flyingnorm wrote:Abuse is addictive due to the psychological sense of power it provides to the abuser. The adrenaline rush is similar to the rush caused by narcotics. The mind becomes dependent on the rush.
There are other behaviours that people engage in that produces a similar adrenaline rush they become dependant upon. Leaders can fall into a trap where they get high on misusing their power.
When a heroin addict talks about a meth addict, he will talk about how bad meth is and how he would never take meth, or he will talk about how good he is now because he no longer uses meth, just uses heroin. When the heroin addict and the meth addict talk to each other, they share a strange brotherhood. They might compare trips, tips, sources, etc. They complain to each other about how terrible the effect of their drug habit is. Yet they will steal from each other to feed their personal addiction.
To the sober people, they are both drug addicts that should get sober. To each other, they are not so bad.
Is is possible for a relationship between a sex offender and a leader who misuses power to be similar to the relationship between the meth user and the heroin user?
The heroin and meth user are both misusing a substance to gain a rush they depend on. Neither knows how to do life without the substance that gives them pleasure.
The sex offender and the abusive leader are both misusing power for personal pleasure. They both do not want to give up their power because of the pleasure it provides them at the expense of other people.
In both scenarios, objectivity is gone.
In both scenarios, both people need each other to feel better about themselves.
Hmm. That's an interesting thought about the leader and offender needing each other.
It is an interesting idea. Something I've not seen discussed in this thread but I haven't really read this whole thing.
In pretty much all circles there is a tendency for leadership types to over-estimate their power and influence. You see it in things like business and sales where there is a giant industry devoted to motivational speaking and all that sort of thing. You see it in education. And you especially see it in religious circles where leaders often greatly over-estimate their ability to influence people's lives and tend to conflate their own influence with God's.
I'm not at all suggesting this was the case here with CAM. I have absolutely no idea. But it is a thought. Whether the leaders here over-estimated their abilities to influence the course of another's life. I wouldn't call it a "misuse of power" but an over-estimation of one's influence and power to affect change.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
steve-in-kville wrote:This thread will be a year old on Saturday. What has been accomplished in that year??
In addition to the changes that CAM has made that have been detailed earlier in this thread, hundreds if not thousands of churches have reviewed their policies and procedures. Some are learning what needs to be reported to law enforcement. Some individuals have gained a vision for helping the abused. Could you please name some of these churches that you know of?
Unfortunately, many potential abusers have gone underground. Would you please clarify what you mean by "gone underground"?
I have had a number of conversations with one of the founders of ASAA. https://www.anabaptistawareness.org/
I asked him whether more abusers and potential abusers are coming forward, and trying to get help, now that they see the damage that one person can do to so many people.
He replied with something like this, "Not anything noticeable. There may be a couple individuals. All the rest are scared of what might happen if they confess their struggles. So they are purposing to 'try harder' on their own.
What are these abusers and potential abusers scared of exactly? Are the potential abusers who are afraid of the shame? If they are then I beg them to please seek the help of a licensed Christian counselor and other support people no matter how shameful it feels. If a potential abuser wants help then I will not shame them for seeking that help. Seeking that help may very well prevent future abuse.
If someone has already abused and is scared of what might happen if they confess then what are they scared of? Are they scared of being shamed? Are they scared of legal consequences and loss of reputation? I feel that if someone is truly sorry for what they've done then they will be willing to face the consequences that result from their sin. The victims of abusers have suffered consequences and shame for years that should rightfully have belonged to the abuser. It is only right that someone who has abused would be willing to suffer the consequences and shame of what they did.
There is no mercy for people with these kinds of struggles in our current environment. I've tried to be open over the years - to be honest about my failures earlier in life to make it easier for others to be more honest and come clean and seek help. But the only reward I and others get for being honest right now (from those caught up in the current environment) is condemnation and judgment and shaming. The current environment doesn't understand how deep change happens. A potential abuser cannot change course unless he can be healed from shame. Our churches need to be safe places for people to confess their struggles. A person should be able stand up in church and say, 'I've been struggling with my sexuality lately. Could you pray for me?' In the current environment, it is not safe to do this."
There is mercy for those who struggle with sexual desires toward children and are sincere about walking the long road to freedom. There is mercy for those who have already abused and who are truly broken and repentant over what they have done and are sincere about walking the long road to freedom. Those who claim they are repentant but use every tool available to get out of the consequences of their sin do not seem to me to be truly sorry or sincere about changing, but seem to only be sorry because they were caught.
One statement that really bothered me was the part where he said "A person should be able stand up in church and say, 'I've been struggling with my sexuality lately. Could you pray for me?'"
