# Julie Roys ethics



## Leslie (Mar 1, 2021)

Julie Roys is a Christian investigative reporter who has called out some big names, and she has suffered for it. She first came to my attention with James MacDonald, then with Ravi Zacharias, and now John McArthur plus one of his side-kicks is in her cross-hairs. She also reports morally neutral Christian news and also good stuff, like someone wronged freely forgiving. She documents, she tries to contact both sides of disputes. I have mixed feelings about what she does. Would anyone like to offer an opinion? If what she does is not right, I will stop following her.


----------



## Andrew35 (Mar 1, 2021)

Also conflicted.

The work they do is necessary and helpful.

But it seems to extract a price from them personally they may not recognize. So many of these types of ministry become very cynical and, occasionally, too quick to jump on any negative report because they read past experiences into the present situation. 

"When all you have is a hammer..."

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Pergamum (Mar 1, 2021)

Discernment bloggers were lambasted for their treatment of Ravi and Tom Chantry, too, before the whole truth was finally revealed. In those cases Julie Roys was shown to be on the right side. But call out a rich reformed preacher who lives in a mansion and employs his family members with lucrative deals, and the reformed circle their wagons against her. But something is fishy when you become a millionaire from the gospel. My father told me, "Never trust a rich preacher" and I still agree with him.

Reactions: Like 7


----------



## Andrew35 (Mar 1, 2021)

Pergamum said:


> Discernment bloggers were lambasted for their treatment of Ravi and Tom Chantry, too, before the whole truth was finally revealed. In those cases Julie Roys was shown to be on the right side. But call out a rich reformed preacher who lives in a mansion and employs his family members with lucrative deals, and the reformed circle their wagons against her. But something is fishy when you become a millionaire from the gospel. My father told me, "Never trust a rich preacher" and I still agree with him.


I've heard it said somewhere that there seems to be a sort of understanding in our society that the more personally rewarding and "making a difference" the job, the more financial sacrifice it should require.

Hence corporate law pays obscenely well, and ministry and education... not so much.

It might not be fair, but there's probably no way of fixing it that wouldn't make society on the whole worse.


----------



## dhh712 (Mar 1, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> Also conflicted.
> 
> The work they do is necessary and helpful.
> 
> ...



I would worry about this. It is good to have church leaders' lives examined and I do believe that due to their position, their lives perhaps should be--and especially in light of how Satan has made such great inroads into many Church leaders' lives--more transparent to the public. 

What also concerns me and what was brought to my mind is that this way however is not what Jesus taught when we have an issue with a brother or sister in Christ. We are to address them personally first, then bring a couple other people with us and then if they still do not listen to us to bring it before the church. It appears to me that she is skipping the first two steps. Yet, how are those supposed to be done? I suppose if she is discovering such things about these people then maybe there is a way, but maybe not? 

It's definitely a tough issue. It's definitely needed. The corruption of church leaders is a massive problem, a word is not in existence to convey how great it is. It horribly disfigures the testimony of the church to the point where I can really understand why a Christian would not want to bother to attend church and have that knee-jerk reaction that "It's just me and my Bible". But does the end justify the means? I don't know that my knowledge of God's word is adequate to make a decisive judgment.


----------



## Smeagol (Mar 1, 2021)

I’m thankful for the truths she HAS revealed in some cases. However, it almost seems like a necessary evil due to ecclesiastical bodies failing to perform church discipline beyond writing public statements or either very influential speakers failing to submit to and be under the oversight of a faithful congregation. That said, in my opinion the ends do not justify her means, which I believe to be outside of the prescription of Christ for handling private or public sins of visible brothers/sisters in Christ. This detracts from and undermines the responsibilities/duties of the ordained office of the under-shepherd (sessions, presbyteries, and assemblies). Further, I believe these blogs feed our proneness (mine included) to examine other’s failures more than our own (self-examination), which will often breed pride and contempt for our neighbors.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 4


----------



## deleteduser99 (Mar 1, 2021)

This is in some part why a Presbyterianism system exists with a succession of higher courts as in Acts 15. Men qualified and ordained to watch the sheep will have taken vows to do this kind of work. And when a man in leadership in a congregation steps out of line, he knows he must answer to other men qualified and ordained outside his congregation and circle of influence, and they will have a say in what must be done. And if the elders or the presbytery have not grieved the Spirit, they may expect to be guided in a course of action that will be good for the man in question and for the congregation. Which, sadly, doesn't always happen.

