Dee Parsons of Wartburg Watch: The Personification of Everything Wrong with Church
When Paul’s Passing Thoughts .com was started in 2009, the goal was to find out why church turned on me with a vengeance despite my best efforts. Second to that was the question, “What now, where does one go from the point of diagnosing the problem?” You have to properly diagnose the problem before you can fix it.
This article will not wear you out with points leading up to a final conclusion; I will begin by stating what I have found. Church produces the fruit of its ideology. What is wrong with church? Answer: church is what’s wrong with church. Christ’s mandate to his followers was never intended to look anything like church. The solution is to depart from church and pursue Christ’s mandate to His followers. You can’t fix church. There is nothing there that is salvageable.
Let me back up a tad because this post is not the least bit personal, but seeks to sharpen the objectives of TANC Ministries. This is some information that I have not shared before. PPT was primarily a blog for the express purpose of sharing my research. My focus was research. I had to know why—how could dozens of pastors stand by and watch Clearcreek Chapel do to my family what they did?
Clearly, obviously, from a literal interpretive standpoint in regard to the Bible, what they were doing was dead wrong and unbiblical. During the episode, I was even under the counsel of a church that was part of the same fellowship of churches that Clearcreek Chapel belongs to. The pastor, the late Rick Wilson, was a former associate pastor at CCC. The present pastor of the church, Paul Craig, was an elder at the time and according to Wilson found the situation, “unsettling.” Grace Covenant (Beavercreek, Ohio) was obviously stuck in the middle, and was also the recipient of a significant exodus of people from CCC at the time. Though I was clearly under church discipline at CCC, I was allowed to attend Grace Covenant on a regular basis. I even thought about applying for membership which would have forced the Grace Covenant elders into making a judgment regarding the veracity of CCC discipline. I should have; watching that play out would have been priceless.
Eventually, Wilson instructed me to go back and play along in order to get my wife back, but I had already tried that for four months. During that time, I was subjected to cult-like break sessions conducted by CCC elder and Psychiatrist Dr. Devon Berry. The CCC elders knew that I had overcome serious depression in the past, and it was obvious they thought they could use Berry and the circumstances they were bringing to bear in my life to drive me into debilitating despair. It was very apparent to me at the time: that is what they were trying to do.
I want to stop right here and thank God publically for something right now—I want to give Him the glory. At the time, I was working out of town and laid in bed at night before going to work the next day…in perfect peace. My favorite time of the day during that time period was bedtime. Why? I laid there in the quiet darkness, not really thinking about anything except how peaceful it was. I was doing nothing but laying there soaking up the peacefulness. Do I have any theories regarding this experience? One: I had begun a long journey in search for the truth. God is with one on such journeys. That’s my best shot at answering that question. By all reasoning, I should have been a basket case.
Let’s now pause here for some simple clarification. It all boiled down to two things:
AUTHORITY, and how I interpreted reality versus how they interpreted reality.
I have discovered something in my research—research enables you to come to a point more and more where you can explain complex problems in simple terms. In the 2500 + articles I have written on Reformed ideology, you can see the focus move from the what to the why. My first book articulated the what and how it contradicted a grammatical interpretation of reality, though I didn’t understand the latter dynamic. My second book articulated the contemporary history of the Neo-Calvinism movement and added some more data about grammatical contradictions.
My third book and subsequent booklets articulate the grammatical contradictions in regard to soteriology. They also describe the dynamics between the Old Calvinism/New Calvinism question and how the interpretation of reality drives that debate.
Including time spent prior to PPT, eight years later, I can now put all of this in simple terms. It boils down to AUTHORITY vested in the interpretation of reality.
And, the established credential thereof known as “orthodoxy.” What is the premise of orthodoxy? Nothing more or less than the claims of men that people choose to believe. You can put any number of things in place of “naked” in regard to the following question posed by God, “Who told you that you are_____?” Be very, very, very wary of what men say God told you. And that’s orthodoxy. And the place we go to get certified in orthodoxy is called “seminary.” In case you haven’t noticed, God isn’t the dean or an adjunct professor in any of these schools.
