BJU faulted for response to GRACE report

Actually, I’m much more interested in what Ben Howard did not say in his post above. He said that he does a lot of counseling in his role as a chaplain, and that he has gone away from the model BJU (and to a lesser extent Southern Seminary) taught during his education. What was unstated, and might be useful in a discussion of what BJU should do in the future, was what approach he now uses. I’m assuming, of course, that he is still attempting to be faithful to the scriptures in his approach.

After all, if BJU’s changes are insufficient, it might be nice to actually discuss valid approaches other than “outsource to one organization” about which there are questions.

To answer Dave Barnhart, I wish I had a great certain method! LOL! For the last 10 years, to be honest, I feel that I have been flying by the seat of my pants when it comes to a lot of counseling. Some, like marriage counseling, I have been blessed to have been provided some decent training in resources by the Navy that even had Christian components to them, read other books (including some recommended at BJU and Southeastern that were really helpful), and made a great psychologist friend who certified me in Prepare and Enrich which is my starting point and basis for pretty much all my marriage counseling. For other issues, suicidal thoughts, depression etc., I spend a lot of time listening and if they are Christians pointing them to Scripture and whether they are Christians or not, giving them practical exercises. I have yet to have anyone turn me down for prayer, religious or not.

For these type of issues as well as Operational Stress/PTSD, I do view my role strictly as a pastoral counselor, and highly encourage them to also be involved with a mental health professional. Ultimately, I do view counseling as a process of discipleship, if the person is not a Christian, I want to give them something, even practical and non-spiritual that will meet the immediate need and hopefully provide me an opportunity at the right time to share the gospel or move them a step closer to Christ. If the person is a Christian, I want them to use whatever they are experiencing in their life to grow closer to Christ, but that is not always or even mostly related to sin in their lives. Many, many times (and it may just be the demographic I am dealing with), it is really bad life and relationship skills that come from really bad family histories. Of course, within that, there are usually spiritual issues but not everything boils down to memorize verses, have devotions and attend church. (I know that is a really bad oversimplification)

I will say that I firmly believe that just as someone else pointed out the mental health community is not the ugly Christ hating monster that it was painted as by Berg and Mazak. I have worked with many good mental health providers who while possibly not professing any faith were extremely respectful of each individuals personal beliefs and referred back and forth with me to try to help a person mentally, physically and spiritually. There is no need for the average Pastor (or Chaplain either although some Chaplain colleagues of mine disagree) to get certified in EMDR, which is the latest research validated method of dealing with PTSD for almost any type of trauma. To bash EMDR and other scientifically valid treatments as psychobabble is wrong and dangerous. There is a lot of science for such treatments and hard core Biblical Counseling adherents completely miss the opportunity to recommend legitimate and (from talking to those who have gone through it) very helpful options to deal with and overcome symptoms of trauma.

Someone else up above asked about Mazak and Berg being veterans - no they were not. Mazak does have an undergrad degree in Psychology, but his PhD is in Bible or New Testament (not sure which) from BJU. He did an internship at the State mental hospital in South Carolina and basically attributes all severe mental health issues to demon possession or sin (worship disorders, he calls them). I only had Mazak for General and Abnormal Psych on the undergrad level, but he did basically deny that anything found in the DSM was a true disease that had a basis in physiology.

I agree with Rob Fall that you don’t need to have been a veteran (or for that matter have gone through a sexual assault) to help someone struggling with PTSD or was a victim of sexual trauma, but you can’t be someone who doesn’t even believe that such thing exists. As long as that attitude is allowed, any help that is offered will be ineffective at best and hurtful to many.

[Joeb]

dcbii it’s is real easy, recognize that PTSD exists and it’s not a sinful world phsyco voodoo and get the appropriate training to handle it.

Chip,

I’ve already mentioned one valid treatment that really does work and is currently being successfully used to relieve the symptoms associated with PTSD and that is EMDR. It is a purely medical type therapy treatment and I don’t think its necessary for a Pastoral/Christian counselor to learn it, but they should know about it and have a referral that can offer it to send people to.

