Elizabeth Vargas’ Year-long Investigation into the Independent Fundamental Baptist Church Airs on “20/20,” Friday, April 8, 10-11 PM ET

That should be pure joy… and completely fair, too, I’m sure.

Louise,

Your comments about Pastor Phelps and what he did are completely without merit. You’ve obviously believed the young lady’s side of things without giving him any consideration at all. Please, please hesitate for a moment, and consider that maybe Pastor Phelps did the best he could with an incredibly difficult, legal/moral/ethical situation. After having spent three hours with him last summer (just after this story broke) I know his side of the story and it’s compelling. I know that in his shoes, I probably would have done as he did. There are so many laws governing these things, that after considering the legal issues and then the Biblical ones as well, I think he did what he could. Unless you know something new about what happened here, I think you should give Pastor Phelps the benefit of the doubt.

Matt

Matt,

I have great respect for you. But I think you are dead wrong on this one. Just with the facts out there, there is no excuse for at least some of the things Chuck did. Even looking at how Brian Fuller has handled this will show that there were things that could have been handled better. I think I am being generous. Had He been humble enough to at least admit that last year, this story Friday night might not have even come out. I have followed the facts of this case very carefully and am VERY disappointed in Chuck Phelps.

Aaron,

You are probably right that it wont be fair. But I am hopeful that it will. Elizabeth Vargas is a smart reporter and has done good work in the past. I know it will be painful, but I hope and pray it will at least be fair. But you very well could be right.

The heart of the matter is that an adult man willingly had a sexual relationship with a minor. That is both a sin and a crime.

For the record, twenty five years ago a similar instance happened in a small fundamental Baptist church. The pastor escorted the man to the sheriff’s office and, after his arrest and trial, the perpetrator went to jail.

Atticus told me to delete the adjectives and I’d have the facts.

I am sickened by how many fellow Christians want to throw Dr. Phelps under the bus. It is very easy - and wrong - to sit back and armchair quarterback events from 10-15 years ago. As a fellow pastor my heart goes out to him. We can only make decisions based on the information that we have AT THAT TIME. This is hardly a cut-and-dried case.

If you’ve been in ministry any length of time at all, you have been confronted by situations where people can have very fanciful recollections of things that didn’t happen, or were completely different that what they say. It seems to me the women making the most noise here have an ax to grind against fundamental churches.

I know Chuck Phelps personally and he is a decent, godly, gracious Christian man. Please at least give him the benefit of the doubt and refrain from passing judgment until you know ALL the facts.

So we’re going to “retry” Chuck Phelps again with just as much evidence as before (almost none).
Why do people find it so hard to admit that they really don’t know what happened or why?

It’s really not that hard. Watch….
I really don’t know what happened or why.
See, that wasn’t so hard. More people should try it.

I’m sure glad it isn’t my job to sift through a few vague statements, a few second hand reports, and a tanker load of blog blather then pass judgment on cases! (Come to think of it, who’s job is that? Hmm.)

It seems that we know what happened. What puzzles me is this: If I knew a man had had sex with an underage girl and I called the police and they did nothing, I wouldn’t accept their response.

Louise,

Your two facts are her two facts and have only been established by people who are speculating as you are here. The facts…at least pastor Phelps perspective has never been given publicly because he is unable, legally, to do so. He has been advised that to go public would be a problem legally. I talked with him and like pastor Carlson, I was skeptical of pastor Phelps but wanted to hear him out. His argument is compelling. No he probably didn’t do everything exactly right but his situation was incredibly difficult.

Were called more than once as I have heard.

[Louise Dan] Aaron, a lot has been established by multiple witnesses. What do you think people are accusing him of that is still in question? For me, the issue is 1) bringing a minor who had been raped up for church discipline and 2) allowing the rapist to continue in the church without recourse. Are you still in doubt as to whether either of those actually happened? Maybe enough first hand witnesses will be interviewed by 20/20 to convince you of at least that much.

Last I knew, just about all of that was in dispute. But I have to admit I have very little interest in the case. I have not paid any attention to it since we beat it to death here last year. As far as I know, there have been no new news reports or any results of investigations. We had conflicting versions of whether it was “discipline,” what sort of role the perp. was allowed in the church, etc., and still do.

The thing with “multiple witnesses” is that you have to weigh testimony not just count it. That’s why courtrooms cross examine and instruct jurors to ignore this or that. I’m not in a position to weigh the testimony. It has not been gathered and presented in way I can handle that way.