Here is something else that should be evident: you, and only you alone will answer to God. Therefore, pick your orthodoxy well. There are no attorneys in God’s court save Christ, “hear ye Him.” “God has spoken to us in these last days through His Son”, not a horde of academics.
So, what do we have in the recent dust-up between PPT and Wartburg Watch? Be advised, I am not going to rehash all of the gory details. Dee Parsons is right and I am wrong because she has college degrees, and holds to orthodoxy. Paul Dohse does not have college degrees, and does not hold to orthodoxy. Paul Dohse holds to a grammatical interpretation of realty, and therefore asks, “How can those who proclaim themselves ‘wicked’ lay claim to salvation?”
Be sure of this: NOTHING has changed since Christ ministered on earth. The primary pushback against Christ was clearly the orthodoxy of the day. Christ deliberately avoided the lauded academia of that day. I just don’t know what is more obvious. In addition, he had to personally reeducate the apostle Paul who was the only religious academic that He used for foundational purposes.
I am weary of documenting the steroidal cognitive dissonance that takes place over at Wartburg and their e-church hosted by the Barney Fife of pastors, Wade Burleson. Regardless of his credentials, from a standpoint of interpreting reality grammatically, his theological snafus are just plain embarrassing. For example, you can’t make the point that a biblical author was teaching something based on the analysis of a word that didn’t exist in the first century. This all takes place in the face of common sense for the same reason I experienced what I experienced at CCC:
AUTHORITY vested in a particular interpretation of reality.
Because one is credentialed in knowing how to lead those who cannot know reality, one should have authority over you for your own good and the common good of people in general.
In varying degrees, CHURCH, established in the 4th century by St. Augustine et al, is the expression of this primary root, and the fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree. Chaos and drama will continue in the church with no solution in sight because of its foundational presuppositions concerning the interpretation of reality and the authority vested in its epistemology.
This ministry’s series on the Heidelberg Disputation focuses on the following fact: at issue with the Reformation was a debate about the interpretation of reality. Of course that spoke to how the Bible is interpreted, but the issue started with how reality itself is to be interpreted. Let me give you the thumbnail:
Words don’t necessarily mean things.
By and large, there are two kinds of Protestants roaming about, Calvinists and functioning Calvinists. Susan and I often have conversations with people who hate Calvinism, but verbally espouse Calvinism unawares constantly. We don’t even address the particulars anymore because we know a complete reeducation is needed. This is what we are attempting to do with the HD series. This series reexamines the roots of the poisonous tree.
This is why Dee Parsons, in the recent dust-up, insinuated that I am mentally ill. What is the definition of a person who does not properly perceive reality? Hence, the CCC elders involved a Psychiatrist in my situation because they honestly believe I am mentally ill because I interpret reality grammatically. Reformed scholars such as Geerhardus Vos have stated such openly. Pastor Russ Kennedy told me I was “mad” and begged me to allow them to “shepherd” me. I believe the guy honestly meant well and still does. Unfortunately, as the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
By the way, I am not talking about grammatical interpretation that leads to a redemptive outcome. I am talking about the interpretation of reality beginning with exegetical presuppositions in the purest sense. I realize Reformed scholars interpret a verse literally when it can serve a redemptive historical outcome…
…that doesn’t make you a proponent of interpreting reality grammatically.
One of the accusations that flowed from the recent dust-up was that TANC Ministries is merely developing its own orthodoxy. Not so. Orthodoxy fundamentally interprets reality according to Martin Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation which was expanded upon by John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion. Seminary degrees guarantee that individuals will not do independent research that will reveal the real tenants of orthodoxy:
- It is a metaphysical redemptive narrative that interprets all reality through a dualism of good and evil.
- It demands the fusion of faith and force for the common good of mankind.
- It is predicated on spiritual caste that adds additional mediators between God and man other than Christ.
