
Alfred wrote in reply: “There was no version of the statement you demanded he sign that did not have him assuming responsibility for deliberately sending women into harm’s way. He could not, in good conscience, sign that. Negligence, lack of wisdom, such things he would admit to, not being perfect. But what he heard and believed to be true made him feel that his permission was the right thing to do for women that he certainly felt a personal responsibility for.”
Larne reply to Alfred: We never asked him to sign anything, but a man’s word is supposed to be his bond, I thought of video taping the session but based on our experience with him, we wanted open and honest dialog with nothing to hinder. Denver was not a legal process but the true intent of seeing repentance based on Matthew 18:15-17 and we were at verse 16. Alfred the issue is Bill showed his complete disregard for his loyal employees, he needed his brother’s driving force to accomplish the tasks agreed to, publishing, editing, art work, construction ect. The woman ability to assist his brother to accomplish those goals, out weighted their protection or safety. Staff was a means to an end to be used and used up if necessary.
Larne wrote:….Bill has never humbled himself as evident by his Agent of Satan letter or calling Bill Wood’s pastor.
Alfred wroth in reply:”Just allow for differences of opinion here. Someone today who was there (not Bill) called one of those two a “master manipulator”. I rather think that we will never land that.”
Larne’s reply to Alfred: You lost me on that on the only master manipulators I knew at the institute were Bill and his brother. Is that who you meant?
Larne wrote: Failed Lawsuit? Use the correct termination, “Voluntarily Dismissed” lawsuit.
Alfred reply: “Yes, I do know why. It is so not “voluntary” as to elicit an involuntary and likely inappropriate laugh. Something akin to jumping off a runaway sled before it goes over a series of deeper and deeper cliffs. Is that voluntary? Think about two large legal firms, spending maybe $400,000? Money typically borrowed, or obtained from investors. The plaintiffs have not, nor ever will pay a dime of that. Under what circumstances do such firms allow their carefully protected and guided clients to just . . . Walk away “voluntarily”? Not ONE plaintiff hung on to?
larne wrote. Your opinion
Larne wrote: “The woman was told to go back to work and keep her mouth shut.”
Alfred’s reply to Larne: “I don’t believe you! Can you enlighten me, anything? That is the first time to hear such a charge. If that happened, I wanna know who said that. Someone other than the perpetrator, correct? There is NOT chance that would not have made it into the lawsuits that were filed in 1980, right?”
Larne wrote: You don’t have to believe me but its true, there are a lot of things you don’t know and don’t need to know but God knows. I have shared enough stuff privately with you and you refuse to believe anything negative about Bill.
Larne wrote: why Bill has continually attacked Tony
Alfred’s reply to Larne: Count me among the aggrieved with Tony. HIS charges of Bill “fondling staff women” made it into Veinot’s book and the LA Times. And 10 years post first request, he finally tipped his hand, that it was based on the now completely discredited Cabin Story. AND the exploding soda incident on the LearJet. Irresponsible, and I will avoid saying more.
Larne wrote: I guess a matter of opinion that one I will leave with you and Tony
Larne wrote: You see Alfred I don’t deserve heaven either, its availability is only through God’s Grace, His unmerited favor.
Alfred reply: Unlike your forgiveness and grace, which must be earned by Bill in precise ways. You can see the irony I see.
Larne wrote: You are more than welcome to have your own Theological belief, so do the Catholics, Orthodox, Replacement Theology believers ect. I choose what the Bible says that Grace is a free give of God. Romans 5:15, “But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.” I will continue on my Progressive path of Sanctification knowing that it was anchored by the Positional Sanctification of my salvation by the Grace of God which was unmerited. There is no irony there is only truth, Salvation is based on what He did on the cross not what we work for. If that is your and his belief I see the irony of his rejection of all the accusations against him knowing that he can never measure up to obtaining God’s favor. Now I understand and I know how to pray for both of you. Thank you Jesus!
I have in my possession statements that you and the others from the “Denver Committee” urgently insisted that Bill publish, hence “signing them”. You will recall that we were actively trying to help resolve the impasses and deliver a resolution.
No, the individual speaking was not speaking of Bill, but one of the two people you named. Pointing out that not everyone important to IBLP would have shared your perspective on who was causing problems.
I give you an informed opinion, shared by the defense legal teams. Curious what opinion you may have heard from the lawyers on the other side. It is fine to say, “They disagree: This was completely voluntary, and we just happily parted ways”. Not a chance 🙂
That is material, one of those deal busters, if Bill, for example, ignored immorality – fornication – and told the woman part of the sinful act to shut up and go back to work without it being addressed. That seems so far out of the pale of possibility that it defies reason. If you can prove that, you will have something I will take extremely seriously. Like full stop treatment. Your call. If not, I am going to assume it is incorrect and need it not discussed anymore.
My point is being lost. You choose to accept unmerited favor from God but refuse to give the same to others. Like Bill. Making you a tad of a hypocrite, methinks.
Alfred writes: I have in my possession statements that you and the others from the “Denver Committee” urgently insisted that Bill publish, hence “signing them”. You will recall that we were actively trying to help resolve the impasses and deliver a resolution.
Larne replies: Our attempt in Denver was repentance, the discussion points focused on what it would take to get the “Reconcilation” Bill so badly wanted so he could move on and was our goal too but only if Bill was willing to repent. In our above and previous posts, I mentioned several things Bill admitted to his disqualification of ministry and knowing of his brother’s immorality ect. That was want I was referring to and at no time did we demand he sign anything leaving the meeting. In our humble opinion for Bill to get the Reconciliation he so badly wanted he had to first repent and we all told him that. He chose a different path and in the process of the year we worked with him, he was not truthful, fought us at every corner and did not accomplish everything he said he would. We gave him a roadmap, but he chose to go on his own and I believe that probably lead to the lawsuit.