Other than that, there are very good resources available, even VA sponsored classes for pastors that are given at VA hospitals so that Pastors can better deal with problems faced by returning veterans. Their goal with that training is not to turn you into a therapist and stop being a Pastor, but to give solid medical information and referral sources so that when you give pastoral and spiritual counsel to someone dealing with those issues, you better understand the mental, emotional and physical reactions that they are experiencing.

From the Pastoral Care perspective and dealing with PTSD, which I also think can happen with abuse victims, our best support is in the moral injury category. There are many dealing with PTSD that is exacerbated by the facts of what they had to do in war or during what they went through. Who better to help them work through moral issues (which by their very nature are spiritual/Biblical in nature) than their Pastor or Christian counselor. Any good training should help walk a person through sorting out feelings of guilt to decide if there was truly any sin or wrongdoing committed to deserve the guilt, and then how to deal with it - forgiveness or replacing patterns of thinking that lead to guilt with those that lead to acknowledging the horror but your innocence in the circumstances. All of this can and should take place for the Christian within a framework of the Gospel and the truth of Scripture. The danger comes in seeing all victims and all guilt as a sign of sin, and that being the default mode. Even if the person is convinced of wrongdoing on their part, the focus should be on the forgiveness of God towards them. I have talked to Marines (only a couple) who were firmly convinced that killing on their part in combat was sin, no matter what Scriptural argument I could make to the contrary, usually based on a Catholic upbringing. My Scriptural advice to them even though I wouldn’t consider that sin is confess it as sin and accept God’s forgiveness.

No, not trying to argue that it isn’t Biblical, but just the opposite; if we do not have a Biblical basis for what we’re saying about PTSD (and a number of other phenomena really involving the mind), we can rest assured that we will be ignored by BJU and others. And, quite frankly, shouldn’t they if they value the first fundamental, the inerrancy of Scripture?

So while other resources can be valuable for helping us, I think in the long term we’ve really got to upgrade our theology to be able to argue that the Scriptures allow for mental disorders (again, e.g. Dinah and Tamar, or Nabal’s stroke, etc..) that are not the result of the person’s sin. I remember as a kid when I had some plastic surgery (removal of benign cysts from my skull) that I met a guy who was real combative—the surgeon told me that he’d been gentle as a lamb before his car accident. But after his skull got thumped good—and whatever other mental things I just don’t understand—something happened.

Sin? Maybe. Or maybe the thump triggered something in his head that he couldn’t cope with. It seems that if we can concede this point, we can make progress. Perhaps even another tendency noted by the GRACE report—to blame the victim—has a lot of its roots there, though I’d still want to discard the notion that ladies can indeed “lead men astray” through clothing choices. Not exactly Biblical, either.

Well, if we want to know what PTSD is, we ought to learn about it. Here’s the first search hit on Bing, courtesy of the VA:

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) can occur after you have been through a traumatic event. A traumatic event is something terrible and scary that you see, hear about, or that happens to you, like:

• Combat exposure
• Child sexual or physical abuse
• Terrorist attack
• Sexual or physical assault
• Serious accidents, like a car wreck
• Natural disasters, like a fire, tornado, hurricane, flood, or earthquake

During a traumatic event, you think that your life or others’ lives are in danger. You may feel afraid or feel that you have no control over what is happening around you. Most people have some stress-related reactions after a traumatic event; but, not everyone gets PTSD. If your reactions don’t go away over time and they disrupt your life, you may have PTSD.

How does PTSD develop?

Most people who go through a trauma have some symptoms at the beginning. Only some will develop PTSD over time. It isn’t clear why some people develop PTSD and others don’t.

Whether or not you get PTSD depends on many things:

• How intense the trauma was or how long it lasted
• If you were injured or lost someone important to you
• How close you were to the event
• How strong your reaction was
• How much you felt in control of events
• How much help and support you got after the event
• What are the symptoms of PTSD?

PTSD symptoms usually start soon after the traumatic event, but they may not appear until months or years later. They also may come and go over many years. If the symptoms last longer than four weeks, cause you great distress, or interfere with your work or home life, you might have PTSD.

