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 
Paul, this is an excellent article that you’ve written, and I agree with you that the athropology, soteriology, and ecclesiology of Christianity must be re-assessed and re-examined. I believe that Augustine did some very extensive damage to Christianity in his writings, from which we have not yet recovered. Of course, the emporer Constantine is also to blame.
But the word “orthodoxy” goes back must further than Luther and Calvin. Could you state where you stand on much older aspects of theology such as the Trinity, Christology and the nature of God?
In regards to ecclesiology, I advocate an individualistic and contemplative type of Christianity, no regular meetings, no buildings. I believe that spiritual abuse can occur in house fellowships as well. In fact, I’ve seen some horrible examples of this in my own life. I’ve concluded that the only safe type of Christianity is being a “lone wolf”.
Also, have you examined the Anabaptists and their opposition to Luther and Calvin?
Another thing to consider: The Communists in Russia and other countries considered someone to be mentally ill if they disagreed with communism.
LikeLike
Ryan,
Thanks. In my mind, orthodoxy is just a newer form of mythology. The latter is a collection of metaphysical narratives while orthodoxy is predicated on one narrative. So, I agree, the idea of orthodoxy goes way back. Both find their roots in spiritual caste, dualism, and gnosis. I strongly suspect that the basic elements of all false religions can be found in the serpents approach to Eve; ie, a needed mediator between God and man, especially in the area of knowledge.
My focus has been justification and the new birth, and I feel like I know where I stand on those issues. I also believe that we dwell in a Protestant dark age in which we have been blinded by orthodoxy, and the long road to escaping the present darkness in earnest must begin. Therefore, my positions on the Trinity, Christology, and the nature of God need much more study. At present, and what I gather from being a grammarian, God is one, but three persons. This is one of the few biblical paradoxes that I presently accept according to Deuteronomy 29:29. I reject a Christocentric view of the Trinity; viz, the Father and the Spirit are expressions of Christ. That is very Reformed and the argument is made via the Gnostic Emphasis hermeneutic based on Plato’s model of forms.
While understanding your lone wolf approach, I would disagree with it. Somewhere, a body needs your part. The whole body is not an eye, and God’s work needs more than an eye to accomplish His mandate. I think the key to home fellowships being a safe place is the complete absence of horizontal authority. Wherever there is horizontal authority, wherever faith and authority are combined, abuse WILL follow.
The thing most missing from church history is the persecution of home fellowships. Though persecutions of groups by Augustine, Calvin, and Luther focus on doctrine, one of the major contentions was that those groups met in homes and rejected church authority. The Anabaptists were a massive home fellowship movement persecuted by the Reformers. The Reformers slaughtered 30,000 of them in the Netherlands alone.
Right, Communism is the secular form of Plato’s Republic, and again, what comes into question is one’s interpretation of reality. If it doesn’t fit the standard, an errant view of reality necessarily demands a mental illness conclusion. The Reformed thinker Geerhardus Vos bemoaned the fact that dispensationalists were not subject to scientific examinations by psychologists.
LikeLike
LOL. Why am I laughing so hard when this is totally spot on? Right, if we are “functioning sinners” how do you abuse sin? Exactly. The way you word it exposes the absurdity of it all.
LikeLike
Thanks Sean. Tried to get to the core of the issue as I am exhausted from cataloging the massive cognitive dissonance.
LikeLike
I used to have to work really hard in order to uncover the subtle nuance. Anymore, not so much. They just say it outright. Anyone remember the day when the notion that one could be saved via a Star Trek episode would have been rejected out of hand with severe prejudice?
LikeLike
I think you guys totally misunderstand TWW.This is not an apologetic but an explanation cos I have issues with their some of what I know of their doctrine, (such as apologies being enough for evil) too, and lord knows I have MAJOR issues with Wade’s doctrine especially his “instant forgiveness of thugs who are Christian celebs” doctrine. Which I think it is self serving and enables more abuse in the long run. I think most miss Wades coddling of abusers because of his egalitarian leanings.
TWW is all about being nice and a safe place for the abused to tell their stories.