Let me digress a little you are equating “signing them” with “publishing them” they actually mean different things one is legal and one informational. You say they are the same. BTW our process was never a “legal” process it was meant to be an honorable process. You are putting word in my mouth that are not accurate and implying something short of the truth. Bill made his choice of what he was going to do and I believe suffered the consequences of being tied up in a lawsuit for three years which was completely independent of us.
A couple of other comments:
I think you need to find different adjective then “master manipulators” for those two men, both are Godly men, true to their word who are willing to stand up for truth.
Believe what you want about the statement, there are other statements too, but for us, this whole process is about repentance that might lead to some sort of reconciliation, that is still our end goal. Its in Bill hands. We have provided you with more than ample material, but you discount it all, why would this be any different?
Regarding unmerited favor, I in no way could even think of coming close to God unmerited favor of what His Son did on the Cross. As I said I have forgiven Bill whether you believe it or not, that is what I am commanded by Christ to do, I pray for him, his brother and even you. But God as called all of us to proclaim truth as shown in some of the previous posted verses. Bill doesn’t get a free pass nor do you or me, we are all accountable. As I read your posts I ask is there truth to the criticism of me and I search my heart to see if there are any wicked ways in me. I am careful what I say to make it accurate. The first reply above is an example, we didn’t ask Bill to sign anything, but we gave him the recommended steps we felt were required to get the reconciliation he wanted, but he didn’t like what that entailed and rejected it and got a lawsuit instead. What I find interesting is that lawsuit came from the family of an old friend of his.
May I say, that from our side it was anything but “humble”, but an urgent drive to finally settle old scores. It was noteworthy to me that I could not discern much of ANY interest in the “Denver Committee” to address the cases that were current, women and their tales. Right? None were contacted, brought into contact with Bill, to reconcile. Just you 1980s people taking up 1980s things and seeking to use all that extra equity and mandate you had to go back . . . and fix 1980.
It appeared to me that “Repent” – to you – meant “tell us we were right after all, Bill”. Maybe that is not all true, but some of it was.
That was a phrase coined by someone who knew them well, was applied to one of them that manipulated the other.
Of course we are all accountable, to the Lord. That being the case, I am interested to know what this “unmerited favor” you speak of means, based on how you practice it. I can only conclude that, similar to Emily, that “forgave” Bill but kept furiously suing him, and would have taken $500,000 from him and the ministry he founded as vengeance AFTER forgiving him, so you too “forgive” in a religious way, but practically, every “uttermost farthing” must be paid before you can rest. The “Avenger of Blood” to the end?
Yes, estranged from his father. You also recall that perhaps it was some of that residual bitterness drove him to destroy his very public career over Bill in this matter. The ENTIRE MATTER came from families of old friends. The parents of a number of them had gone to Bill in desperation because their young people were struggling or out of control. Several or these testifying of the Lord bringing them a key victory or deliverance because of Bill. Gretchen herself was the 7th child, unlikely to have even existed if it weren’t for Bill’s influence on her parents. Bill invented a law school, Oak Brook College of Law in Fresno, California that produced a fair number of licensed attorneys. One of those helped co-found RG, another that is a practicing lawyer guided the entire process. As mentioned, we were not aware of a single plaintiff having her family’s support in this matter. That was just sickening to us.
Absalom was as family as they come. He was mad at David for several failures of misjudgment that had personally affected him, hurt his full sister. So he went about to settle the score by stealing the hearts of the people, one by one as they passed by his spot in the public square, his “Facebook”. He collected many young, but also old, old folks with their own scores to settle, deep personal friends of David that he had failed at one time or another. One of these was Ahithophel, grandpa of Bathsheba, the woman David committed adultery with and whose husband he had killed. Ahithophel was a great man, noble, honorable, but he never could forgive David for this crime, even though the Lord had. Of him David later wrote:
“Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted,
which did eat of my bread,
hath lifted up his heel against me.” (Psalms 41:9)
You recall that Jesus used this verse to refer to Judas, that close, personal “old friend” that betrayed him.
God does not see as we do. It offends Him deeply when we refuse to let others go, cleanly, fully, from any amount of heinous crimes against us after He has been so gracious with us and our heinous crimes against Him. Yes, it is almost always “family” that is the most bitter. And also family that must learn to “let go and let God” handle those massive matters of judgment that we are so unqualified to handle.
“Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.”
First, regarding Bill learning of his brother’s immorality in 1976: You write: “Based on that he fired him from his position as VP and sent him up to the Northwoods to get right with Jesus. Subsequent checks convinced him, along with the deep and sincere attestations of the brother that he loved and had no reason not to trust, that the matter had been resolved.”
Larne replies: I don’t know who told you that but that is a misleading statement and mostly not true. He was never removed from his executive VP role in IBYC. One year after the confrontation between Bill, Gary, Ken and Ed he was still in that position, I know because he interviewed me at the Northwoods on May 23, 1977 (see previous post regarding my flight with John Johnson). This is probably less then a year after the confrontation. He was living in Crazy Bear, the lodge he built and owned (at that time). He loved the Northwoods. One of the women who was later part of the 1980 scandal was also living there, the day I was there the “chaperones” had left and were gone for a few days. After Bill interview me, he told me that I also had to have his brother’s approval. Thus, John was pulled out of “retirement” and flew me up north. I was told he was the executive VP then and again when I accepted the second offer in late 1978 (starting my employment 1/1/79).
