Love Letters from Schaap: "That is exactly what Christ desires for us. He wants to marry us + become eternal lovers!”

14225 reads

There are 54 Comments

PLewis's picture

Rob Fall wrote:

sound a lot like Gibbs' Rules on NCIS. Biggrin

 

THWAP ... <across the backa the head>    ;-)

 

 

Rob Fall's picture

how Mr. Schaap is going to handle the transfer from the county lock up to a federal pen (even if the place is a "Club Fed").

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Alex Guggenheim's picture

Club Fed is generally a myth with respect to federal prisons. The lightest restrictions are at what are called camps. There are several in Florida which gained notoriety for lack restrictions, one at a military base where offenders had jobs on the base but could go to the movies or rendezvous with friends etc. without detection.

Schaap will not be permitted sentencing to a camp due to the category of his offense. He will likely go to what is called a medium or low max which is standard and somewhere in his federal district if possible or to a facility which specializes in treating offenders with sex related convictions.

Joshua R's picture

Is anyone else concerned that BJU is having Clarence Sexton speak at Bible Conference?  Sexton, in very recent memory has put a stamp of approval on not only Jack Schaap (prior to the sex scandal of course), but also on First Baptist of Hammond and their new pastor.  FBCH has not owned its sin nor is it admitting its idolatry of man which paved a clear path for Schaap to groom and prey upon his victim(s).  

At best, Sexton has little to no discernment and I'm baffled that he's on the schedule to speak this year.

 

 

Jay's picture

That's not a funny joke. 

Leno may go that way for cheap laughs, but there's nothing funny about rape or the Schaap case.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Easton's picture

The real news would be Jay Leno actually being funny.

Of course Jack Schaap is an embarrassment - and, I'm sorry, but the prospect of Schaap being asked to "dance" while in prison does evoke a wry smile.

(Look at me right now - I'm smiling wryly...)

But, I quickly become uncomfortable with Christians reveling in Schaap's scandalous down-fall.  The piling-on soon becomes something very similar to Leno --

Un-funny.

Jay's picture

...and I stand by my earlier assertion of Schaap as a sexual predator.

Records from federal attorneys show that Schaap started counseling the girl last spring after she was expelled from First Baptist’s high school because of a sexual relationship she had with someone else. A school administrator wrote to Schaap that the girl was hurt and confused at the time and that the administrator had convinced her to trust her church leaders and let them make decisions for her.

“The administrator further writes that the victim is willing to trust her leaders but is very scared,” Lozano said.

The administrator then asked Schaap to counsel her.

Schaap did so, and from the beginning took improper steps toward the girl, Lozano said. Church rules state that someone counseling a person of the opposite sex should not have closed-door sessions for more than 20 minutes. Schaap’s first session with the girl, who had attended the church for most of her life, lasted two hours behind a closed door. One session lasted six hours.

When staff questioned him on it, Lozano said, he responded by saying, “I made the rule, and I can break it."

This certainly isn't either:

He also wrote that God wanted them to be husband and wife and that he was leading her to a “better path of living — that’s what we call Righteousness.”

Lozano said he was concerned how Schaap used his power as a pastor and the fact that the girl had been taught her whole life to obey church leaders to “mold her into what you wanted.”

When a church technology employee finally found photos of Schaap with the victim, he told another church employee, who then approached Schaap’s wife. That’s when Schaap held a six-hour meeting with church employees, railing at them for their lack of loyalty and for questioning his actions. He then fired the one employee and later asked the technology employee if he could delete the photos and the more than 600 texts between Schaap and the victim.

The employee instead downloaded the photos and took them to other church officials, who went to the local law enforcement around the end of July.

So the solution to a woman who had an immoral sexual relationship was to expel her from school, then mandate that that she have counseling with the pastor (not a principal or teacher or counselor).  Then when the Pastor starts putting himself in a compromising situation, he blatantly defies his own rule, fires an employee that questions him, and continues the relationship anyway.

No, that's not intentional and predatory behavior.  Not. At. All.

