Narcissistic pastoring in the RP church - part 1

 

This is a situation that has me so angry. I'm going to start with the most innocuous bit of the whole saga that shows how callous, uncaring and evil this RP pastor is and then start walking though what led to this situation.

Background: RP Pastor Phil Pockras is the pastor of Belle Center OH, RPC (the fact this is in Great Lakes - Gulf Presbytery should come as no shock as the level of narcissism is befitting only those who remain in that presbytery).

Two long-term members of Belle Center were arrested recently, according to https://www.facebook.com/LoganSheriffOhio/posts/4447913998599956

Paul Soma, for 2 Counts Gross Sexual Imposition and his wife, Dana Soma, for Endangering Children

I will talk about the charges in a later post, but look at the response. Their pastor, for decades, Phil Pockras is "feeling heartbroken". Not for any victims, not for the faithful RP wife who obeyed her abusive and allegedly sex predator husband to the point of fleeing from the police with him, but for himself and for his church.

For his church - "Major distress in our church", but note that he is ready to accept pity for himself. Major red flags here. In this situation, you have sexual assault victims, a member of the church accused of sexual violence and another accused of child endangerment and his sadness is primarily for the affect on his church. (And since the pastor is the spiritual equivalent of the church, against, this is all about him.

I'm also fascinated what is behind this response, but I think there will be much more to work through on this one in later part(s).

I don't want to leave you too much in the dark about where I'm going with this. I want to point out that there is a lot of history of Evangelical/Reformed churches creating a safe space for abusive men and how their wives are not only victimized, but gaslighted and spiritually coerced into aiding and abetting criminals.

For example, Katie Sitler, wife of convicted pedophile Stephen Sitler and member of Doug Wilson's church in Moscow ID, was first encouraged to marry him knowing that he was a convicted pedophile, presumably to cure him. After they had children of their own, she allowed him to molest the children, despite being appointed as a court observer [seriously??] to prevent him from doing just that.

One of the reports that came out of Sovereign Grace Ministries was a wife whose husband was molesting their teenage daughter. She was discouraged from going to the police (the elders also failed in their duty as mandatory reporters to report him), and instead they recommended she make herself more sexually available to him and lock the daughter's bedroom door at night. When she was finally fed up enough to be part of a lawsuit against SGM, the statute of limitations had run out.

What I think is heartbreaking is when women and children are gaslighted into a crazy system where they have to choose between their religion (i.e. patriarchal authority and blind submission to whatever the authority says, even if it's wrong) or their morality (I'm sure these women know in their heart that what they are doing is wrong, but every authoritative voice in their life says otherwise).

As the comment suggests, Phil Pockras is not some innocent observer to criminal behavior. He, the GLG Presbytery, and to a lesser extent, the RPCNA, have created an environment where abusers flourish and are protected from scrutiny. Abuse-suffering children are not believed (I can attest to this!). Abuse-suffering wives are not believed, or even if they are believed, they are told that God wants them to suffer for his sake. Both wives and children are taught that God cares more about the "institutions" of marriage and family (meaning patriarchal authority), than he does about the people in those relationships. (It's a bait-and-switch, but that is where they double down)

Edit: It seems pretty obvious what gender matters in Belle Center, evidence for the comment above:

To be clear, many women commented that they were praying for him, too, but I guess they don't count.

Also, I found the charges. The date of the offense is listed as 1/1/2012 for both Paul and Dana. There are no other details, but this is very concerning, given that nine years have passed between the time of the offense and the time that arrests were made.

Twisted Total Depravity, Original Sin and the PCA ruling

As I tried to understand why this PCA ruling bothered me so much, the thing that came back to me over and over again was the concept of original sin. We inherit a sin nature that prevents us from being able to bridge the gap between us and God in our own strength. That sin nature is not a permanent part of our identity, but it remains with us throughout our earthly lives. How God deals with the sin nature varies by each person. As we see with Paul, our "body of death" becomes a consistent struggle during our lives once we are saved.

As I said, on the surface, it seems that the PCA ruling is simply being deliberate and precise when it comes to dealing with our depraved sin nature. They can say that referring to our "body of death" as our identity is theologically incorrect. I get that and I can see where they're coming from. The ruling, however, goes beyond that.

I don't see this precision in the Bible. How can Paul say, "It is a trustworthy statement, deserving full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, among whom I am foremost." (1 Tim 1:15) We Reformed people cheer Paul's honesty and humility here, but what Paul is doing is stating an identity. A few verses before, he says what he was - blasphemer, persecutor and violent aggressor.

I think the basis of the concern is normalizing specific identities. This is concerning because the church has compartmentalized effects of sin that are okay and those that are not. Talking about original sin.

Statements one could make about results of original sin:

I'm blind. PCA would probably accept this statement, even though the blindness is part of the original sin, and presumably the bodies we receive when glorified are not blind.

I have Down Syndrome. Again, okay because it is part of original sin, and a characteristic that has physical basis.

I have ADHD. Okay, we're now starting to get into the gray area as far as Reformed beliefs go. There is pretty good evidence that ADHD is innate, but because it is now a struggle of self-control, which is a spiritual fruit, there might be concern.