I don’t think anybody is saying no mistakes were made on the church’s part, including Phelps. So I guess that’s established. Beyond that, it would be nice if definitive evidence could end all the speculation and we could move on. If 20/20 can achieve that, more power to them. But they have shown a fondness for making anybody who is even traditional (much less Bible believing) look bad. I’m not optimistic.

[Louise Dan] But being warned against speaking publicly due to legal concerns is hardly compelling. The only person he could implicate is himself. And the only way he’d implicate himself is if he did something wrong.

Not true. History is full of examples of people’s testimony being used against them when their words are used contrary to their intent or when the audience is particularly hostile. This is why defense lawyers advise even innocent clients to let the council do the talking. The legal system is very complex and somebody as innocent as lilies can step on a mine by saying the wrong thing at the wrong time… especially to the press.

Even Vargas is careful to use the word ‘alleged’. The problem with this and other cases is that there is no way to verify much of the information that comes down the pike. It’s very much “he said-she said”. And eye witness testimony is http://criminaldefense.homestead.com/eyewitnessmisidentification.html not unassailable . I have no doubt that this incident was not handled properly, but I seriously can’t see how any of us can claim to know exactly what went down.

There was a case here not too long ago where several families united against a pastor because of some accusations of sexual abuse, but when the case was investigated by authorities, it fell completely apart, and all charges were dropped. So much for the reliability of multiple witnesses, and now an innocent man who spent a year being harassed and practically tortured has lost his church and his reputation. No one is lining up to repent to him, or make reparations, or help him find a job, I can tell you that.

BTW, it is SOP for those involved in a case to refrain from speaking about an ongoing investigation. Ulterior motives should not be read into silence about an open case.

What was amusing is the reference to how many churches there are in the IFB. If that’s supposed to be a flash of brilliance, none of us are going to need sunglasses for this report. After seeing the CBS report years ago about ‘the dark side of homeschooling’, I’m not going to be putting any stock into the information presented by the news media.

What if this was your daughter? She was 15. He was well over twice her age. Why should this even be an issue? Sexual abuse is NEVER the victim’s fault. And, the victim should NEVER be blamed. Both of those things are being done. She is still being accused of it being consensual and the very fact that she had to stand before the church and confess shows her being blamed.

I ask you. What would Jesus have done? He is our example. The Pharisees wanted to stone the woman in adultery and Jesus said, he who has no sin throw the first stone. This precious broken child (and yes, you are STILL a child at 15), was stoned. She was innocent, yet the Pharisees stoned her. Jesus as our example would not have judged her. A) because she was an innocent victim and B) because he loves His children. For those of you who are choosing right now to stone Tina because you believe either she is lying now or it was consensual, why don’t you look at your own life before throwing stones.

I hate that we will defend a person simply because he is “God’s” man. The problem is — he is “just” a man. No matter how godly someone is. They still make mistakes. They still sin. They are human. And, I believe that this situation was handled inappropriately. Being a pastor does not equate perfection. The best thing that can and should be done with this situation is that Dr. Phelps and even everyone here on SI, recognize the mistakes and aim to make policy changes in our churches so that this situation NEVER EVER occurs again.

Anne- I don’t think any here is ‘stoning’ Tina. What most are concerned about, at least from what I can tell, is that we don’t know how the situation was handled after the fact. I have no doubt about Tina’s story as far as the rape was concerned. In no way, shape, or form was any of this her fault. What we don’t know for certain is how it was handled by the church and law enforcement. There are too many conflicting stories, and to my knowledge none of us has the ability to sort these things out with any measure of accuracy. That is what the legal process is for. When Phelps is allowed to speak openly or in court about what happened, then a fuller picture might present itself. Meanwhile, I think efforts should be focused on prosecuting the perpetrator of this heinous act. Phelps may have botched the whole thing as far as the church was concerned, but the man who raped Tina is the criminal here. Let’s not forget that.

[Anna Walker] I hate that we will defend a person simply because he is “God’s” man. The problem is — he is “just” a man. No matter how godly someone is. They still make mistakes. They still sin. They are human. And, I believe that this situation was handled inappropriately. Being a pastor does not equate perfection. The best thing that can and should be done with this situation is that Dr. Phelps and even everyone here on SI, recognize the mistakes and aim to make policy changes in our churches so that this situation NEVER EVER occurs again.

No one here is defending Phelps because he’s a ‘man of God’. There’s a massive difference between defending someone who is ‘the man of God’ - like what happened at Jack Hyles’ church - and what we’re all speculating on.