 

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Alex Guggenheim's picture

Well Jay, you certainly have a right to develop concepts in your mind and attach them to words and insist they are what they are, though they are not as I see it. In this case, of course, I believe you have done this. This is not to say you do not have supporters who are eager, as you are, to attach "predator" to the sexual offender status of Schaap but for many it is a disservice to the effective use and categorization of the word, itself. Wiki, not known for its exhaustive scholarship, nevertheless contains an helpful point on the matter:

 Distinction from sex offenders

The term "sexual predator" is often considered distinct from "sex offender". Many U.S. states also see these differences legally. A sexual offender is a person who has committed a sexual offense. A sexual predator is often used to refer to a person who habitually seeks out sexual situations that are deemed exploitative. However, in some states, the term "sexual predator" is applied to anyone who has been convicted of certain crimes, regardless of whether or not there is a history of similar behavior. In the state of Illinois, for instance, a person convicted of any sex crime against a minor is designated a sexual predator, no matter the nature of the crime (violent versus statutory, a young child versus a teenager, etc.), and regardless of past behavior. This has led to criticism that the term is being misused, or overused, and thus has lost its original meaning and effectiveness.

To me the anxious and eager effort to label someone a sexual predator when, in fact, they have no history of this outside of a special case which speaks of a unique event in one's life, is telling. It informs me of a insurmountable prejudice and an unreasonable insistence on the use of the extreme and pejorative which does not speak to the facts of the offense and does not meet the threshold in comparison to real sexual predators who have a history of such offenses which is discoverable. Thus, I do not expect to convince you of what I perceive to be a gross error on your part.

 

 

Rob Fall's picture

to me is the difference between a serial killer and a killer.  Both have committed first degree murder.  One has murdered more than one person in a pattern of homicide.  The other's victim, though murdered in the first degree, fits a certain set of circumstances and qualifications (e.g. the abusing party in a domestic violence situation) which no one else would fit.

Hoping to shed more light than heat..

Susan R's picture

EditorModerator

A sexual predator is often used to refer to a person who habitually seeks out sexual situations that are deemed exploitative.

I think Schaap's behavior definitely smacks of predation. His web of manipulation and lies is broad and intricate, and he went to great lengths to have opportunity to repeatedly exploit and victimize this girl. 

Alex Guggenheim's picture

The distinction you seem to ignore is the single event verses a documented pattern. A sexual predator has most commonly in view just what has been pointed about regarding serial murders and a single event murders which, themselves, can have elements of predation but such a person, though acting with forethought, malice and predation is not classified as a serial murderer.  It is still a single or unique event, though possessing elements similar to a serial or predatory murderer. If having any elements of predation for sexual and relational development forces us to label Schaap a predator, it makes everyone a predator seeing every human involves themselves in some form of predation and many in sexual predation, though magically they don't get called predators. A man who sends notes to a woman or flowers or a woman who flirts, she is grooming, hence it is predation and now we must call her a predator? Ridiculous of course but that is what happens when critical distinctions are ignored.

Jay's picture

Alex,

I'll make this distinction and then back out, since you and I have clear differences on this and I have no desire to get into a extended debate.

Predatory behavior requires intent.  If Schaap had been driving this girl home from church and parked with her and repented and made it right, or if he had parked with her and 'gotten carried away with his lust', the story would be much different.

This is a story of a man that knew that the woman was vulnerable and then structured the relationship and the circumstances to sleep with her.  I do not, at any point, believe that this was just a tragic accident or tragic mistake on his part.  The whole case demonstrates intent on his part, and that's predatory behavior.  It's that simple.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Susan R's picture

EditorModerator

One of the differences between a sex offender/predator and a murderer is that you can only kill a person one time. With sex crimes, the same victim can be attacked again and again. 

I don't care if a lion eats one antelope or five, it's a predator. With Schaap, there are aspects of predatory behavior and a documented pattern of sexual abuse, even though at this point there is 'only' one victim. 

There is also a difference between pursuing a relationship and grooming a victim, especially since we are talking about a minor child here, not an adult woman. And while phone calls can be made, and cards and flowers can be sent by both a gentleman and a Jack the Ripper, obviously their motives are different, and will be reflected in the ongoing nature of the relationship and the eventual outcome. 

We have the outcome of the Schaap case, and I think it is reasonable to assume that if this girl had been removed from his grasp, he would have found another victim. 