He remained in that position the whole time of my employment. In a quick review of post scandal articles about the scandal in CT, LA Times and other publications his brother was listed as second in command, had operational control, ect. He was never demoted, just sent to a location initially without women, that he loved. But within a year, women started to be sent to the Northwoods to assist him, including Ruth who had just gone through an emotional breakdown. As I have said before not once in my 18 months there did I see a spiritual side of Bill’s brother, he refused to pray when asked, exhibited none of the gifts of the spirit, was controlling and vengeful. (I heard he changed and that he walks with the Lord and I rejoice in that.) You see Alfred you are not the expert you think you are regarding the scandal. Now that can be for one of three reasons, you trust only what Bill says and fail to research the facts, you are not careful with the words you choose, of you are writing to convey a “different” message.
Alfred writes: “May I say, that from our side it was anything but “humble”, but an urgent drive to finally settle old scores. It was noteworthy to me that I could not discern much of ANY interest in the “Denver Committee” to address the cases that were current, women and their tales. Right? None were contacted, brought into contact with Bill, to reconcile. ““Just you 1980s people taking up 1980s things and seeking to use all that extra equity and mandate you had to go back . . . and fix 1980.”
Larne replies: I would be the first one to admit that I was bitter an angry for 26 years (I’ve told you that before, made public posts about it and told Bill that) but in June of 2006 that all ended when I gave it to the Lord in my June 2006, 26-page letter to Bill. That ship sailed a long time ago. I had no more scores to settle, I was done. Seven years later in June 2013 God brought me back and promoted me to Watchmen (Ezequiel 3:17-21). That started a spiritual preparation for Bill’s August 24, 2013 call to reconcile. The rest is history, no score to settle, just truth. We/I were not brought back to fight the ATI victim’s battle but to give an unrepentant man a chance to repent for his failures with us. Even thought our stories showed a similar pattern of behavior that started long before it affect them, but we could only speak for our experience. Yes, in the meeting we showed Bill how his failures of our era continued to the ATI era and affected those victims the same way it had ours. We knew if Bill could see the depth of his damage to the 1980 scandal staff he would be able to also come to grips with his ATI era failure too. But we were wrong, and nothing had changed. Bill wanted reconciliation without repentance.
In you last sentence I can only guess what you are trying to say. Remember, 8/24/13 Bill called me about 1980 reconciliation, just like he did on May 1, 2014 after his resignation, he was talking to RG separately both in the summer of 2013 and the spring of 2014. We were never meant to be the ATI victim’s spokesmen but we shared similar stories. There was no “extra equity” because of RG, Bill initiated the contact because he was under pressure from RG and when he failed to follow through on his agreement with us and he chose to spread lies about us, during a time he told the world he was fasting and praying 1/10/14. That’s what lead to our sharing our stories with RG, again Bill has no one to blame but himself. 2 Timothy 3:1-9
Regarding to your last post and with this I’ll close, the difference between Bill’s story and David’s story is that David repented and did so publically and we have been reading about it for 3000 years. Psalm 32 & 51 , 2 Samuel 12
I will confirm with Bill. If true, all the more proof that Bill considered him recovered of whatever had gone amiss. You know Bill – you know that he may have been negligent, he may have been naive, but he would never send women up to the Northwoods if he believed them to be in danger. There has been lots of research, and there will be more. The most meticulous researcher had to have been Tony, and he definitely got a number of things very wrong. So we keep plugging away as best we can.
From where we sit, you continue to appear to be obsessed with Bill. You have been involved this lawsuit in direct and personal ways. Many references to “Larne” in the plaintiff chats. I suppose that is solely to help Bill repent, right? At what point does it shift from “loving Bill” to “taking vengeance on Bill”?
There was one “lie” that I recall being a grief, that he suggested that y’all were all about money. Money was specifically brought up, as I recall without the details handy, and one of you suggested that a financial settlement should be part of “restitution”. Money was part of the discussion from the get-go, so Bill was not completely out of line, and was not lying. If there were other matters, bring them up.
So well put Larne!
God bless you.
But shall an assailant insist upon cheek turning by the assailed? Was BG the first to petition caesar’s court for redress of grievance? (Shall caesar’s court be open to the accuser but closed to the accused?) Or did BG appeal unto caesar for relief after he was accused?
I’ve been following this story for years now and I just want to say a few things. I was slightly familiar with Gothards teachings around 2007/2008. My church did the basic right before we started going there. And my pastor did a study based on Bill’s book Commands of Christ. On the surface, I thought the teachings were very deep and I did learn a lot and grow my relationships with God and my family. But, some of the members wore skirts and their hair long and I did not agree that a man should tell others how to dress and how to look. I had many problems with Bill’s teachings especially the umbrella of protection. Anyway, when all this business started, I was quick to believe the ladies and condemn Bill. And when Alfred posted on RG, I was furious. I couldn’t believe how you could stick up for such a monster. Alfred, I thought of you as a villian. I’d like to apologize for that. I see that you genuinely seek the truth, I see that you are a loyal friend to Bill and that you work hard for what you believe in. I am shocked at the ethics involved with RG are so lacking. Terribly disturbing. I have no respect for underhanded means and anything dishonest. I’m shocked by those that support RG in light of these sneaky methods. With that said, I do believe that Bill is guilty of many of the accusations, both sexually and breaking labor laws. But, the waters have been muddied and shame on those who told lies and also those who may have manipulated others to participate in a shady attempt at a lawsuit. May truth always reign supreme.
A tear. Thanks for saying that. Not expecting such things. We are all imperfect. Funny how we got to know plaintiffs and support folk (yes, “Lizzie” and “Annette” and others previously annonymous who were now apparent – “Lizzie” apparently visited a hearing several of us attended). Some have deep problems one would pray for, but others were . . . Kind of like us, maybe a lot. Which made the mess all the harder to process.