I would not call a desire to abuse children "struggling with sexuality." That doesn't sound much better to me than someone saying they had a "moral failure." I think most people who heard that "struggling with sexuality" statement would assume that the person was struggling with same sex attraction to other adults. Please let's stop using euphemisms and start naming the sin for what it is.
I've been wanting to start a thread on this but do not have the time to fully engage with it. So if someone else wants to start a thread on this, go for it.
0 x
No half-heartedness and no worldly fear must turn us aside from following the light unflinchingly. --J.R.R. Tolkien
When you can't run, you crawl, and when you can't crawl - when you can't do that...you find someone to carry you. --Firefly
steve-in-kville wrote:We've been going around in this circle for a year now. It takes a cultural change, one that will most likely never happen. We don't want it to. We're too comfortable in it and why compromise something that can be swept under a rug somewhere? But then that's a thread for another day....
I doubt that any of the present CAM staff will make a similar failure. Those who are still working for CAM have needed to deal with enough fallout from this crisis that no one wants to go through this again. I know that some of you don't have this confidence, but I am just sharing how it looks from my perspective.
Hypothetical question here. Ernie what would you say if you discovered that someone still at CAM had sexually abused another person years ago and the abuse had been kept quiet?
The concerns I have are with all the churches and other organizations who think that this is an isolated mishap that just happened to turn out bad and who believe that most molesters who have a good Christian testimony are not pedophiles and won't be molesting people again.
I was just talking with a bishop the other day who said he and his fellow minister don't like discussing "what if" situations that may never happen. He would rather wait until there is a problem and deal with it then.
This reflects the culture that I have been around most of my life and is probably the aspect of conservative Anabaptist culture that I get the most frustrated with.
0 x
No half-heartedness and no worldly fear must turn us aside from following the light unflinchingly. --J.R.R. Tolkien
When you can't run, you crawl, and when you can't crawl - when you can't do that...you find someone to carry you. --Firefly
flyingnorm wrote:
The sex offender and the abusive leader are both misusing power for personal pleasure. They both do not want to give up their power because of the pleasure it provides them at the expense of other people.
In both scenarios, objectivity is gone.
In both scenarios, both people need each other to feel better about themselves.
steve-in-kville wrote:Does anyone know if "the powers that be" from CAM are paying any attention to the negativity they are getting? Do they care? I thought I read somewhere they hawked this forum but considered it the "vocal minority."
Let me speak CAM "powers that be" for you and see if they care?
investment income =$756,951
JM scandal cost =$420,000
Expense paid, contributions took a minor hit (a rounding error). 2018 =$50M and 2019=$50M What more is there to care about? They can now continue as before.
flyingnorm wrote:
The sex offender and the abusive leader are both misusing power for personal pleasure. They both do not want to give up their power because of the pleasure it provides them at the expense of other people.
In both scenarios, objectivity is gone.
In both scenarios, both people need each other to feel better about themselves.
I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing the parallel.
The hypoyhesis is that an abusive leader and a sexual predator could have a codependant relationship with each other similar to the codependant relationship between the heroin user and the meth user. Maybe the idea is unfounded or a long stretch. Its an idea, not a well proven theory.
steve-in-kville wrote:This thread will be a year old on Saturday. What has been accomplished in that year??
In addition to the changes that CAM has made that have been detailed earlier in this thread, hundreds if not thousands of churches have reviewed their policies and procedures. Some are learning what needs to be reported to law enforcement. Some individuals have gained a vision for helping the abused.
Unfortunately, many potential abusers have gone underground. I have had a number of conversations with one of the founders of ASAA.https://www.anabaptistawareness.org/
I asked him whether more abusers and potential abusers are coming forward, and trying to get help, now that they see the damage that one person can do to so many people.
He replied with something like this, "Not anything noticeable. There may be a couple individuals. All the rest are scared of what might happen if they confess their struggles. So they are purposing to 'try harder' on their own. There is no mercy for people with these kinds of struggles in our current environment. I've tried to be open over the years - to be honest about my failures earlier in life to make it easier for others to be more honest and come clean and seek help. But the only reward I and others get for being honest right now (from those caught up in the current environment) is condemnation and judgment and shaming. The current environment doesn't understand how deep change happens. A potential abuser cannot change course unless he can be healed from shame. Our churches need to be safe places for people to confess their struggles. A person should be able stand up in church and say, 'I've been struggling with my sexuality lately. Could you pray for me?' In the current environment, it is not safe to do this."