There are four types of symptoms of PTSD:

• You may have bad memories or nightmares. You even may feel like you’re going through the event again. This is called a flashback.
• You may try to avoid situations or people that trigger memories of the traumatic event. You may even avoid talking or thinking about the event.
• The way you think about yourself and others may change because of the trauma. You may feel fear, guilt, or shame. Or, you may not be interested in activities you used to enjoy. This is another way to avoid memories.
• You may be jittery, or always alert and on the lookout for danger. Or, you may have trouble concentrating or sleeping. This is known as hyperarousal.
• Reliving the event (also called re-experiencing symptoms)
• Avoiding situations that remind you of the event
• Negative changes in beliefs and feelings
• Feeling keyed up (also called hyperarousal)

Can children have PTSD?

Children can have PTSD too. They may have symptoms described above or other symptoms depending on how old they are. As children get older, their symptoms are more like those of adults. Here are some examples of PTSD symptoms in children:

• Children age birth to 6 may get upset if their parents are not close by, have trouble sleeping, or suddenly have trouble with toilet training or going to the bathroom.
• Children age 7 to 11 may act out the trauma through play, drawings, or stories. Some have nightmares or become more irritable or aggressive. They may also want to avoid school or have trouble with schoolwork or friends.
• Children age 12 to 18 have symptoms more similar to adults: depression, anxiety, withdrawal, or reckless behavior like substance abuse or running away.
• What other problems do people with PTSD experience?

People with PTSD may also have other problems. These include:

• Feelings of hopelessness, shame, or despair
• Depression or anxiety
• Drinking or drug problems
• Physical symptoms or chronic pain
• Employment problems
• Relationship problems, including divorce

In many cases, treatments for PTSD will also help these other problems, because they are often related. The coping skills you learn in treatment can work for PTSD and these related problems.

Will I get better?

“Getting better” means different things for different people, and not everyone who gets treatment will be “cured.” Even if you continue to have symptoms, however, treatment can help you cope. Your symptoms don’t have to interfere with your everyday activities, work, and relationships.

Judging from what this is describing, I can’t see any way possible for PTSD to be fairly labelled as a sin issue. Will there be temptations (hopelessness, fear, etc), but this is an involuntary response to a traumatic event. To treat it as a sin issue would only compound the damage.

[Jay] Will I get better?

“Getting better” means different things for different people, and not everyone who gets treatment will be “cured.” Even if you continue to have symptoms, however, treatment can help you cope. Your symptoms don’t have to interfere with your everyday activities, work, and relationships.

Judging from what this is describing, I can’t see any way possible for PTSD to be fairly labelled as a sin issue. Will there be temptations (hopelessness, fear, etc), but this is an involuntary response to a traumatic event. To treat it as a sin issue would only compound the damage.

This part of the quote is at the crux of the issue. Modern psychology does not believe in “cures.” In fact, the general consensus among the psychological community is that there is no such thing as being mentally healthy, there are only different levels of mentally disturbed for all of us. This quote you provided is founded in that philosophy. However, that is not a biblical approach. Scripture presents solutions, “cures” if you will, through God’s intervention, not just eternal treatment and coping mechanisms. This is why I kept asking those of you denouncing BJ’s approach to explain what competent counsel would look like to you. Modern psychology is not compatible with the Bible; they are diametrically opposed in their description of who man is and how man “works” which produces mutually exclusive solutions to man’s problems.

Mostly about BJU’s response to the GRACE report:

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2015/3/30/bob-jones-university-sexual-abuse.html

Among other tidbits:

“…at a recent talent show, [BJU] students performed the soft rock song “Oceans (Where Feet may Fail)” by the Christian band Hillsong United, and it was extremely well received.”