Did I miss something here? I carefully read Emily’s first response, then Bill’s rebuttal or version of the relationship and the reasons, then I carefully read the rebuttal to Bill. In all fairness, I do not see in the rebuttal to Bill any denial of his reasons for reaching out to her and her mom, all I saw was a some what ramble that she is now “free” and dancing in the rain of grace. It was a completely different tone from the first statement of having or reaching out for courage and the desire to live out of a cage. I honestly do hope and pray that Emily will come to some kind of peace and freedom in her life but these 2 statements do not match and actually do not refute Bill’s version of the events. I honestly have never doubted before a number of these stories but reading both these statements from Emily, I think I can begin to understand why they withdrew the case. Again, I do pray for Emily and all the others involved in the case. I also don’t think Bill as the IBLP investigation stated has acted in an above manner or reproach and has been unwise in his choices and behaviors but these two statements do not match from Emily and do not refute Bill’s version of the story.
I would be highly curious as to what articles have been changed and/or deleted from the Recovering Grace website as mentioned by Moderator above. Is there a Wayback archive that shows them?
-Not a Gothard fan, but also a skeptic of the lawsuit
Well, now, not so sure. I DO know that all of MY comments on Lizzie’s story have evaporated. We found Emily’s posts last year, but for the life of me, cannot find them now. Which makes it good that we grabbed them while available. The statement about history prior to 2014? That may be bogus. Wayback is not very user friendly, let’s make that statement. We are now seeing things prior to 2014. So . . . Consider that “fake news” for now. SOME stuff is gone.
Thanks, sounds like a good topic for its own entry – changed accounts on RG. I’m still a little confused about the “fake news” part though. Was that something you’re changed your mind on or something somebody else claimed?
I “freaked out” when I went to Wayback and noted a complete lack of history prior to 2014. RG started in 2011. Now I am seeing prior history, although finding things in their clutzy interface is way, way too hard. So I am the fake news, I think I misfired.
OK, thanks! Would love to see a side-by-side comparison of RG edits someday.
So would we. Unfortunately we could not imagine that revisionism was part of the game here. There was a veritable bloodbath on the “Lizzie” page as I sought to process through her claims. I made a statement that she should have gone to her parents if she felt uneasy, then left on a 12 hour road trip. Part way down, a very nice adjunct member of the RG team sent an email asking if I needed a friend. I figured out real quick I must be missing something. Lo and behold, I was being savaged from one end to another . . . That I dared try to make anything of “Lizzie’s” troubles her responsibility. I apologized. ALL of that is gone. Small consolation was reading her version of this in discovery in the last year or so . . . Was weird, a time machine back in time, observing their side of things. I to this day am unclear on what made it necessary to zap my almost 1,000 comments . . . Besides spite. Funny thing, I plead with their editorial staff (and I now know who I was interacting with) to not cut me off when they terminated me years later, stating that if they left me there, they could control me . . . But if not, we would have to invent an alternative venue to say things that they found inconvenient. No avail. Out of that, of course, DG was born. None of us wanted to put in the work, families and all.
Is Bill now trying to get back to being the head of IBLP?
I have an answer today that is different than the answer I would have had yesterday, so . . . I think we will defer on that. This is an important time and all that care about IBLP and Bill, as well as the millions of seminar alumni let alone the tens of thousands of ATI students need to pray earnestly for the Lord to speak and bless and direct. No matter how you slice it the Board has had a most difficult task thrust upon them, besides all that Bill has endured. I think we can confidently say that noone on the defense side expected the precipitous end to the suit, despite the fact that things were definitely looking up of late. So it is taking some focused time to regain bearings and find the Lord for next steps.
Well, that sounds like it may be in the works? That would be a huge mistake. Sorry, but I agree with the stated reasons on why the board decided to disband Bill from IBLP and the turn would be a very big mistake. If the ending of this law suit was a moment of grace for Bill, then I think he ought to continue in this by forgiving those that brought it on and finishing off the rest of his life (he’s 83 right) in a spirit of humility, pray and repentance. If people are looking for justice, they did get it when the IBLP board disbarred him from the ministry. That was the right thing to do and they did it. He should not come back. It’s not his ministry, it should be God’s. He should not be concerned about his reputation, he should be concerned about God’s and God’s name which is the 3rd of the Ten commandments as well as the second line of the Lord’s prayer. Christ’s first words from the cross was “Father forgive them, they know not what they do”. That should be Bill’s prayer for others as well. And to try and bring him back or even go after others for defamation I predict will not be successful and will only backfire on Bill. He has this moment of grace, he needs to take it and let go and move on.
Well, what happens to Bill and his ministry is way bigger than how Bill feels about it. There are, again 2.7 million seminar alumni, tens of thousands of ATI students and families, and staff members, like my son. There is and has been a movement to bring back Bill from the very beginning, fueled not by Bill, but others that have been so deeply blessed by him. It matters to THEM. It is kind of like the difference between your Dad and your friend’s Dad. One affects you deeply, your history, your heritage, even your reputation . . . The other, well, you can be very objective about, because it doesn’t really impact you. To discount the earnest needs of others in the first class would be unfair.
And then there is the Lord. The Lord’s name, for better or worse, has been savaged by this scandal. Many heard of Him and His principles and ways from Bill. Many trusted Christ at a seminar, chose to remain in a difficult marriage and keep working on it because of him, had a lot more kids than their friends because of him, avoided lifestyles and sins because of him. Suddenly the “umbrella” protecting them has been ripped away. Satan has had a field day with some. The act of rejecting Bill has, for some, been coupled with dumping Jesus at the same time. We can argue that some of those never knew Him to start, which may be true, but not all. Discouragement, disillusionment is one of the devil’s sharpest and most effective tools. Many feel this damage MUST begin to be corrected. A scenario where Bill situation is left with the understanding that he “got away with it” is unacceptable. “We know he did it, but we are nice and will stop talking about it, as long as he goes away, goes fishing, spends time with his grandkids . . . “. A million times, NO.