Chip Van Emmerik's picture

Susan R wrote:
We have the outcome of the Schaap case, and I think it is reasonable to assume that if this girl had been removed from his grasp, he would have found another victim.
This is the part I have wondered about. If that's so, you would think there would have been others before as well, but the extensive investigation has not uncovered anything else.

Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?

Jay's picture

Chip Van Emmerik wrote:

Susan R wrote:
We have the outcome of the Schaap case, and I think it is reasonable to assume that if this girl had been removed from his grasp, he would have found another victim.
This is the part I have wondered about. If that's so, you would think there would have been others before as well, but the extensive investigation has not uncovered anything else.

I've wondered about that too.  One of the initial news reports mentioned "another young woman coming forward" in addition to the first victim.  Predators like Schaap usually have multiple victims before they are caught.

"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells

Susan R's picture

EditorModerator

When reading about all the shenanigans involved in getting this girl transported from place to place with the cooperation of other adults, it seems to me that there must be a significant amount of brainwashing and fear-mongering.

I've seen this in other churches, one with whom I have been very personally acquainted. People are not only silent about what they see and experience, they stay in spite of it, because they think the price of leaving (being shunned and slandered) is too high. I've also seen people admit that they've been attacked and abused, only to recant later in fear of repercussions when I tried to get them some help. 

 

Alex Guggenheim's picture

Susan R wrote:

One of the differences between a sex offender/predator and a murderer is that you can only kill a person one time. With sex crimes, the same victim can be attacked again and again. 

I don't care if a lion eats one antelope or five, it's a predator. With Schaap, there are aspects of predatory behavior and a documented pattern of sexual abuse, even though at this point there is 'only' one victim. 

There is also a difference between pursuing a relationship and grooming a victim, especially since we are talking about a minor child here, not an adult woman. And while phone calls can be made, and cards and flowers can be sent by both a gentleman and a Jack the Ripper, obviously their motives are different, and will be reflected in the ongoing nature of the relationship and the eventual outcome. 

We have the outcome of the Schaap case, and I think it is reasonable to assume that if this girl had been removed from his grasp, he would have found another victim. 

Spare me the selective use of the redundant "minor child" narrative. The fact is the state understands she was not a "child" the in sense you are seeking to communicateate but sophisticated enough as a teenager to make poor decisions and she did just that. This does not justify Schaap's poor boundary failures but it does mitigate the context which it appears many with an ax to grind simply do not wish to hear about but that is nothing new.

Jack the Ripper? Again, save me the melodrama.

Schaap has no history of paramours or even teenaged paramours. The reasonable and rational response isn't invoking Jack the Ripper but noticing this as an anomaly. Why and how did this happen. Schaap was arrogant and narcissistic to say the least but many arrogant and narcissistic are quite bounded and so was Jack Schaap.

So to assume he would have moved on to someone else actually speaks against his history. But let's not that get in the way of things, eh? The assumption isn't that he would have found someone else, rather the facts of the case speak to a unique event where the combination of his immaturity, arrogance and narcissism met with a teenager who was willing to form an immoral relationship with him. Did he exacerbate his failure with other activities? Yes but that should not be surprising, most people who believe they are to be discovered for a significant or lesser indiscretion reasonably seek to avoid that. Sure, they might distastefully and unethically use certain means to cover it up but simply doing that does not somehow make them a predator, it makes them desperate to not be discovered whether it be having broken mom's vase or doing something immoral and/or illegal.

Finally, as to trying treat their repeated dalliances as predatory is certainly an argument that a prosecutor might make and understandably so, they wish for the worst descriptions of every law-offender whether they are true or not. It is a prejudicial use of the context of both the relationship, immoral as it was.

Susan R's picture

EditorModerator

to disagree, Alex. But spare me the mischaracterizations of MY character while you seek to defend Schaap's. I think the evidence points to a predator, and you don't. Done now. 

 

Easton's picture

"...you have not grasped the essence of my assertions..." ~ Alex Guggenheim

I didn't get what you said to me either.

Maybe you're just hard to understand -- rather than the rest of us being, well, a bit dim.

Pages