This part of the quote is at the crux of the issue. Modern psychology does not believe in “cures.” In fact, the general consensus among the psychological community is that there is no such thing as being mentally healthy, there are only different levels of mentally disturbed for all of us. This quote you provided is founded in that philosophy. However, that is not a biblical approach. Scripture presents solutions, “cures” if you will, through God’s intervention, not just eternal treatment and coping mechanisms. This is why I kept asking those of you denouncing BJ’s approach to explain what competent counsel would look like to you. Modern psychology is not compatible with the Bible; they are diametrically opposed in their description of who man is and how man “works” which produces mutually exclusive solutions to man’s problems.

‘Competent’ counsel understands that there is no ‘cure’ for victims of abuse, because the consequences of that abuse (or other trauma) will never be completely undone. A person who has been battered or molested will deal in some way or another with that for the rest of their lives. Will they need to forgive their assailant at some point, as they are able and as God gives them the grace too? Absolutely. But if you are going to argue that the victims of abuse should and can be restored to a state where they don’t think about it ever again, then that strikes me as amazingly naive.

Chip, our choices are not binary. The Bible is absolutely sufficient for dealing with every issue. That doesn’t mean that every issue’s problem will be resolved with the application of Scripture alone. The EMDR therapy that some have derided and that Ben mentioned appears to be a valuable tool that can come alongside to assist the counselor because it deals with the physical / mental trauma side of things as a Biblical counselor deals with the spiritual side.

[Larry Nelson]

Mostly about BJU’s response to the GRACE report:

http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/america-tonight/articles/2015/3/30/bob-jones-university-sexual-abuse.html

Among other tidbits:

“…at a recent talent show, [BJU] students performed the soft rock song “Oceans (Where Feet may Fail)” by the Christian band Hillsong United, and it was extremely well received.”

As was mentioned above, this is the kind of continual media coverage and controversy that continues when you don’t adequately deal with a situation. Berg is referred to four times in this article. I get it that al jazeera would already be biased against BJU; however, yet again we are seeing negative attention about BJU. This is not to say that BJU should make their policy based on Katie Couric or al jazeera’s feelings, but this makes BJU look like they they still don’t understand the magnitude of the situation.

Up next at BJU, Big Daddy Weave & Skillet. Whoo-hooo!

My hunch is most who support BJU stopped reading this thread about 2 pages ago.

Maybe not…

[Bert Perry] Perhaps even another tendency noted by the GRACE report—to blame the victim—has a lot of its roots there, though I’d still want to discard the notion that ladies can indeed “lead men astray” through clothing choices. Not exactly Biblical, either.

Not to start another rabbit trail, but the Bible does actually address the issue of using clothing to allure / seduce:

• Tamar - Gen 38:14-15
• The adulteress - Prov 7:10

So, yes, women can and do use clothing to attract attention to themselves and suggest their availability to men. That being said, I’m not suggesting that these abuse victims were doing that. Nor am I suggesting that dressing provocatively excuses the crime / sin of rape or sexual abuse.

[T Howard]

Bert Perry wrote:

Perhaps even another tendency noted by the GRACE report—to blame the victim—has a lot of its roots there, though I’d still want to discard the notion that ladies can indeed “lead men astray” through clothing choices. Not exactly Biblical, either.

Not to start another rabbit trail, but the Bible does actually address the issue of using clothing to allure / seduce:

• Tamar - Gen 38:14-15
• The adulteress - Prov 7:10

So, yes, women can and do use clothing to attract attention to themselves and suggest their availability to men. That being said, I’m not suggesting that these abuse victims were doing that. Nor am I suggesting that dressing provocatively excuses the crime / sin of rape or sexual abuse.

Agreed wholeheartedly that attire can suggest availability and draw attention. The trick is that the testimony of those in the GRACE report is that the victims were being blamed because of their attire—and an interesting corollary point to that is that we’re talking about BJU students, and I’d have to assume that those who choose to attend BJU are more modest than average. Per my earlier comments about “review those counseling materials closely”, they need to make sure that the point they’re making is that it can invite attention and suggest availability, but avoid saying ladies please don’t lead men astray through your clothing choices.

I might ask them for a date, but rape them? That’s quite a leap.

The 2 verses you sight are about prostitutes. Are you saying that BJU students dress in a way to suggest they will take money for sexual services? Even if they did, that still is not rape.