I am attracted to ... (non-normal attraction). Again, this could be a result of original sin, but if ADHD is gray, we've now crossed the line. Even though self-control is a spiritual fruit, and thus, lacking self-control would be fairly categorized as sinful, this must clearly be wrong.

The difficulty I have is that all of these are fixed in the resurrection, or through some other miraculous means. They can be managed, they can be accommodated, but we don't have the expectation, in this life, that God is going to remove these burdens from us.

My conclusion, then, is that ADHD and SSA can be innate characteristics, just like blindness or genetic diseases, that are a result of original sin, but the PCA wants to refuse that. They want to deny that innate characteristics can lead us to sin, which is a denial of Total Depravity. Total Depravity says that we are born predisposed to sin. Calling out our sinful predisposition is not a "sin identity", but recognizing our depraved condition under the Fall.

Conversely, when the PCA claims that ordained leadership cannot have a sin identity, they are asking leaders and those who aspire to be leaders to cover up their depravity. They will even refuse to recognize the implications of this. Modesty is moot because no true Christian would have a fleshly struggle with women's bodies (despite the fact that the church calls this a universal male struggle). Sigh.

PCA General Assembly rules: Ordained leadership cannot struggle with temptation

In a ruling befitting the Judaizers in Galatians, the PCA ruled the following (wording thanks to https://twitter.com/PCAByFaith/status/1410594510912901123)

16-4 Officers in the Presbyterian Church in America must be above reproach in their walk and Christlike in their character. Those who profess an identity (such as, but not limited to, 'gay Christian,' 'same sex attracted Christian,' 'homosexual Christian,' or like terms) that undermines or contradicts their identity as new creations in Christ, either by denying the sinfulness of fallen desires (such as, but not limited to, same sex attraction), or by denying the reality and hope of progressive sanctification, or by failing to pursue Spirit-empowered victory over their sinful temptations, inclinations, and actions are not qualified for ordained office.

First of all, I'd like to put this up against scripture. Paul says, in Romans 7:

For I know that good does not dwell in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.

We don't know the nature of this sin struggle that Paul is talking about, but we understand that being a Christian, and even being a Pastor/Apostle does not remove temptations. Here we see that some temptations are a result of "our own flesh" versus the sorts of temptations Jesus struggled with that were not due to the coexistence of a sin nature.

So, this is the sort of ruling where the conclusion(?) might resonate with many of the leaders, but the reasoning is essentially denying gospel principles. Are PCA leaders limited to those who have, through God's grace, overcome all of their fleshly temptations? Is it, instead, just a name game where it's okay to struggle with besetting sins, but not okay to "identify" with those besetting sins.

That's honestly what it sounds like, but it is wrapped in anti-gay language. So, play this out. A man wants to become a PCA pastor having had a lifelong struggle with alcoholism. He recognizes that his battle with his flesh means that he needs to abstain from alcohol for the rest of his life, lest he give into the temptation. So, I guess he can say that he struggles with alcohol, or maybe that he is tempted by alcohol, but if he says "I'm an alcoholic" BAM! It's over, no ordination for him! Is that what this is all about - maybe on the surface, but I think it's worse than that.

Let's look at the second aspect. What has the PCA's action been with regard to fleshly struggles?

Tullian Tchividjian was deposed by the PCA for his extramarital affair. At that time, I believe, multiple women had come forward and described his pursuit of them in what can best be described as clergy sex abuse. Yet... the PCA essentially created a restoration team, including Paul Tripp, designed to restore him to ordained leadership. He was approved for a non-ordained leadership position at a nearby PCA church, and his team went on the offensive to recharacterize his sins as relatively minor and forgiven compared to the sins of those around him.

So, in essence, Tchividjian was a clergy sex abuser, but he didn't "identify" as a clergy sex abuser, so he can still be restored, but a pastor who "identifies" as same-sex attracted is disqualified?

There is a third aspect. Temptation is not sin. When studies show that >50% of pastors "struggle with porn", they're not talking about identity or temptation. This means that these pastors are viewing porn. On the other hand, when a pastor talks about same-sex attraction, but remains celibate, he is tempted, yet presumably without sin. The PCA turns this on its head. The porn-addicted pastor is qualified, but the same-sex attracted pastor is disqualified.

This is indicative of a dangerous theology. We, as Christians, become new creatures, yes, and we have the Spirit-given power to resist temptation, but we are not automatically freed from our fleshly tendencies. That is what Paul is saying. We are at war with our own remaining sinful desires, our body of death, as Paul says. The PCA is driving honesty and integrity underground, because denying our sin struggles is the opposite of accountability. Pastors will be afraid to be accountable, lest they find themselves unemployed. The PCA is also perpetuating the authoritarian myth that PASTORS are different than you and me. You see, WE may struggle with our sexual identity, and we may struggle with besetting sins, but the approved pastors do not. They are spiritually shielded from sinful tendencies, and if you dare accuse them, you probably won't last long because they are now in a battle for their lifelong calling and identity as God's anointed.