But Presbyterianism aside and addressing eldership work across the board, I don't know this lady, but I have some initial reservations about a Christian investigative journalist. From what you describe @Leslie it seems she is taking on something that would fall under the responsibility of elders. To gather info on a controversy and publish it, particularly when it comes to someone's flaws, crosses into a shepherd's precinct. The investigation, admonition, and if need be the public censure, belongs to those authorized to do it. In some cases outside voices, or any broadcasting of the issues publicly, can get in the way of the church dealing with such things, which I have seen happen. I don't doubt the lady's love for the church and truth, but the zeal to investigate can't be mistaken for a shepherding gift that's necessary to deal with such things. On top of that, she is ultimately an outsider to the events, so there's a real potential limit to what she can know, and what conclusions you can draw, and cannot ultimately be called Christ's oversight of the flock.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## ChristianLibertarian (Mar 1, 2021)

Leslie said:


> Julie Roys is a Christian investigative reporter who has called out some big names, and she has suffered for it. She first came to my attention with James MacDonald, then with Ravi Zacharias, and now John McArthur plus one of his side-kicks is in her cross-hairs. She also reports morally neutral Christian news and also good stuff, like someone wronged freely forgiving. She documents, she tries to contact both sides of disputes. I have mixed feelings about what she does. Would anyone like to offer an opinion? If what she does is not right, I will stop following her.


"Investigative journalism" is nothing more than scandal journalism. It could also be called advocacy journalism because the author almost always has an agenda he or she is pushing, for which scandal furthers their broader argument. I am not opposed to it across the board but it's important to note that these journalists aren't usually on the up and up regarding their intentions. 

Most of what I'm seeing from Roys is stuff elders should be taking care of. In the case of MacArthur, she's pushing a wicked agenda that wealth is evil and the fact that someone is wealthy is worthy of attack. That's rank cultural Marxism, to say nothing of a violation of the 9th and 10th commandments. It is sensational though and it hits on a massive cultural problem we have, the jealousy of people who have wealth. The church really needs to preach against this wickedness.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 2


----------



## Jonathco (Mar 1, 2021)

RPEphesian said:


> But Presbyterianism aside and addressing eldership work across the board, I don't know this lady, but I have some initial reservations about a Christian investigative journalist. From what you describe @Leslie it seems she is taking on something that would fall under the responsibility of elders. To gather info on a controversy and publish it, particularly when it comes to someone's flaws, crosses into a shepherd's precinct. The investigation, admonition, and if need be the public censure, belongs to those authorized to do it. In some cases outside voices, or any broadcasting of the issues publicly, can get in the way of the church dealing with such things, which I have seen happen. I don't doubt the lady's love for the church and truth, but the zeal to investigate can't be mistaken for a shepherding gift that's necessary to deal with such things. On top of that, she is ultimately an outsider to the events, so there's a real potential limit to what she can know, and what conclusions you can draw, and cannot ultimately be called Christ's oversight of the flock.


Well said, Jake. Discernment bloggers like Julie Roys, Pulpit & Pen, etc... have stepped outside God's design for the church, by assuming a role that is (1) outside that of eldership, and (2) outside of their local church (if Baptist) or outside of their Presbytery/Synod (if Presbyterian).

One could argue that since RZM was a para-church organization and therefore not under the oversight of church elders, discernment bloggers are not overstepping church authority - a valid argument, perhaps. However, the larger discussion should be that para-church organizations like RZM should not exist. I strongly question ministries that exist without valid oversight from the church. 

I am not trying to ridicule Roys unnecessarily; however, God's design for the local church is elders (in plurality), not discernment bloggers. Independent journalists, celebrity ministers, and pastors without co-elders all have something in common: they lack accountability and oversight from the local church.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## retroGRAD3 (Mar 1, 2021)

Pergamum said:


> My father told me, "Never trust a rich preacher" and I still agree with him.


There needs to be nuance here. I agree this can be true, but it does not hold up as a blanket statement especially when considering some of the figures in the Bible that were both faithful and rich. The love of money is a sin, not being rich.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

What place is there for independent news that reports on controversies? There was consternation if not attempts to silence independent reporting by Presbyterians over 19th century controversies in the church, and similarly there was independent reporting last century as the church descended into liberalism. In not granting Ms. Roys a place, how do you avoid the consistency of decrying all independent reporting? Recall the most recent defense of such when there were attempts to silence Frank J. Smith's Presbyterian News service when he was reporting on the PCA (when still part of the PCA; he's RPCNA now).