- All of reality progresses as predetermined by manifestations of good completely outside of man.
Dee Parsons’ response to me that “I don’t believe what you say I believe” is most likely due to her ignorance regarding the true sum and substance of the same Reformed orthodoxy that she promotes. Perhaps. While claiming to be an advocate for the spiritually abused, she picks and chooses from orthodoxy what she wants to acknowledge.
The Westminster Confession is just wonderful, but its call to control the free press and execute those who are heterodox is due to the authors being “men of the time.” Of course, their politics and ethics had nothing to do with their ideology. Perish the thought, and no, American Jurisprudence isn’t the only difference between Calvin’s Geneva and the present-day church. It’s absurd to think Dee Parsons would actually have you committed to a mental institution because she thinks you are mentally ill. It’s absurd to think Mark Driscoll would really put you in a wood chipper just because he said that’s what ought to be done. It’s absurd to think James MacDonald would catapult you into the next county, and to your certain death just because he said he wishes he could.
Church is a place where professional clergy interpret reality in a completely different way than most parishioners. Congregants follow the dictates of church leaders while being clueless in regard to their interpretation of reality. They are given elements to follow while being totally unaware as to what those elements are based on. Hence, chaos and confusion reign. Duggar-like drama is paraded before the world constantly like an out-of-control stampede of rats. Yet, that isn’t the madness; the madness is suggesting that we rethink how church is done. After all, Catholicism and Protestantism have had only 1500 + years to get it right. Not only that, the Neo-Calvinist movement has been in total control of the church for at least ten years. Growing steadily since its conceptual resurgence in 1970, discernment/spiritual abuse blogs exploded in 2009 when the movement shifted into 4th gear. Starting in 2008, a historical phenomenon of mediation organizations to keep churches out of court exploded onto the scene as well.
With all of this considered, I think I have heard the best assessment of Wartburg Watch yet:
Subconsciously or consciously, Dee uses her blog as a means to leverage her desire for a seat at the American church’s authoritarian table. Period. Whether this was an initial objective of her blog or merely a pitfall of unforeseen success, who knows? But the reality is obvious:
Dee creates better soldiers, not better souls. And the irony is thus that the “victims” who frequent her site often become the very image of that which they initially despised: manipulative self-appointed God-proxies who claim that the only legitimate doctrinal discussions are with those whom already concede their reformed hermeneutic (Muff Potter, anyone?).
My point is that the cognitive dissonance, the categorical rejection of reason as a yard stick for measuring reality (the efficacy of existence), makes contending with her an almost perfect waste of time.
So what’s the solution? I believe the solution is an utter rejection of orthodoxy and church as we know it. The immense ramifications of that is not the issue—truth is the issue. The church has had its chance to make a case for hope, and has not measured up.
I believe the task ahead is daunting, but will supply a freedom and joy beyond our wildest imaginations. It is a call for Christians to submit themselves to the one mediator Jesus Christ. It is a call for Christians to stop listening to men, and “hear ye Him.” Orthodoxy has NO authority, ALL authority has been given to Christ and no one else.
Past this, God’s people must gather together for mutual encouragement and edification in the ways prescribed by the Bible and not the traditions of men.
When is the misery and suffering produced by orthodoxy enough to make us question everything?
That time is well past.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Thanks for the exchange, Pearl. I never expected to be a sort of enemy here because I disagree with the method of one exchange on another blog– but that seems to be where it has ended up. Is this one of those ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ sort of things?
While I agree with the concept of perpetual drama, I maintain that stories also teach in ways we might not see fruit from for a long time. I do not consider telling them, “gossip” when it comes to a public figure. I can tell you that very few people connect the dots on doctrine when they are sitting in these churches.
My former church was taken over last year and people know something is different but they cannot put their finger on it. Stories would really help them—and are in a few cases—as those who take an interest are looking for answers. Most aren’t. They just go to church and check the box. They are not even aware they went from striving in the Lord to perpetual brokenness—they can just feel the chaos that comes with it. They don’t even know how to label these things. Sometimes softly softly catchy monkey. And that is not for everyone. I get that. But is there not room for both?