I've been rolling the parts in bold over in my head all day. You're talking about statements by one of the founders of ASAA. His language is troubling.
1. Why does it seem like there is expected to be a reward for being honest about sexual sins/crimes or being honest about the desire to commit sexual sins/crimes? What kind of reward are abusers or potential abusers looking for in exchange for honesty, and does the seeming expectation of a reward show that they are sincere in repenting and wanting help?
2. What kind of failures earlier in life is this founder talking about? Is the word "failure" another euphemism for having sexually abused someone? Is he talking about having urges to abuse someone (potential abuser)? Is he talking about something like pornography use, sex before marriage, or an extramarital affair?
0 x
No half-heartedness and no worldly fear must turn us aside from following the light unflinchingly. --J.R.R. Tolkien
When you can't run, you crawl, and when you can't crawl - when you can't do that...you find someone to carry you. --Firefly
flyingnorm wrote:
The sex offender and the abusive leader are both misusing power for personal pleasure. They both do not want to give up their power because of the pleasure it provides them at the expense of other people.
In both scenarios, objectivity is gone.
In both scenarios, both people need each other to feel better about themselves.
I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing the parallel.
The hypoyhesis is that an abusive leader and a sexual predator could have a codependant relationship with each other similar to the codependant relationship between the heroin user and the meth user. Maybe the idea is unfounded or a long stretch. Its an idea, not a well proven theory.
Yeah, I'm just not drawing the conclusion. Not saying in some situations that is not the case. But it's a stretch to think it is in them all. A lot of this is cultural, and leaders can and have handled things in the wrong way out of the pressure of tradition or a false understanding of repentance and forgiveness. At least, that's what I think is most likely. I could be wrong.
Aurien wrote:Could you please name some of these churches that you know of?
I just know that many CA's are looking at these matters in a new light and having conversations about what they should do (reporting to authorities) in light of what they learned from this ordeal. Some were already working on this before the scandal and this has provided motivation to keep working on this.
Aurien wrote:
Would you please clarify what you mean by "gone underground"?
People who were slowly getting the courage to talk about their sins and inclinations, are afraid to do so anymore because of the public backlash.
Aurien wrote:
What are these abusers and potential abusers scared of exactly? Are the potential abusers who are afraid of the shame? If they are then I beg them to please seek the help of a licensed Christian counselor and other support people no matter how shameful it feels. If a potential abuser wants help then I will not shame them for seeking that help. Seeking that help may very well prevent future abuse.
Potential abusers don't realize this. They think that they can control themselves with more "mind over matter".
Aurien wrote:
If someone has already abused and is scared of what might happen if they confess then what are they scared of? Are they scared of being shamed? Are they scared of legal consequences and loss of reputation?
Yes, scared of both.
Aurien wrote:
I feel that if someone is truly sorry for what they've done then they will be willing to face the consequences that result from their sin.
Not everybody is truly sorry. They feel deep shame and this shame keeps them from being able to feel truly sorry. Unless they can feel Jesus forgiveness, they will be locked in shame. I think sorrow for sin comes off in layers for many people. It starts by confessing, and as the person is healed of some shame, they can continue to repent more fully of the wrong they did. At first they repent of the act. Later they repent of the sin and ideas behind the act. (the desire to control others, the desire to use others for their own pleasure, etc.)
Aurien wrote:I've been rolling the parts in bold over in my head all day. You're talking about statements by one of the founders of ASAA. His language is troubling.
1. Why does it seem like there is expected to be a reward for being honest about sexual sins/crimes or being honest about the desire to commit sexual sins/crimes? What kind of reward are abusers or potential abusers looking for in exchange for honesty, and does the seeming expectation of a reward show that they are sincere in repenting and wanting help?
That was not a direct quote. It should have read, "The only response I get is..."
steve-in-kville wrote:Does anyone know if "the powers that be" from CAM are paying any attention to the negativity they are getting? Do they care? I thought I read somewhere they hawked this forum but considered it the "vocal minority."
Let me speak CAM "powers that be" for you and see if they care?
investment income =$756,951
JM scandal cost =$420,000
Expense paid, contributions took a minor hit (a rounding error). 2018 =$50M and 2019=$50M What more is there to care about? They can now continue as before.
I look at the numbers and see a decrease in giving of 5.4% over the entire year. The scandal was not publicized until midway through the year, and I suspect that many who have decided to defund CAM did not reach that decision until months later after allowing a grace period for response(s) they could consider satisfactory. So a month-to-month comparison with the previous year would give a more complete picture, but it seems to me the hit was somewhat significant, but not catastrophic.