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## RamistThomist (Mar 1, 2021)

Jonathco said:


> One could argue that since RZM was a para-church organization and therefore not under the oversight of church elders, discernment bloggers are not overstepping church authority - a valid argument, perhaps. However, the larger discussion should be that para-church organizations like RZM should not exist. I strongly question ministries that exist without valid oversight from the church.



Agreed. Parachurch ministries should only function under the church. In my opinion, those who don't are fair game. And Roys did a great job in taking down Vision Forum.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Edward (Mar 1, 2021)

RPEphesian said:


> it seems she is taking on something that would fall under the responsibility of elders.


Except it isn't that hard to find cases where elders have abdicated their responsibilities at the church, presbytery (Louisiana Presbytery PCA) (Pacific Northwest PCA) and even the General Assembly level (St. Louis PCA)


----------



## Edward (Mar 1, 2021)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Recall the most recent defense of such when there were attempts to silence Frank J. Smith's Presbyterian News service when he was reporting on the PCA


There were some attacks on the Aquila Report, as well.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Jonathco (Mar 1, 2021)

NaphtaliPress said:


> What place is there for independent news that reports on controversies? There was consternation if not attempts to silence independent reporting by Presbyterians over 19th century controversies in the church, and similarly there was independent reporting last century as the church descended into liberalism. In not granting Ms. Roys a place, how do you avoid the consistency of decrying all independent reporting? Recall the most recent defense of such when there were attempts to silence Frank J. Smith's Presbyterian News service when he was reporting on the PCA (when still part of the PCA; he's RPCNA now).


That's a good question, Chris. I am not familiar with the specifics of the PCA example you mentioned, as I typically run in Baptist circles, but you raise a valid point. One need go no further than ARBCA to see the problems that can arise when larger bodies do not allow accountability, and instead hide the truth for years. 

I guess my question is this: do the historical examples we see with the PCA and ARBCA warrant Roys and others to do investigative, independent reporting from outside the church and post it for the unbeleiving world to gawk at, or... does this show the need for the church to increase it's accountability, oversight, discipline, and transparency among the body, so as not to require muck-rake journalism to expose long-hidden abuse within the church? 
_
*I am not implying Roys is a muck-rake journalist; however, discernment blogging as a whole is eroding into that._

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

Jonathco said:


> That's a good question, Chris. I am not familiar with the specifics of the PCA example you mentioned, as I typically run in Baptist circles, but you raise a valid point. One need go no further than ARBCA to see the problems that can arise when larger bodies do not allow accountability, and instead hide the truth for years.
> 
> I guess my question is this: do the historical examples we see with the PCA and ARBCA warrant Roys and others to do investigative, independent reporting from outside the church and post it for the unbeleiving world to gawk at, or... does this show the need for the church to increase it's accountability, oversight, discipline, and transparency among the body, so as not to require muck-rake journalism to expose long-hidden abuse within the church?
> 
> _*I am not implying Roys is a muck-rake journalist; however, discernment blogging as a whole is eroding into that._


Add the question, who gets to judge the muckraker and legitimate reporting (and we're basically talking journals too; you had independent pro and con reports on GAs in various journals in the 19th century)?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Smeagol (Mar 1, 2021)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Add the question, who gets to judge the muckraker and legitimate reporting (and we're basically talking journals too; you had independent pro and con reports on GAs in various journals in the 19th century)?


Calling out public unaddressed sin, heresy, or dangerous doctrine is 1 thing. Targeting a minister because he is wealthy and has hired family members is quite another that imputes motives and grossly violates the 9th, in my opinion. Show me proof of sin, have witnesses, or something. The other example being raising questions about a minister training ministers in Africa who is undergoing heart treatment.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Taylor (Mar 1, 2021)

I think there are two principles to keep in mind here, each one balancing the abuse of the other:

1) Investigative reporting is not _per se_ a bad thing.
2) There is a difference between exposing sin and being a busybody.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 1


----------



## Leslie (Mar 1, 2021)

Granted that discipline should come from within the church, if and when it does not, is it better for investigative journalists to do their thing, or should church corruption be allowed to continue? 