I have never really thought they were about doctrine or even connecting dots on doctrine and behavior. Even though at one time I wanted them to go that route. That is simply not what they do. They are more of a news site that puts forth news of spiritual abuse. They don’t even give their opinion very often on the root causes or anything like that. And any place that outs evil doings gets a bit of a pass in my book. It is what we do with the information that really matters in the long run. If people leave these churches because they read about how someone was treated, then all the better. Let the money start drying up.
I personally think there is a place for this. People need a place to go and see that they are not alone in what is going on out there on a massive scale. As I have said elsewhere there might come a time when the the abused have exhausted this and are looking for personal solutions, they might dig deeper on connecting dots with doctrine and behavior. Some don’t. Ever.
Everyone has their bent, their focus.
If you recall, I saw where they threw me under the bus on SGM survivors over ESS. No big deal. For them, supporting SGM survivors was the bigger deal to them at the time. I am not really one who wants to be in any clubs so it matters not to me.
Paul, you are not mentally ill. You are zealous and totally passionate about your ideas. Many know you to be a very compassonate man who cares deeply for those stuck in the culture of death. Now, if you said things over there wrapped in whipped creme and did not offend too many liberals who have an inside track, you would be ok. You don’t need a nuclear weapon. A velvet pistol, perhaps? :o)
LikeLike
“Right, if we are “functioning sinners” how do you abuse sin?”
You know, until people change their thinking on this, there will be NO solutions. It only becomes a matter of degrees of evil. It also means saying “sorry” is “redemptive”. Nevermind a literal change of direction is required by our Savior.
Even those who don’t claim imputed guilt or Augustines original sin are buying into it without realizing it. Do you know how many on SBC blogs claim I am horrible because I won’t admit I am wicked? This was a huge thing for them. To them, that is claiming sinless perfection so I am not saved. Note the “either/or” stance.
Where is the striving to be perfect like your heavenly father is perfect? Instead…we get, excuses, excuses for sin thinking it sounds pious to admit it.
There is a sadness for me in all this. So many professing Christians are basically saying, “You cannot trust me” as a Christian sibling. They don’t even realize they are saying this. They don’t realize they are really giving themselves and others an out for treating people horribly.
LikeLike
“No Lydia, you thought wrong. There is no misunderstanding about the WW. No misunderstanding whatsoever. But I can only speak for myself. It is a place to gossip, nothing more. I stopped reading there and other discernment blogs a long time ago for many reasons already mentioned.”
You will have to school me on gossip because I am not sure how it fits. I am certainly not concerned about protecting celebrity Chrisitans who seek followers but then want privacy for their nasty deeds. I think people have a right to tell their stories. And I think telling those stories is step 1.
“I do not believe I need to repeat what has already been said here at PPT’s regarding the dangers of WW, you can read for yourself. It appears that it is you who does not understand, I believe you even said you do not understand Paul D teaching. It is my hope that you will get understanding. But please, do not come here and excuse behavior and tell us that we have “misunderstood”. ”
I did not mean to offend I was just giving my opinion. I thought you guys were expecting something from TWW for which they are not equipped and don’t want to be. And you are right I don’t understand all of Paul’s teaching. I do think I get the overarching theme and agree with it as far as I understand it.
“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. ”
I have a different take on the whole situation and it is simply about propriety. I view blogs as people’s backyards which are public but also private. They get to decide what goes on there but people can peer in. I am not sure I see the value in walking into private backyard where the public has been invited and launch the equivelant of a nuclear weapon and expect people not to respond accordingly. I don’t see that it even helps people consider another way of looking at a matter. I think it does the opposite. Makes them dig their heels in and defend their position even more. That is usually how it works. And if you go back and read I did interact about John later because this whole idea of peer review is ridiculous. It took me a while to get what was going on because at first missed Paul’s comment.
“I don’t know for sure, but I do not believe one person has come and apologized. One person did attempt but Law Prof led them to not do what was right. Is this surprising coming from a law prof?”
I don’t really understand the blanket categorization. I know one Law Prof who is a very intelligent, wise person.
I appreciate Paul allowing me to comment here and give my opinion.
LikeLike
Pearl, None of what I am saying is an apologetic. I am simply giving another view.
