IBLP on Bill Gothard - not illegal but disgraceful

I wonder if Bill Gothard is a member of a local church and if so, will they participate in his discipline and any restoration? Seems like that is a very obvious missing link in all of this.

The Board does not believe that Mr. Gothard’s shortcomings discredit the truths of God’s Word that were taught through him.

Hmmm. Yes, the truths of God’s Word cannot be discredited, but what about the “truths” he made up and then called “God’s Word”? Is the board willing to repudiate the false teaching?

And did he have “shortcomings” or did he sin?

It will be interesting to see what happens now.

While it is good the board removed BG from being involved with the ministry it still seems they neither have the eyes to see nor the will to call a spade a spade.

Weak.

This statement leaves two impressions on this writer:

1. The statement was heavily “lawyered,” and

2. The board is evading as much responsibility as possible for overseeing Gothard’s organization, what could be called the “Rocketman” defense: “It’s wasn’t me!”. If this is the case, why then even have a board?

1. The statement was heavily “lawyered,”

I agree with this suspicion.

2. The board is evading as much responsibility as possible for overseeing Gothard’s organization

I don’t know about this as much, simply because I’m betting that most of the Board members have close ties or are good friends with Gothard himself. That would be like asking the Cardinals to condemn the Pope. I’ve seen this in plenty of NPOs, and it’s usually the ruby glasses distorting what is said and believed by the Board, not an desire to avoid responsibility. We have to keep in mind that some of the teachings espoused by IBLP / Gothard are very ‘cult-like’, so I doubt highly that the Board members can be neutral, objective and unbiased.

That being said, they did agree that there was enough evidence to bar him from being involved with IBLP, so that in and of itself is a very good action, especially since Gothard founded IBLP. This is what the Board said:

However, the review showed that Mr. Gothard has acted in an inappropriate manner, and the Board realizes the seriousness of his lack of discretion and failure to follow Christ’s example of being blameless and above reproach. As a Christian leader, he is to avoid the appearance of evil (I Thessalonians 5:22), and he must have a good reputation, even with those outside the Church (I Timothy 3:7).

We believe God still desires to use Bill Gothard for His work in the Kingdom of God, but we also believe it is important that he be held to the high standards clearly taught in the Scriptures and upheld by this ministry. At this time the Board unanimously agrees that Mr. Gothard is not permitted to serve in any counseling, leadership, or Board role within the IBLP ministry.

Sometimes I’ll take the actions taken over the words said. In this case, I think that’s the right way to proceed.

Having been through sexual harassment training many times in my years of employment, I’ve got to note that yes, sexual harassment can be treated as a crime, though it is more often resolved in civil courts. This is especially the case if a company knows of the harassment but does nothing to prevent or punish it.

Which may be a reason for the lawyerly announcement by his board of directors. DLCreed notes something very important here; it’s not clear that Gothard has a local church that can shepherd in his journey of what I hope is repentance. If I am wrong and Gothard is indeed a member of a local church, taking part consistently in meetings and such, I rejoice, of course!

But if DLCreed’s suspicion is correct, and the board did not confront him on not being a church member, or did not confront him on untoward behavior, that’ll be nasty if and when the lawsuits come. You can be friends with your board, but you’ve got to get some people who are willing to tell you no.