I am wondering why it is so horrible to have different opinions on things?
However, I can feel the chill so will go.
LikeLike
Lydia,
There is nothing personal going on here at all. What you are hearing is the same constant message that TANC ministries will continue to repeat: the ideology that produces the abuse must be totally abandoned. Not all Nazis manned the ovens. Not all Nazis agreed on everything. Neo-Nazis do nice things for people. Why is a watered-down version or sanctified version always unacceptable? Because it leaves an open door for the full-blown return of the original. When authentic Protestantism makes a comeback, Protestant Light emerges from the eventual ashes, but that always leaves an open door for the lager to return. What Cindy/Dee/Deb do for people in the short term is irrelevant–they are enabling abuse for the long term.
LikeLike
Paul, Thanks for responding. I appreciate there is nothing personal toward me from you. However:
“There is nothing personal going on here at all.”
“Well this was sorta kinda a tad bit personal: “In fact, if I recall you were one of the commenter who pretended not to see the mocking and abuse towards Paul and John. It reminded me of my ‘friends’ who watched me be devoured. ”
Isn’t this exactly what she was complaining about going on over at TWW? it seems to be ok when one thinks it is for a good cause. I was not even asked a question first!
I just don’t know the rules anymore. I thought throwing a verbal grenade in a drive by in a place like that– no one should have expected folks to all of a sudden see the light. Quite the opposite, in fact. they just dug in more. You will have to wipe out the Nazi’s in each generation if persuasion and meeting folks where they are is not going to be a factor in education.
I despise the doctrine, too. Just not all the people who are buying into it. Some don’t even know anything different.
There is no way I would ever throw my dear friend Cindy under a bus. Even if she decides she believes little pink Martians are Jesus. It would not matter to me. I have all sorts of friends including atheists.
Thanks for allowing me to comment, anyway!
LikeLike
You nailed it there; opposing ideologies. That is the assumption that drives all behavior to its logical conclusion. And the behaviors will continue as long as those ideologies remain the root assumption. And that is that hardest part; getting people to re-evaluate their root assumptions, because they have so much invested in them. You must be first willing to throw it all away and start over. For some, such a sacrifice is too great. That is a pragmatism of a totally different sort; to put up will all kinds of evil just for the sake of some perceived personal benefit. Those of us who have made that sacrifice have found it a very lonely place to be, but at the same time we discovered that we weren’t really alone after all, and what we ended up with was so much better that what we could have imagined!
LikeLike
“Of course, individuals absolutely do have the right to tell their stories, and they should continue to do so! The concern is how many days, months, years does one spend telling/discussing the countless stories of abuse coming from the Protestant cult before making a decision to heed the warnings? It’s a show over there, no different than the institutional church, including a Calvinist preacher. How can a totally depraved person help another totally depraved person? Impossible. I liken it to the Enquirer.”
You don’t have to read it. Not everyone is going to agree it is like the Enquirer. Is that a prereq for you?
“Lydia, you speak of being thrown under the bus by WW, have you ever confronted Dee and Deb about this, brought the matter to their attention,…. was there an apology extended to you? or do you just go about sharing your story about how they treated you on different blogs?”
I don’t really understand what you are getting at here. I found out about the SGM survivors situation/ww interaction when John mentioned it on his blog a while back. I had not been over there for a while and had no idea. What would be the point of “confrontation”? To what end? I just don’t get that sort of thinking. I honestly do not care. I would have to be very thin skinned for that to become an issue to me. I have nothing invested in any of it.. They are blogs for crying out loud. These are not personal relationships that have any influence in my life. I comment all sorts of places…Calvinist pastor blogs, even. And where are all the places I shared that story? Wow. You are practiced at going for the jugglar…for no reason. I am not your enemy unless anyone who does not tow the party line in all interactions is automatically an enemy to you. I just don’t get that sort of thinking.