Exposure of one pastor may motivate another to clean up his act, to avoid embarrassment; on the other hand, it helps unbelievers scoff at the church.
Silence ensures that when the corruption does become public, it's a far, far bigger deal, with many more vulnerable people being hurt in the meantime.

I had some acquaintance with the MacDonald problem long before it broke open. It only became the big deal that it finally was because the evangelical community in the greater Chicago area kept shutting up Julie Roys.


----------



## Smeagol (Mar 1, 2021)

Taylor said:


> I think there are two principals to keep in mind here, each one balancing the abuse of the other:
> 
> 1) Investigative reporting is not _per se_ a bad thing.
> 2) There is a difference between exposing sin and being a busybody.


Exactly and there is a difference in offering critique on ones word’s and actions, and presbytery decisions vs. the sin of imputing motives.


----------



## Edward (Mar 1, 2021)

Jonathco said:


> do the historical examples we see with the PCA and ARBCA warrant Roys and others to do investigative, independent reporting from outside the church and post it for the unbeleiving world to gawk at, or... does this show the need for the church to increase it's accountability, oversight, discipline, and transparency among the body,


I would say "and" instead of "or" there. There are too many cases of problematic persons being quietly shifted to another geographic area as part of a cover up for any of us to pretend that the system actually functions as advertised. 

That being said, North Texas Presbytery of the PCA seems to have a pretty good batting average when it comes to discipline.


----------



## mvdm (Mar 1, 2021)

She has done some good work, but as of late, she seems to be losing objectivity and becoming a partisan player in some disputes. Her targeting of MacArthur looks unfair and obsessive. She complains of being momentarily doxed by Phil Johnson, but overlooks Aimee Byrd's doxing of hundreds of innocent folks and promotes Byrd's faux victim narrative.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

Grant said:


> Calling out public unaddressed sin, or heresy, dangerous doctrines is 1 thing. Targeting a minister because he is wealthy and has hired family members is quite another that imputes motives and grossly violates the 9th, in my opinion. Show me proof of sin, have witnesses, or something. The other example being raising questions about a minister training ministers in Africa who is undergoing heart treatment.





Taylor said:


> I think there are two principals to keep in mind here, each one balancing the abuse of the other:
> 
> 1) Investigative reporting is not _per se_ a bad thing.
> 2) There is a difference between exposing sin and being a busybody.


The only guard I see is for the reporter to be open to ninth commandment charges and slander; but there's a long way from "didn't answer my questions" to anything that is actionable. News people seem to not think they need to guard the good name of their neighbor and avoid bringing lesser faults before the public. If the gofundme for Rev. Baucham has been tardy or negligent to state how the excess funds are to be disposed of, let it go. Doing an article just as the guy is trying to or just made it to Mayo, and leave dangling "questions were not answered" leaves the impression something is not being on the up and up. I don't even follow the guy's ministry; it just seemed like a hit piece leaving that implication rather than just reporting the news of it.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## deleteduser99 (Mar 1, 2021)

NaphtaliPress said:


> What place is there for independent news that reports on controversies? There was consternation if not attempts to silence independent reporting by Presbyterians over 19th century controversies in the church, and similarly there was independent reporting last century as the church descended into liberalism. In not granting Ms. Roys a place, how do you avoid the consistency of decrying all independent reporting? Recall the most recent defense of such when there were attempts to silence Frank J. Smith's Presbyterian News service when he was reporting on the PCA (when still part of the PCA; he's RPCNA now).





Is she merely an independent reporter, or is she trying to be judge/jury? The former is good in my book with discretion, if they know the difference between reporting fact and interpretation; the latter I think is usurping bounds.

I had in my mind among other things the Iain Campbell case. PB had put a moratorium on discussing the matter so the presbytery could sort things out unhindered. That act taught me a healthy respect for boundaries in church affairs. Things get online, they end up in presbytery meeting discussions, and it complicates things. Even the power of suggestion in a report could make things difficult. There is often more to a case than actually goes public. Some things are not said for good discretionary reasons.

Of course if a Presbyterian/synod commits a grievous sin and there's no repentance, it may just be Christ's method of cleaning the clock to let the news out; and I can't say that the independent journalists are wrong to report, warts and all. @Edward 

Frank Smith is in my presbytery.


----------



## Smeagol (Mar 1, 2021)

Was the PB just crashed by discernment bloggers?

