BJU faulted for response to GRACE report

Jim’s last post illustrates well the callousness of the counseling techniques used in the past at BJ and why I think it’s a good idea to outsource that kind of counseling. But a friend did email me and let me know that BJU has said that if anyone wants counseling with someone in Greenville, they will accomodate that:

At the same time, students will continue to have the option to pursue off-campus counseling from a counselor of their choosing. We recognize there currently may be limits to our ability to deal with certain aspects of trauma present in some cases of sexual abuse/assault. While we will strive to offer as much help as we can in such cases, students have the option to go to agencies and or organizations that at this time may be better equipped and prepared to offer help in their specific situations.

I think part of the underlying discussion here is the legitimacy of psychological diagnoses like PTSD. It has been my experience that there is such a thing as PTSD, and that it should not be treated as a sin issue, which is, whether we like it or not, kind of the default tool set we go to for counseling.

I don’t think that anyone is arguing for the superiority of contemporary psychoanalysis like Freud, Jung, or others. Where I do think the conversation is breaking down, in part, is whether or not we should counsel based on the Bible alone or take other factors like PTSD into consideration when it comes to properly addressing these issues. I fall into the latter category.

Jim:

“Joel Shaffer wrote:
…. after having a gun pulled on me

Were you wearing suggestive clothing?
Did you enjoy it?”

I assume this is your effort at humor but I wonder do you personally know that these types of statements were made by Jim Berg? It seems to me a bit un-Christlike to get our laughs at the expense of another, but especially if we do not know personally that the things we are espousing are true.

[Kirk Mellen] I assume this is your effort at humor but I wonder do you personally know that these types of statements were made by Jim Berg? It seems to me a bit un-Christlike to get our laughs at the expense of another, but especially if we do not know personally that the things we are espousing are true.

Read the footnote 24 on page 48 of the GRACE report and footnotes 147 and 152/153 on pages 72 and 73. Those are actual statements as reported. I should note that some of the remarks are attributed to Dr. Fremont, not Dr. Berg.

Jay, this wasn’t my point in my statement to Jim, but even at this, do we know what was actually said in these counseling sessions? Are we sure these statements are accurate? Do we know the context? It simply seems to me that we are quick to judge and quick to appropriate blame when most of us, as complete outsiders, have no real idea what happened. To flippantly make an individual the butt of our jokes if we do not personally know that what we are insinuating is true, seems a bit un-Christian to me.

Regarding the pointers GRACE uses, I would agree that GRACE puts too much credit to modern psychology to the avoidance of what the church should be doing. One thing of note is that psychology has some things they know well—PTSD is real, there are therapies that work well—and on the flip side there is a tremendous amount of dispute in some things—see the parties of the Freudians, Skinner, etc…Hence deferring to credentials is dangerous, as a previous commenter noted that a tremendously influential therapy comes from an English professor. There is tremendous growth possible in the field fo the study of the soul (which is what psychology means after all).

Back to the report, GRACE makes some excellent observations, really centering around the claim that BJU was consistently being accused of blaming the victim for their abuse in a number of ways—inviting it through clothing, enjoying it, etc.. It is worth noting that to make changes in this regard, BJU does not need to be shown to have done this openly, but rather only that it was a reasonable inference from the materials they were using. And quite frankly, you can do this without really digging in to things that you need a MS or PhD in psychology to address—though it might be good for BJU to hire a couple of guys with such degrees to get an idea of the interaction of Christian and secular psychological theories.

And a final note; yes, there are others who have suffered tragedies like this, and yes, there are places where others have looked very good and other places where others have looked very bad. But that said, it is in general a mistake to compare too much since it almost inevitably invokes the tu quoque (you too) fallacy.

Jim, if Berg or BJ3 were not the intention it seems a strange place to interject your humor based upon the flow of the comments.

[Kirk Mellen]

Jay, this wasn’t my point in my statement to Jim, but even at this, do we know what was actually said in these counseling sessions? Are we sure these statements are accurate? Do we know the context? It simply seems to me that we are quick to judge and quick to appropriate blame when most of us, as complete outsiders, have no real idea what happened. To flippantly make an individual the butt of our jokes if we do not personally know that what we are insinuating is true, seems a bit un-Christian to me.

First off, I don’t think that anyone here is singling out Dr. Berg for jokes. I find the whole discussion extremely sad and Jim’s post in bad taste.

Second, your comments seem to indicate that you think people just made this stuff up when they were meeting with the investigators from GRACE and BJU. So let me ask you this - WHY? Does the ‘context’ really matter if that’s what was actually said in counseling situations?

Third, I’m sorry, but there is absolutely a time and place to be judging and blaming if the victim’s stories about the counsel they received are true. Given that these comments were not only reported, but corroborated by two or three different victims separately in one report, I would believe them.

Final response to Jim. Tainting anyone accused with the stain of a broad brush of another’s sin seems intellectually dishonest and lazy. But I surely can’t see clearly because my gaze is obscured by the sand.