“And I have given you my opinion. Your thinking about me is wrong, I expected nothing from WW. The WW has made a choice to ignore the warnings of evil doctrines taught by wolves…..this makes them even more dangerous pretending to “ help” abused victims. I utterly reject dualism. ”
I live at ground zero. Do you have any idea how much you sound like the YRR around here? “you have ignored our warnings about the true gospel”. “Your doctrine is man centered” and on and on. Why are you using the same tactics. You are even practicing a form of dualism with me.
“No one apologized to a man who simply asked a question over at the WW, was punished for doing so, and wasn’t allowed to defend himself. Silenced. As you well know, Paul spends his life seeking to equip, encourage, and instruct others as he shares his research and resources in order that ALL may understand the reality of what we are witnessing today in the institutional churches.”
If the convo had been about Paul I might understand the drive by verbal grenade better. It is none of my business what he does. But I seem to be in trouble here because I did not comment in solidarity. It is not a friendly place for this sort of zealotry. And you know that. How many views were changed? It makes no difference anyway and that is none of my business except you seemed to have a real problem with me coming here. Evidently I did not show my solidarity by chiming in and I am now “one of them”. Again, I did not understand the rules.
“And regarding the Law Prof- we must be speaking of a different person, or have a different definition of a “wise person” but then again, John Calvin was also deemed “very intelligent”.”
You categorized “law profs” in general in that comment. I was saying I know one (not the WW one) who did not fit your generalization. Why take a jab at all law profs because one at TWW was so cruel? To what end?
Why does everything have to be degraded to some sort of insult? I hope this club does not become too exclusive.
LikeLike
“Lydia, you speak of being thrown under the bus by WW, have you ever confronted Dee and Deb about this, brought the matter to their attention,…. was there an apology extended to you? or do you just go about sharing your story about how they treated you on different blogs?”
I just do not understand this sort of thinking. The first I heard of the sgmsurvivor/ww exchange was on Johns blog a while after it happened. What would be the point of confrontation? I was not even in the convo and it was a bit after it happened. So confront? to what end? I could care less what those folks think of me. I thought it was a bit amusing and a good indicator how the discernment blogs try and stick together. I was not offended at all. I have been called a heretic so much it rolls off my back.
And where all have I shared this story? What exactly are you going for here? What am I guilty of in your eyes? For clarity sake, please state what I am guilty of with you?
“And I have given you my opinion. Your thinking about me is wrong, I expected nothing from WW. The WW has made a choice to ignore the warnings of evil doctrines taught by wolves…..this makes them even more dangerous pretending to “ help” abused victims. I utterly reject dualism. ”
Good Lord! I live at ground zero and have had many YRR say the exact same to me about my non Cal doctrine! You are practicing a sort of dualism with me, can you not see it? Why the claws? I just don’t get it.
“No one apologized to a man who simply asked a question over at the WW, was punished for doing so, and wasn’t allowed to defend himself. Silenced. As you well know, Paul spends his life seeking to equip, encourage, and instruct others as he shares his research and resources in order that ALL may understand the reality of what we are witnessing today in the institutional churches. ”
I don’t understand what I am guilty of with you. Was it not being in solidarity with Pauls comment and retaliating for him? As I said it took me a while to see what went on as I missed his comment. The threads there are quite long and go fast. Is there a litmus test here? Goodness, I comment on all sorts of blogs. From Calvinist pastor blogs to Nakedpastor who is very pro gay which I am not. But as a libertarian I not against civil marriage. I am real big on reading around. That makes me what to you? Not in your club? Not passing your standards?
“And regarding the Law Prof- we must be speaking of a different person, or have a different definition of a “wise person” but then again, John Calvin was also deemed “very intelligent”.”
You made an insulting comment about “law profs” in general. “One person did attempt but Law Prof led them to not do what was right. Is this surprising coming from a law prof?”