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 3


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

Grant said:


> Was the PB just crashed by discernment bloggers?


The server was down; or at least all the sites hosted unavailable or sporadically so; not sure why. I told Rich and he worked on it.

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 2


----------



## ZackF (Mar 1, 2021)

Grant said:


> Was the PB just crashed by discernment bloggers?


If so, I can’t believe it has taken them so long.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward (Mar 1, 2021)

RPEphesian said:


> Of course if a Presbyterian/synod commits a grievous sin and there's no repentance, it may just be Christ's method of cleaning the clock to let the news out; and I can't say that the independent journalists are wrong to report, warts and all. @Edward


Then there was the sorry story out of Scotland of Iain Campbell and the churchfolk who only began to do the right thing after 'discernment bloggers' exposed what the good folk in the church leadership were doing to the victim. Public embarrassment led to public apology. https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/2151240/anne-campbell-iain-campbell-isle-of-lewis-free-church/

Of course, sometimes it is hard to see the line between what can be the exceedingly slow process of the church courts on one side and stonewalling and cover-up on the other. 

For the record, I consider Frank Smith one of the good guys.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 1, 2021)

Frank Smith is one of the good guys. Thanks Edward. He lives and speaks to where he lives and breaths. He understands boundaries. You have to love a person like that.

I try to do the same. If you post here you are in my boundaries. Just saying.


----------



## ZackF (Mar 1, 2021)

Edward said:


> Then there was the sorry story out of Scotland of Iain Campbell and the churchfolk who only began to do the right thing after 'discernment bloggers' exposed what the good folk in the church leadership were doing to the victim. Public embarrassment led to public apology. https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/2151240/anne-campbell-iain-campbell-isle-of-lewis-free-church/
> 
> Of course, sometimes it is hard to see the line between what can be the exceedingly slow process of the church courts on one side and stonewalling and cover-up on the other.
> 
> For the record, I consider Frank Smith one of the good guys.


Who’s frank smith?

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 1, 2021)

ZackF said:


> Who’s frank smith?


He was actually the first ordination in the PCA way back in the early 70's. He was in Atlanta last I remember working a RPCNA mission type of thing in a very Urban setting.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 1, 2021)

A Hippy and a Scholar. 
Me and Dr. Frank Smith

Edit.... My grammar school teacher would be all over me for writing or saying, "Me and Dr. Frank Smith." LOL

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Mar 1, 2021)

ZackF said:


> Who’s frank smith?


Was wondering that too. Googling "Frank Smith" isn't going to be the most productive method of finding out.

Reactions: Funny 2


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 1, 2021)

Andrew35 said:


> Was wondering that too. Googling "Frank Smith" isn't going to be the most productive method of finding out.


You need to type in Dr. Frank Smith Reformed Presbyterian..... I found this. https://atlanta-rpc.org/us/leadership/

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Edward (Mar 1, 2021)

ZackF said:


> Who’s frank smith?


He is a pastor now in the RPCNA but formerly one of the leaders in the confessionalist movement of the PCA that fought against the advancing tide of liberalism in that denomination. He published an online newsletter for a few years http://www.presbyteriannews.org/ that contained information that one couldn't get from the official church organs. (I don't recall if the denomination's publication was _The Messenger_ or_ byFaith_ in those days.)

Reactions: Informative 2


----------



## Jack K (Mar 1, 2021)

I'm not familiar enough with the particular journalist mentioned in the OP to comment on her work, and I probably would not want to comment on it even if I were. But as a guy who spent the first half of my professional life as a journalist, I've thought about the matter of exposing corrupt pastors and ministries. Four thoughts:

1. There would be little need for investigative journalism to step in if elder and church-court oversight were in place and working correctly. That's really where pastors and ministries should be held in check and have godly men constantly looking over their shoulders, encouraging them in their daily spiritual habits, etc. Sadly, it has become common in American Christianity not only for such oversight to be lax, but for it not to be in place at all.

2. This means that Christian investigative journalism is probably a necessary and helpful endeavor. It's good for us to have some serious, careful, compassionate Christian professionals to do this. It's better than having only secular journalists to do it. I covered the Jim Bakker scandal in the 1980s and was sad that it took the Charlotte Observer to expose some serious wrongs that Christians had clearly seen and should have stepped up to address.