Well there are 1.2 Billion Catholics if you want to talk about numbers, what is the point? The so called 2.7 million seminar attendees which I am assuming is including everyone going all the way back to the beginning is rather meaningless. While Bill may have been the big name in the 1970s, he definitely started to fade after the 1980s sex scandal with his brother and he reinvented himself in the ATI program, which doesn’t look too successful right now since they had to consolidate to Texas. There are more bloggers from ex-ATI students complaining about their education and being raised in ATI than anything out there in support of the program (I mean those that were actually educated in it). You had even said yourself that the numbers are down. The handful of loyal followers that want him back are probably small indeed. What did IBLP really plan to do once Bill passes away? What then? Does Bill really think he is going to live forever or till age 120 like he stated in one of if post IBLP talks? He is 83 years of age, how long do you really think he was even going to be able to run IBLP? Setting aside his age which is probably a mute point, Bill should not be back to do the stated reasons by the IBLP board about his behaviors, choices and judgement.
An interesting post. I am not quite sure of the point, Rob. If the intent is to say that people that care about Bill are irrelevant, probably going to disagree. No matter how great or small the numbers, they matter. Yours truly is one of them. There are far more than you suppose, eternity along will tell. Kind of like saying that Paul, who was all alone at the end of his life, testifying that everybody had forsaken him, was irrelevant. He was neither irrelevant to God, nor even man. We are all witnesses to that.
If his age is a reason to disregard him, again would disagree. God does not think like we do. As far as being fit to run a ministry, a large ministry, no one who knows him would doubt that for a moment. I have personally observed him during much of his “Down Time”. 28 books, 2 conferences, and a lawsuit involving 17 plaintiffs . . . Flying various locations to speak as requested. Bill is still Bill.
Job lived 140 years after his catastrophe and loss of everything. No big deal if God is with you
What grandkids? Are you saying Bill has grandkids? I don’t think you meant it that way. Your last paragraph isn’t making any more sense that Emily’s rebuttal to Bill. If people think that Bill was their umbrella of protection then they have really misplaced their faith and trust and they should have their faith and trust in God and not Bill. If people followed Bill to stay in difficult marriages and have more kids, then they should have done so because of God and not Bill.
Rob, methinks we are nitpicking. Yes, he has grandkids . . . Like my children, and many more families like mine. No, he doesn’t have grandkids because he gave his life to serve others. He would die trying to fish, because he is built for spending about every minute of every day pursing eternal matters. So there is the point. That sentence is close to a death sentence, almost abusive.
Umbrellas of protection are real. They have always been real. Those that ignore them do so to their own peril.
“When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils. “
I totally fail to see how Luke 11:21-22 supports the “umbrella of protection”. The whole context in that part of Luke is about demon possession and exorcism and Jesus was responding to the accusation that He was casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub. There is no mention in Luke 11: 14-26 about umbrellas of protection. Jesus referred to the house being empty is not talking about an external “umbrella of protection” but emptiness due to a lack of putting God in the house which would have prevented the demons from coming back. The context and reference here is internal NOT an external umbrella of protection. Jesus does not mention anything external missing but an empty house (internal). Of course your ideas are from Bill and this is a great example of how scripture verses taken out of context were misused to support his ideas and teaching.
I am bewildered that you do not see the point! IF He was referring in part to demons, their structures of influence and control, then that “protection” is clearly spiritual, not physical. Spiritual beings protecting those under their spiritual authority. We are to go and wrestle with them, spiritually, to wrest things and people out from under their umbrella. Both the protection and the wrestling, the fights, are very real, a realm we all participate in, our own superhero battles if you will:
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
That brings us right up to the exact role that those of us with authority have over those under our authority. It is not our muscles or guns that protect as much as our spiritual authority. See, the devil wanted so badly to mess with Job’s kids, but was prohibited from doing so, because God, honoring Job, kept him away. I don’t care how you slice it, a godly father and mother “protect” those under their authority. Those that are themselves out from under God’s authority see the devil having pretty easy access to their “house”, darting in and out, stealing stuff.
“Then Satan answered the Lord, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.”
When God – or Satan, two versions of the same account – wanted to spank/harm the people, what was done? First step was to get through David, their “umbrella”, first. Read all about it in 1 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21.
We can move futher discussions about this over to the “Umbrella” post. But it remains that a strong spiritual leader “protects” those under his authority for one reason or another. If you doubt your spiritual leader, you start to become susceptible to the influences of evil people and evil spirits, which you previously would have rejected. There is some level at which you can see my point.
Is it your view that Bill is a prominant spiritual authority over all seminar attendees and ATI families leaving all such at risk with Bill out of authority at IBLP? To press Rob’s question: what was the plan when Bill died? This is a very cultish view.
But Paul, who says: follow Jesus, not Peter or Paul, expresses delight that he did not baptize many in a certain town, to prevent their assuming HE was their rightful leader. (Don’t refute this with “follow me as I follow Jesus” which makes him an example, not authority. And he surely never said or implied: follow me to stay protected for I am your umbrella.)
Jesus is the one who overcomes the demons. Not Bill. Jesus is the strongman. Not Bill. Not any pastor. Not any father. Jesus. Else, as Bill teaches, every failing in the authority brings hell fire dripping down on the innocent. Jesus is the only umbrella of protection any of us need OR CAN TRUST!
If Gothard is the ultimate umbrella in IBLP world, then his diagrams were intentionally deceptive because he hides that. Of course he believed it, else he would never have come between any child and his or her father as he often did for the good of the ministry, when dads did not want their children working for him, etc. Maybe he just told the dads that they were in charge because they had the money! (Written with tongue in cheek.)