I related that I know one (not at tww) law prof who is wise. So why the generalized insult on law profs? Calvin was a brilliant sociopathic narcissist with too much power at a very young age. .
So why the claws? To what end?
Not sure we have the same definition of “love”. :o)
LikeLike
“Seems that there are folks with an ax to grind, those who like to flit about from blog to blog spewing their vitriol for a while; then when the mess is made, disappear into the woodwork like a cockroach when the light’s switched on. Then, once things have cooled off for a while, reappear only to repeat the cycle all over again. Mess, wash, rinse, repeat. ”
Wow.
LikeLike
Lydia,
I, for one, say keep on keeping on. IMO, your comments are salt & light there. They were for me. And for others before me & will be for others in the future. It matters, darn it. Imo, hers is also kingdom work. Bless you, Lydia! You have no idea how grateful I am for you. I cheer you on when I read your comments.
It is precisely because the Deebs and Wade may hold to doctrines of sovereignty, etc. that comments from Lydia are light.
There must be room for both. Speaking/ calling out/ warning is not wrongdoing or gossip. The issue is the need to go deeper. I made this same comment on Paul’s apology post. Lydia kindly begs the good root ?s. Look, extracting one’s self from cult thinking may take a long time. Sure, out of love I scream, “Run!” But let’s understand those just starting to tiptoe in the right direction are moving. Let’s think back to what we were like. Let’s help everyone we can: the runners, walkers & confused butt-planted pewsitters. And it may take diff approaches to help people connect the dots. Let’s not throw away the non-intellectuals or slow thinkers. Body of Christ: eyes, arms, etc, right? We shouldn’t all function the same exact way in ministry to others… who run the gammet.
imo, Lydia’s comments on ANY blog are a part of her very real way of helping others. I will not slam her or tell her she’s wasting her time. On the contrary! Godspeed.
LikeLike
AM
I am going to try to boil this down on behalf of everyone here at TANC, so here it goes: “Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough?” Yes, Paul, I think, may of been guilty of over-complicating things at times, but then there is this nugget. It just says it all, and my individual research going on eight years now bears it out as well. There is nothing of Reformed thought that is beneficial or worth saving. No, there is NO room for both here at PPT or TANC. This attitude of coexistence between high and low octane Calvinism has led to the fluctuation of weak sanctification and tyranny since Geneva. This is merely a tyranny phase. Per the usual, it will implode and revert back to an era of weak sanctification which will pave the way for another era of tyranny. It is a historical vicious cycle that I will be documenting in TTANC 2.
And frankly, as someone who has experienced the initial graces and finally the wrath of Cindy Kunsman because I would not compromise my own conscience, I assure you that the fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree. And bottom line: Deb and Dee stood by and let their minions unload on me with FALSE accusations. When Dee stated that I need professional help, she was merely employing a mainstay tactic of Joseph Stalin and every other murdering mystic despot that has ever come down the pike.
And the whole “he is angry” or the “angry person” motif is also a Reformed weapon of choice that I will not elaborate on here. Yes, a good friend of mine, a man of impeccable character, was accused of being an “angry man” for asking too many questions at church. This led to women in the church confronting his wife about their strong suspicions that said husband was abusing her physically. Folks, bottom line: had I been there, I would be in jail for slapping some people in their silly faces.
Deb and Dee employ all of the same tactics against those who disagree with them. They are no different, in fact, they are a greater danger because they pretend to be advocates for the abused.
Hence, until Dee shows herself a big enough person to apologize for calling me mentally ill, which I assure you she isn’t, Lydia need not come here and defend her. I am shutting that down. And no, Lydia is NOT salt and light etc., she is naive. And admittedly being driven by the reality of what I saw this ideology attempt to do to that precious family, I find myself intolerant of those who are misinformed on this issue.
LikeLike
Paul Dohse: “Name one tyrant in history that has not labeled their detractors mentally ill.. “. You said a mouthful.
LikeLike