3. However, much of what passes for "journalism" these days is careless, lazy, or so intent on a right-camp/wrong-camp agenda that it selectively presents the facts. Too many Christians have copied the larger culture's irresponsible and angry approach to sharing "news." We need real Christian journalists who have the time to work an investigation properly, the oversight that forces them to document and defend everything they report, and the godly character to put truth and fairness and compassion ahead of other agendas. Most of those we would label "discernment bloggers" don't fully fit this description. This means that even if they are well-intentioned, they are in danger of coming closer to being gossips than real journalists.

4. It almost always takes a well-funded _team_ to do investigative journalism properly. Sadly, I'm not sure there's enough of a market for this within American Christianity. Too many of us would rather just have our anger fed or our camp loyalties stroked than have our minds truly informed and wrongs made right.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

Edward said:


> Then there was the sorry story out of Scotland of Iain Campbell and the churchfolk who only began to do the right thing after 'discernment bloggers' exposed what the good folk in the church leadership were doing to the victim. Public embarrassment led to public apology. https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/2151240/anne-campbell-iain-campbell-isle-of-lewis-free-church/
> 
> Of course, sometimes it is hard to see the line between what can be the exceedingly slow process of the church courts on one side and stonewalling and cover-up on the other.
> 
> For the record, I consider Frank Smith one of the good guys.





PuritanCovenanter said:


> Frank Smith is one of the good guys. Thanks Edward. He lives and speaks to where he lives and breaths. He understands boundaries. You have to love a person like that.
> 
> I try to do the same. If you post here you are in my boundaries. Just saying.





ZackF said:


> Who’s frank smith?





PuritanCovenanter said:


> He was actually the first ordination in the PCA way back in the early 70's. He was in Atlanta last I remember working a RPCNA mission type of thing in a very Urban setting.





PuritanCovenanter said:


> A Hippy and a Scholar.
> Me and Dr. Frank Smith
> 
> Edit.... My grammar school teacher would be all over me for writing or saying, "Me and Dr. Frank Smith." LOL
> ...





Andrew35 said:


> Was wondering that too. Googling "Frank Smith" isn't going to be the most productive method of finding out.





PuritanCovenanter said:


> You need to type in Dr. Frank Smith Reformed Presbyterian..... I found this. https://atlanta-rpc.org/us/leadership/





Edward said:


> He is a pastor now in the RPCNA but formerly one of the leaders in the confessionalist movement of the PCA that fought against the advancing tide of liberalism in that denomination. He published an online newsletter for a few years http://www.presbyteriannews.org/ that contained information that one couldn't get from the official church organs. (I don't recall if the denomination's publication was _The Messenger_ or_ byFaith_ in those days.)


Randy, Nice picture with Frank. I first met Frank in the mid 1980s; my church unofficially candidated him and he was interested in one of the gals; didn't work out on either front; he eventually married a Brit (Penny) and as you say he has planted a RPCNA church in the most blighted part of Atlanta. We got to know each other over the years through long telephone chats. He has been an editor of some fashion for _The Confessional Presbyterian_ journal from the beginning; he made a huge contribution with a piece I did the additional research for on the history of the literature on the regulative principle of worship from 1946 till like 2008. He also has one of the more memorable segments in the documentary Spirit and Truth: a film about worship by Les Lanphere. If you have not seen this it is absolutely must viewing. See https://www.missionalwear.com/spiritandtruth

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 1 | Amen 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 1, 2021)

I should add, he did an early compilation work, edited with David C. Lachman, another of the good guys who also gave up on the PCA, Worship in the Presence of God. I think GPTS did a reprint but it was out of print a long time. Important work in 1991 and it still is a good introduction on the subject.
2006 reprint here: https://www.amazon.com/Worship-Presence-God-Frank-Smith/dp/0977344223

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pergamum (Mar 1, 2021)

The Church is the worldwide Body of Christ; it is not merely a local manifestation. We see in cases of abuse and corruption that the entire local church leadership of some local churches cover for one another and cannot be trusted to correct themselves. Therefore, Christians from outside the local assembly may give a critique or ask questions. Public ministries can get public critiques.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## TheInquirer (Mar 1, 2021)

If investigative reporting to uncover corruption is a good thing in the secular world, why would it not be a good thing in the "church realm" if done with skill, truth, and for the purpose of God's glory and the good of the church?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## C. M. Sheffield (Mar 1, 2021)

TheInquirer said:


> If investigative reporting to uncover corruption is a good thing in the secular world, why would it not be a good thing in the "church realm" _*if*_ done with skill, truth, and for the purpose of God's glory and the good of the church?