Bill is no more or less a spiritual authority than Paul or Martin Luther or the Wesleys or Moody or Billy Graham. Those “umbrellas” continue to support and protect those that learned to trust them. When one of your “fathers” takes a fall, it deeply affects you. Satan gets to play to an advantage for a while.
Unless our respect for Paul is “cultish”, no. And be careful how you respond. Paul was an apostle, but he was still a man. Even Peter, the great Peter, had a point of confusion where he misfired badly, and in public.
OK, then please explain this:
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
WHO wrestles? We do, you, me . . . the strong man, fathers, Bill. With WHOM do we wrestle? I trust you are clear that this refers to demons of the highest order and power. So, you cannot “spiritualize” this one, i.e. take it out of the practical realm. Actually, I should not say “you can’t” because people do all kinds of amazing things to Scripture to get out of troubling binds . . . but I suspect you can see the point.
If you felt that in your time in ATI, we did not. Quite the opposite. Maybe it was a “West Coast Thing”, but we men felt perfect freedom to adapt and adjust the “edicts from on high” to match our family’s needs. We never felt that ATI took away our sovereignly granted authority in our own family.
Rob, I disagree with your claim that BG should not return to IBLP. Though of course neither my opinion nor yours will make any practical difference. I would like to see BG back at the helm of IBLP if only to see what a post-RG IBLP looks like. Color me optimistic, but I think if you can weather a crisis like that lawsuit, a lot of good stuff might happen on the other side. You spoke of moving on. But moving on to what? BG leading IBLP is the version of moving on that I would like to see.
But I agree with you that a defamation lawsuit (whether just or not) would appear vindictive now.
First of all, the withdrawal of this suit didn’t clear Bill’s name or even the accusations against him. He is no more declared innocent than guilty. Likewise, the IBLP board DID disband him or publicly stated that he could no longer be in ministry there due to their own internal investigation by G II which was over the allegations of his behaviors with surrounding himself with pretty young women and his interactions with them. The withdrawal of the suit does not dismiss those findings even though most people in support of the suit considered publicly that those findings were a brush over. Therefore, I stand by my opinion that Bill Gothard should not be back at the helm of IBLP. You probably have not paid attention to the news concerning different scandals of improper relationships with big name evangelical leader being moved around or allowed to minister with improper relationships with younger women, or the Dr Nassar situation with the USA gymnastics team. And even the past Catholic Church scandals with priest being moved around after complaints of improper or deviant behaviors. Bill’s name is not cleared in this at all and to put someone back with access to young women would be a HUGE mistake by IBLP. Bill said on his own web site that his new meditation methods, he hasn’t had any “sensuous thoughts”. Correction please, he probably hasn’t had any “sensuous thoughts” because he is no longer surrounding himself with pretty young women and has since focused on men’s meditation groups. IBLP cannot risk second chances with Bill at it’s helm. Yes, that is just my opinion and it doesn’t really mean anything at this time. I also think he age works against him as well.
And we spin around and around.
NO resolution would have declared him innocent or guilty, merely “negligent”. The point being forgotten is that not even that accusation could be demonstrated, or the plaintiffs’ case would not have collapsed. What’s more, plaintiffs have been proven to have been lying in their pleadings. We have provided some examples of this in our initial debrief.
If Bill has not done these things he is accused of, then there is no reason to keep him out. You seem to suspect that their internal investigation was incomplete, and now we agree. We will have to let that go until next steps are taken. But if King David was brought back after committing adultery and killing a man, why are you so adamant that Bill is far worse? He hasn’t done what David did, in fact, as far as we know he hasn’t done anything amiss. Whatever the Board found, it is time to let him deal with it.
Just slide a comment in here. 17 plaintiffs in a frivolous lawsuit have wasted maybe $500,000? That is a guess, have not seen numbers. And just walk away? No, those who had to pay the $500,000 are rather bothered by all of that. I suspect you can understand that.
King David never left being King. After his confession to Nathan the prophet, it was never the same for him afterwards. He had Ammon rape his half sister Tamar, Absalom then kills Ammon and then nearly causes a civil war and in the final years, King David ended up bed ridden and shivering in bed to boot. Not really a happy ending. For the sake of the earlier promises made by God and King David’s repentance did he stay king.
Very true, never stopped being king. By God’s decree, which included sliding Solomon into the lineage of Jesus. This was no oversight, no fluke. And, yes, he got to suffer, kind of like Bill has suffered, with his own Absaloms stealing the hearts of the people and mounting a coup. But the coup was not God’s idea, and those that participated in it got destroyed. Again, explain in what way Bill is worse than David? And please don’t say, “David repented” . . . Because we know David committed adultery and murder, and by God’s grace he did repent. I am still trying to grasp what Bill is to repent of. The charges in the lawsuit were exaggerations and lies. Didn’t do that. Those that thought he did pushed him out. Even IBLP’s quick internal probe says that, unlike David, Bill committed no crimes. Now we know that there was not enough substance in the tales told by these 17 plaintiffs to carry through to a jury, even on the watered down civil claim of “negligence”.
Most of the kings didn’t stop being kings until they died, including bad ones. Saul did a lot of great things, but his lineage wasn’t allowed to continue in that role. This is an odd discussion, talking as though Bill is such a king. If he is, who is his Solomon?
Bill is not king, but a servant of the Lord. David was also His servant, elevated to be king. When Saul messed up, he was killed by the Lord, overtly. David was allowed to continue, and those that opposed him where defeated. As to Solomon, that is a great question. Bill was never much on a succession. He said on several occasions that this was his personal life testimony, and he expected it to cease with him. Maybe the Lord has other ideas, stuff being sorted out as we speak.