The very first blog I found discussing spiritual abuse was Slice of Laodicea 10 years ago. It was like finding an oasis in a very lonely desert. Even my own family was part of the spiritual abuse. the blog owner was Reformed which was never announced I just figured it out over the course of years.. I did not know what that really meant, either. All I knew is that they were discussing stuff I had seen happen in the seeker mega movement and later in Reformed movements. People were telling their stories and I could relate. I had NO idea what had happened to me. I was in shock. It would be another 5 or 6 years before I really started connecting dots after much study. Frankly, I look back and see that all of us had cognitive dissonance as we were discussing these things. I guess that is also willful ignorance or maybe just a steep learning curve? The only thing I had going for me was history and what I knew about the Reformation which was not positive. From there I dug into the doctrine, read the Institutes and a ton of other things trying to figure all this. But that is my personality. I want to know “why” and “how”. A lot of folks don’t care which is fine. it was not so hard for me to start connecting doctrine to behavior because of my history background.
the truth is in government policy just like church, people rarely stop and think about what they believe and why. They rarely question foundational principles. That is just the way it is. But they do learn from stories. Even Jesus used stories and even if people did not have the capacity to understand the meanings, they remember a story.
I do think that eventually discernment blogs become similar to what they are against in many ways. There are in people and out people. The blog owners can get weary of being the enemy so they start making common cause with some of the movement fringe people to show they are not so mean and are full of “grace”. Or they become so neutral as to become impotent. Or they fall prey to cheap grace and think it mean to say, “these people need to get lost and not be restored to ministry”. The SGM survivors blog became a cult of ESS. And if you did not agree then you were a heretic. They all evolve in some way or another.
But one thing I do know, they are not going away. And there is another thing I know, people tend to like people based upon personality and not doctrine/beliefs/principles. Is that shallow? I think so but it is the way it is. I would rather be friends with a consistent jerk than all the fake smiley platitudinal people I have met in Christendom. At least I know what to expect. :o) They don’t even have to think like me.
I do hope that at some point, things click for the victims and they start questioning who Jesus really is and what it is He was about. that brings so much confidence and one does not have to be concerned about the long time “Christian” celebrity finally acting like a true believer. Because they get it.
LikeLike
Here is what I said about Wade on the original thread. And I base this on reading him since about 2006 when he had his old blog which is now deleted. There has been a typical pattern from him that I do not think really helps victims heal in the long run and move on in understanding. I do believe he is all about cheap grace and sees such heinous sins by long time professing Christians who make a living off Jesus….as no big deal. Just sinners being sinners which is normal in that world.
Oasis,
Wade is the sort of pastor who would accompany you to the court room and then proceed to broker a repentance deal with your rapist during break…. and then tell everyone about it.
https://paulspassingthoughts.com/2015/06/03/deb-and-dee-of-wartburg-watch-com-gossip-not-gospel-hobby-not-hope/#comments
LikeLike
“Searching and discussing is the initial part of the healing process. Coming face to face with the evidence, which ought to lead one above and beyond the searching and discussing, but rather rather ignoring it, or making excuses for it, is willful ignorance. It’s like the woman who keeps hooking herself up with abusive boyfriend after abusive boyfriend – pretty soon, talking her through her confusion and pain becomes an exercise in futility. Most people don’t really want to face the hard truth, or desire to change, a sad and frustrating fact related to me by a secular psychologist. She got out because of it.”
Very frustrating. There are tons of women in similar situations who are married and actually believe if they pray more and submit more then things will change. They believe in that sort of god because it was ingrained in them. So they stay on the same path because abusers can be very clever manipulators for a long time before people connect dots. Nothing manipulates better than a wrong paradigm of God.
So what do we do? We can leave the door open in case they come to their senses. In this case would require totally rethinking their paradigm of God and their own value —which is no small thing.
I am meeting more and more young neo Cals who have become atheists. Since determinism was the foundation and they have since realized that sort of god is not applicable to real life when you take the time to really think about it (that god works best if you make a living in ministry) they only see atheism the alternative.
A lot of people threw me away during the dark years because I did not line up with their beliefs and that was the required entry.
LikeLike
And others are following. One pastor couple I know of, after 40 years of being beaten to a pulp by the institutional church, are going to start a home church. The present way church is done was designed for progressive justification, not the priesthood of believers.
LikeLike