Everything would seem to hinge on that "If"

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## VictorBravo (Mar 1, 2021)

Our own church was hit a somewhat by such reporting. All because one of our members was arrested for child molestation (not on church property and not during church activities).

It didn't matter that it was reported the morning it was discovered, detectives did interviews, and within five days he found himself in jail facing charges--we obviously were covering something up. 

Those facts were publicly available in local media, but the "investigator" only talked about how this happened in another Reformed Baptist church.

Reactions: Like 3 | Informative 1 | Sad 1


----------



## Andrew35 (Mar 2, 2021)

VictorBravo said:


> Our own church was hit a somewhat by such reporting. All because one of our members was arrested for child molestation (not on church property and not during church activities).
> 
> It didn't matter that it was reported the morning it was discovered, detectives did interviews, and within five days he found himself in jail facing charges--we obviously were covering something up.
> 
> Those facts were publicly available in local media, but the "investigator" only talked about how this happened in another Reformed Baptist church.


I remember that. A certain RB narrative of child abuse was not-so-subtly constructed, of which your church's situation was an additional building block.

I felt bad for your church when I heard about it, even though I didn't know anyone from there. To me, it didn't seem fair at all, but that hardly matters; even if totally unjustified, those kind of implications leave a real stink.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Mar 2, 2021)

VictorBravo said:


> Our own church was hit a somewhat by such reporting. All because one of our members was arrested for child molestation (not on church property and not during church activities).
> 
> It didn't matter that it was reported the morning it was discovered, detectives did interviews, and within five days he found himself in jail facing charges--we obviously were covering something up.
> 
> Those facts were publicly available in local media, but the "investigator" only talked about how this happened in another Reformed Baptist church.


This incident is an example of 1) how things are supposed to work; 2) how important good ecclesiology is to addressing problems, and the importance of using it, for safeguard of doctrine, practice, and people; 3) the lingering and far-reaching effects of sin and coverup, even far away and long ago, both as to an individual and institution; and 4) the real yet frequently improper (and unscrupulous) tactic of "guilt by association."

The problem of disuse or misuse of church discipline creates a culture of indiscipline. This opens the door for a flood of negative effects in due time, in form deserved and undeserved, as more people are subjected to the negative effects of events and future consequences. When the issue is pressed and must be dealt with, there's doubt as to whether this will be another case of minimizing or sweeping-under the rug.

Another aspect of the perception problem comes from the duty to maintain "due process," presumption of innocence and other rights of the accused. When the matter is so ugly--having festered for too long--the plodding steps of justice seem like foot-dragging to onlookers. In fact, the guilty may indeed be _obviously_ guilty; but almost always there are also falsehoods that must be cleared away, mainly to prevent mixing the justice with new injustice thus turning the perpetrator into a new victim.

When sin is dealt with early, even when it is serious (and it needs to be recognized as such!), all those interested can bear much easier the required delays and care taken. They are encouraged to have further confidence in the process by clearly seeing the probity of it. Compare how things *should *happen, both in church discipline or civil discipline, and what the corruption and opacity of justice has done to people's confidence in the processes.

Reactions: Like 3 | Amen 1


----------



## arapahoepark (Mar 2, 2021)

VictorBravo said:


> Our own church was hit a somewhat by such reporting. All because one of our members was arrested for child molestation (not on church property and not during church activities).
> 
> It didn't matter that it was reported the morning it was discovered, detectives did interviews, and within five days he found himself in jail facing charges--we obviously were covering something up.
> 
> Those facts were publicly available in local media, but the "investigator" only talked about how this happened in another Reformed Baptist church.





Andrew35 said:


> I remember that. A certain RB narrative of child abuse was not-so-subtly constructed, of which your church's situation was an additional building block.
> 
> I felt bad for your church when I heard about it, even though I didn't know anyone from there. To me, it didn't seem fair at all, but that hardly matters; even if totally unjustified, those kind of implications leave a real stink.


I remember that as well. If I recall correctly the narrative came from someone who, after having outed a pastor publicly, believes he now knows everything there is to know about scandals and has effectively made himself the chief crusader against alleged injustice by shouting gossip from the internet roof tops.
At least that's how I had taken many of his articles.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