If Bill doesn’t know what sins he has committed, then God help him. It looks to be more than just lack of “Bible meditation” which he stated on his current web site. While you are trying to make some comparison here to King David and that Bill didn’t commit adultery or murder like King David doesn’t mean that he is sinless and from the looks of the failed reconciliation attempts with Larne and the rest in Denver, there looks to be a number of sins such as pride, dishonesty etc.as well as the fact that his own behaviors have not been above reproach by surrounding himself with pretty young girls that he couldn’t seem to avoid touching. The current IBLP board did state that his own behaviors were not above reproach and gave appearances of sin. Me thinks that the Billy Graham model of never being alone with the opposite sex that is not family should have been his own personal model. Your own defenses using Shepard of the Hills and other examples point the finger that Bill’s behaviors didn’t even follow his own “courtship” teachings.
You are taking a lot of accusations and accepting them as fact. Give us credit for pursing this with Bill and anyone else that would talk to us. Driving blind here with the response, so not sure what prompted “Bill doesn’t know what sins he has committed”. If you are suggesting that he is at fault for not admitting the many accusations against him, well, that is kind of the point, if he didn’t do it.
“Failed reconciliation attempts” include situations – like Denver – where he was pressed, again, to assume responsibility for things he never did. We walked that with him and, despite the fact that we wanted to see this all landed, could not disagree with him. We don’t lie, even to make some major trouble go away.
And the reference to “pretty girls that he couldn’t seem to avoid touching” again implies that you know he did what he was accused of. He didn’t do it! 17 plaintiffs alleged a great deal of stuff, none of which had enough feet for skillful personal injury law firms to pull through over the finish line.
“Shepherd of the Hills” has nothing to do with courtship! The young girl in the tale was a motherless child – Dad a gangbanger – that he cared for like a daughter.
Your confidence in Bill is commendable and you are free to make him as influential as you like in your life. But as Alfred has indicated, those with such personal affection lack objectivity. If you do not see how Bill’s restoration at IBLP would confirm all the worst observations of “Christian” organizations–leaders in it for themselves; leaders such as Swaggart, Gothard, numerous pastors, etc., all avoid real consequences; “above reproach” is a joke!– then you need to ask some objective people. Also ask yourself if Bill would restore everyone he has ever dismissed for taking too much interest in the opposite sex.
Read to any good woman over age 50 Bill’s letters confessing to stroking hair, playing footsie, insensitivity, etc., which he published around the time of his dismissal and ask that woman if such a man should be put back over the education and spiritual formation of hundreds of young people. Take of poll of 10 such women who know nothing else of IBLP/ATI. Bill Cosby should not be on TV. Jimmy Swaggart should not be preaching. Bill Gothard should not be in charge of any ministry to youth. He is not above reproach. If you care about the reputation of IBLP/ATI or the seminars, you should consider such concerns before preferring his reinstatement.
Rob, you are right. I have not followed whatever sex scandals have dominated current events. So never consult me for sex-scandal public relations advice.
Nor do I have access to the findings of the DG internal investigation (that’s why they call it internal). But apart from shrewd public relations, I earnestly hope there’s nothing in there which disqualifies BG from a return to IBLP. At the moment we can only be certain that seventeen plaintiffs and their attorneys despaired of a successful sex harassment lawsuit.
As to the board expulsion of BG, we don’t know whether they were motivated by moral outrage, or sound stewardship of IBLP assets, or what.
As to the IBLP board taking a second chance on BG, the second chance was taken back when you and I were youngsters in the early 1980s. After that second chance, IBLP thrived for the next couple of decades through the 1980s and 1990s. Whether a third chance might cost them their remaining ministry and material assets, they must decide for themselves.
They haven’t consulted us yet. That would be vain, as our advice would probably be contradictory and cancel itself out.
The boards of IBYC and IBLP were different between 1980 and now. Likewise in 1980, Bill had big name pastors etc. come in to defend Bill against his “rebellious” staff. If 1980 scandal happen today, Bill would never have been back. The times that tolerated the head of the organization ignoring sexual improprieties under their noses are no more. With the Dr. Nassar case out of Michigan State with the US Olympic gymnastics team, there have been a lot of heads rolling, the whole US coaching staff and organization has turned over due to ignoring complaints on him. The Joe Paternal situation with Penn State when complaints about that assistant coach were ignored ruined his otherwise stellar career. This is also true with a number of the scandals going about with different big name evangelicals. They guys are losing book deals and stepping aside if they have ignored complaints about sexual improprieties by their staff. In Boston, Cardinal Bernard Shaw had to resign even though the majority of the sex abusing priests happen before he took over the Boston diocese. There have been other Bishops the same. So the only good that can be seen from the 1980 scandal is that it won’t be repeated again and those in charge that ignore complaints of sexual immorality that happen under their noses will be gone and held responsible.
No sexual improprieties were ever tolerated or ignored! What we can say is that hindsight has a lot of clarity, allowing us to look very wise as we speak of all that happened in the past. And don’t kid yourself. People of the world have not suddenly grown much more righteous. The entire Harvey Weinstein matter makes me ill, not primarily because of what he did because, frankly, EVERYBODY knew he was doing it. I am nauseated because of the women that aided and abetted it and played the game. So many knew, Rob, you know they knew. It was the joke of Hollywood. They could have done something about it on any day prior to this scandal. Big, powerful women that, frankly, owed him, and so covered for him. And I am not the first to make note of this hypocrisy.
Coming from this most serious, godly, “conservative” ministry the suggestion that his brother would be engaging in anything remotely resembling what was actually happening was unfathomable. On the first round an investigation was opened. As part of it one of the first women to come forward actually completely recanted her initial testimony. As I said, it is so easy to judge after the fact. What happened was a tragedy. It was not due to Bill’s indifference let alone tacit approval, somehow. Nobody ever claimed that.