[Joeb]

Chip I guess you don’t believe in PTSD and it’s just psycho babble. So all are fine young men who have come home or are coming home from numerous tours from Afghanistan and Iraq damaged physically and mentally are in sin. Boys just get rid of your bitterness and you will be fine. So my neighbor who knows the Lord is in continual sin since he stills suffers from the physical and mental damage from an IED and is disabled. So my father who saw all his buddies blown up when the Japanese first opened on the beaches on Iwo Jima never suffered PTSD and when fighting and leading his men in combat against the Chinese human wave attacks and killing so many Chinese that they melted the barrels on their machine guns to survive. I guess my father would not suffer any damage to his psychee going through this. Just pshyco babble. Those girls In Cleveland held as sex slaves for 10 years and repeatedly raped and beaten by the perp. I guess they did not suffer any PTSD. Oh that’s right they could not have because according to those Tea Party senates canadates it’s Gods will that women get raped. Chip if your daughter gets raped and she can’t recover from it are you going to tell her she is in sin and should get rid of her bitterness and go right away and forgive the perp for her sin. Also are you going to ask her if she was wearing suggestive clothing. I guess you agree with those Ww 1 generals just shoot the bastard coward deserter. Being Shellshocked is just phsyco babble. What I’m saying is the whole point of the Grace report in how offensive it was the way Berg handled the counseling. And yes I will throw stones when something like this is so obviously wrong. So obvious like you protecting your wife from a person who is going to kill her. Thank God Pettit is in charge at BJU and not you. You sound like those ABWE missionary parents who just rolled over and allowed Wendall Kempton and his minions to accuse his 14 year old daughter of tempting poor 60 year Dr Kechum into keeping her as a little sexual pet. Kechum took a12 year old girl had her giving him regular oral sex for two years and her parents did not say a thing or defend her. Her parents allowed the godly Wendall Kempton to cover it up.

Your entire post is a red herring. I didn’t say anything about PTSD. I’m sorry you wasted your time on that whole rabbit trail, but it had nothing to do with my post. My post was an encouragement to better understand the accusation that biblical counselors blame the victim for their suffering. One of the reasons the Romans persecuted Christians in the first few centuries AD was because the Romans took statements made by Christians and tried to process them in the Roman context. This produced all kinds of erroneous mischaracterizations of the church. Thus, the Christian celebration of the Lord’s Supper became an accusation of cannabalism; Christian exultation of God’s authority over the emperor’s authority became proof civil rebellion; talk of the church as the Bride of Christ became evidence of polygamy; the expression of the Trinity became polytheism. The same thing is happening here when competent biblical counselors are being criticized and castigated by modern psychologists for “blaming the victim for their sin.” I am not trying to exonerate every counselor who claims to use the Bible over psychology; I am sure there are as many snake-oil charlatans out there calling themselves biblical counselors are there are posers calling themselves pastor. My point to you was to talk to a competent biblical counselor such as Donn Arms and ask them to explain where this mischaracterization could have come from before making judgment and siding with those whose teachings diametrically oppose scripture.

I know this may sound inflammatory and unfair, but…

The same thing is happening here when competent biblical counselors are being criticized and castigated by modern psychologists for “blaming the victim for their sin.” I am not trying to exonerate every counselor who claims to use the Bible over psychology; I am sure there are as many snake-oil charlatans out there calling themselves biblical counselors are there are posers calling themselves pastor…

Given what I’ve read of the GRACE report (I’m about 1/3 of the way through it), it seems fair to question whether or not the counsel given by some at BJU, especially early on (pre-1980’s) could be deemed ‘competent’ in terms of sexual abuse. There is a section of the report where the team at the school admits that they could have used more training and information on how to manage abuse victims and abuse reporting.

I’m not out to ‘get’ Dr. Berg, and I don’t think I’m a ‘hater’, or anything like that. I just think that it’s fair to admit that there were problems in the way that BJU handled these things, and part of that is owning where the school mismanaged things.

I guess what we need to figure out is who and how do we define ‘competent’? Someone who is angry and bitter about sin is easy to deal with. Someone who is angry and bitter because they have been victimized in this way is completely different.

Jay,

I agree they are completely different, but you still described someone as angry and bitter because they have been victimized. While there are some biblical instances where anger would not be sin (and this could be one though even then you would not say all anger is justified even in this situation), I am not aware of any circumstance where scripture indicates bitterness is ever acceptable. As far as I can see in scripture, bitterness is always sin. My only point has been to fairly characterize what is actually being said by the counselors. Only then can we determine if and where changes are needed.

One important question in my mind is whether the Bible describes PTSD—I would suggest that Dinah may have suffered it after her rape at Schechem, and Tamar after her rape by Amnon, among others. Maybe Mary Magdalene?

An independent, “fundy” Bible church pastor (who shall remain nameless, but with which I am very close) has read Dr. Berg’s books extensively and has great respect for his work and utilized much of what he learned from Dr. Berg in dealing with a sexual abuse case in his church. Once the victim approached this pastor’s wife and made a few comments that hinted something was wrong, both of them followed up and asked questions to fully understand what had happened.

Upon learning the full gravity of the situation and at great risk to the ministry of his local church and his family, he immediately reported the abuse to local authorities and began counseling with the young lady. The perpetrator was arrested and now sits in prison under a looong sentence. The young lady is doing well and is attending a non-accredited “fundy” Bible college. I’m not sure how all this happened considering this Pastor’s respect for the eeeeevil Dr. Berg and the reading of his counseling materials. According to most people on this thread, this actual event would have to be impossible, given their impression of the GRACE report.

I mentioned the Pastor did this at great risk to his church and family. The perpetrator was the pastor’s brother.