Yes, obviously. Whatever sex scandals are uncovered now, no credit goes to a sudden moral awakening in our culture. We are not yet enjoying the Third Great Awakening!
I have not followed any Catholic sex scandals, but that must have been pretty bad. I am baffled why a cardinal would resign over sins which happened before his term in office. But maybe it makes sense to people closer to the problem.
Cardinal Bernard Shaw inherited a big problem but he also shifted priests around and wrote a letter of praise when one of the biggest offenders retired which when made public did him in.
correction, it was Cardinal Bernard Law not Shaw. My error
Hollywood has such a long history of abuse of women and children that goes back to the beginning of Hollywood. That also includes many of the forced abortions on women during the “golden years”. Many of the child stars like Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland were also drugged up in order to work all day long. Many of the big name child stars were sexually abused as well, (I’m thinking of the big names during the 80’s). While this isn’t an excuse for any of this, it is equally sickening that so many accepted this in order to become stars. There wasn’t enough self-respect or dignity or morality to say no and walk off. There is no fame that is worth it. This also includes those parents that pushed their children to become big name stars. Trust me, I do not know of any Hollywood Star that I like, admire or follow. The whole thing is corrupted.
Back to the 1980 scandal. I went to a church then that followed it very closely and it was discussed a lot in the cell group I was in. I remember very clearly that it was reported back then that Bill was confronted about Steve in 1976 and it was ignored. Now, I did not get this from RG, that info was reported on when all of this blew open and public. That supports what Larne who was on staff during those days has stated. I do not doubt that this was true and Bill did in the pastor one seminars go on stage and ask for forgiveness. I know this because the elders and deacons of this church attended those one day pastor seminars. I have no doubt that this is true.
We agree that Hollywood and the pursuit of fame is fraught with dangers. I heard a lot of explanations about the meaning behind the hit song, “Hotel California”. From what I read, the Eagles were referring to that Hollywood, “California” culture, that takes aspiring singers and actors and actresses in, and invariably crushes their soul. “You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave”. The Disney princesses and all. Satan’s “pound of flesh, closest to the heart”.
Bill has always acknowledged that he mishandled his brother. He was far too believing of him. It was the reason he resigned. But, it is a chasm further to insist that he knew what what likely to happen, didn’t care, sent the women up to the Northwoods anyway.
And “Gothard girls” were the joke of IBLP-ywood. For years.
I see what you are trying to do there. 🙂 Tell me, honestly, sir: Were YOU ever aware of Bill crossing any moral lines with any girls from your first or even second hand experience? Not talking about “sitting counseling with a girl all alone in the big blue car parked at the SC while all manner of staff strolled by on both sides.”
Another beautifully written letter from Bill. His style has not changed in 40 plus years. Reveal just enough personal secrets about an acquiser to provide suspicion. Deflect criticism by holding some secret knowledge or revealing information that was private and confidential in the first place. Then claim love and a commitment to serve while speaking ill of someone if not outright providing a “false report” as he use to call it. This way Bill can take the moral high road while still making the other party look dirty. Add to this the value of a volunteer “moderator” who is willing to defend, deflect, and debate the details of truth so Bill can continue us work of “mediating on scripture” and not be dirtied with the details. Its a brilliant strategy if successful, and Bill has been doing it successfully for a long time.
Well, Dan, if you have details to add, do so. Frankly I am baffled at how Bill could have more properly answered. Have a look at the deleted Emily’s posts on Recovering Grace, and that of her Mom. See if that lines up with what Bill said. Please report back your findings, if you don’t mind. I can’t find a problem, and I doubt you can too, other than that shock of Bill actually speaking up to defend himself.
Defend himself? He use to tell us that we should give this right up and let God do it for us. This was the central theme of the Pineapple Story – give God our rights. Maybe I misunderstood the book because I was always in the midst of selling thousands of them at seminars. Come to think of it, I remember speaking with the missionary who is the subject of the story. I bet he misunderstood the theme of the book too.
Do you agree with what Bill and Otto Koning taught? If so, how would you apply it in this situation, assuming yourself to be innocent?
Just butting in here, but today I read this page and I read the Emily RG posts you linked to. I see no inconsistency in the two versions of the story. Emily’s mom’s letter was written long before she knew about hand holding and footsie. I have not read Emily’s affidavit from the defunct lawsuit, but to compare Bill’s version of their story with Emily’s, one is consistent with the self affirming “supportive” role of a groomer and one is consistent with one being groomed who was willing to call out the inappropriate conduct.
Alfred, as I’ve said for years, you need some lessons in logic and evidence. A fact that does not refute an allegation does not refute the allegation. Harassers are always surprised by accusations of those they have shown beneficence to. They believe they have purchased the familiarity they presume. But just because you do good to someone, doe not mean you can’t or haven’t taken advantage of them or worse. Both stories stand together.
Forgive me, but as a non-trivial lawyer: WHAT exactly is “grooming”? It is preparation for a crime. In the absence of a crime, CAN it legally be called “grooming”? I think this to be a slur. One of the plaintiffs called her account “Sacred Grooming”. This being the woman who declared that the worst thing that Bill ever did to her, physically, was “almost kissed me once”. Again . . . grooming for ALMOST kissing her once?!
Emily’s story has grown and expanded the longer she has been in this. Because I am forgetting for the moment what is part of the public record I will leave it there. But it is not inconsistent with “sexual abuse hysteria” either. Don, just for a moment try to separate your prejudices from this situation. Consider what she said, what her Mom said – and she acknowledged that she and her Mom were the closest of confidantes – and try to mesh it with her later allegations. It just doesn’t.