Dear Recovering Grace Reader,

IBLP board statement

The Institute in Basic Life Principles (IBLP) board of directors released a statement on Tuesday (June 17, 2014) entitled A Time of Transition. This appears to be their official response to the allegations of sexual harassment and abuse that have been reported on our site, and it also addressed our assertion that Bill Gothard is disqualified from Christian service. Additionally, Gothard was quoted on Wednesday (June 18, 2014) by the Chicago Sun-Times. Gothard’s comments in that article give some insight into his current and future plans.

According to the IBLP website, the men currently serving on the IBLP board are Dr. Stephen Paine, Pastor David York, Mr. Anthony Burrus, Mr. Gil Bates, and Dr. John Stancil. In the three months since these men released their initial statement concerning Gothard’s resignation from IBLP on March 17, we have been cautiously hopeful that the board would ultimately do the right thing—that they would come to an understanding of the corruption and misconduct that has permeated the ministry for almost forty years, and that they would lead the ministry towards repentance, restoring its focus on the grace of God as displayed through the gospel of Jesus Christ. We hoped that members of the board and the IBLP staff would be willing to take a stand for truth, transparency, and humble repentance, understanding that so much more is at stake than a single organization.

This week’s statement by IBLP was a severe disappointment as we realized that the current board of IBLP has chosen to do as the previous IBLP board did in 1980 and 1981: to minimize the exploitation of innocent young women by the founder of their ministry, to ignore their responsibility for this and other misconduct and abuse, and to justify this type of non-response because they believe in saving the organization above all else. Once again, a Christian organization is choosing self-preservation, ignoring the abuse and broken lives left by a predatory leader.

In summary, we see three major flaws in the board’s statement:

(1) It is dismissive of the victims and of the harassment itself;

(2) It is deceptive in its presentation of recent events;

(3) It is defensive of the validity of Bill Gothard’s ministry and teachings.

These flaws are further magnified by Gothard’s statements to the Chicago Sun-Times regarding his intention to continue “working with young people,” and using “intent” as the defining characteristic of sexual harassment.

The board’s statement is dismissive of Bill Gothard’s misconduct and its impact upon the victims

At no point in their statement does the IBLP board recognize and address the damaging impact of Gothard’s behavior, nor does the board offer any sort of apology or expression of sorrow for what took place under their jurisdiction. Indeed, there seems to be more concern about the difficulty that this has caused the board than about the pain perpetrated upon Gothard’s victims:

We are grateful for your prayers and patience as we have all walked through these difficult months. As Board members, each of us has been positively impacted by the relationships, teachings, and opportunities available through the Institute in Basic Life Principles. It is because of our appreciation for this ministry that we agreed to serve on the Board of Directors. We also recognize our duty as Board members, and we bring this statement with great heaviness of heart.

In response to allegations against Bill Gothard, the Board sought the facts through a confidential and thorough review process conducted by outside legal counsel. Many people were interviewed, including former Board members, current and past staff members, current and past administrators, parents, and family members.

There is no mention of interviewing the victims themselves, those who have already spoken publicly of their harassment and abuse. We believe that this statement has essentially re-victimized these women by negligently and publicly demonstrating that, in the Board’s eyes, they are of no consequence in this discussion. To our knowledge, none of the women who have published their stories on Recovering Grace were personally approached for their statement in the IBLP investigation.

Furthermore, the board uses language throughout the statement that minimizes the invasive and depraved nature of Gothard’s behavior—Instead, they say he “acted in an inappropriate manner,” that there was a “lack of discretion,” a “failure to follow Christ’s example,” and “shortcomings.” This is a man who used his position of power to coerce underaged young women into telling him intimate details of their previous sexual abuse over and over again, manipulated them into altering their appearance through cosmetic procedures to please him, specified what types of bras they should wear around him, held hands and played footsie with them, touched them inappropriately, engaged them in long frontal embraces, and controlled every area he could of their personal lives. He did not engage in this behavior just once, but repeatedly over a forty-year period. He cannot claim innocence, or that he did not know what he did was wrong, for he was confronted about these sins and abuses of position many, many times, by the young women themselves, by their parents, by his peers, and by past board members in authority over him.

Let us be clear: Gothard’s actions were sin. His actions were not “lacking discretion” or “shortcomings”; they were sin. And for an organization that has always taken the hardest possible line on anything it categorizes as sinful behavior, this attempt to whitewash Gothard’s sin is shockingly hypocritical. The board seems to believe that it can minimize the depravity and consequences of Gothard’s behavior by pretending the victims don’t really exist, in an attempt to carry on IBLP’s work as if nothing ever happened. By doing so, the board members have now aligned themselves with Gothard’s misconduct by characterizing it as mere victimless indiscretion or imperfection, and they have re-victimized these women themselves.

The board’s statement is deceptive in how it describes their investigation

The second and third paragraphs of the statement say,

In response to allegations against Bill Gothard, the Board sought the facts through a confidential and thorough review process conducted by outside legal counsel. Many people were interviewed, including former Board members, current and past staff members, current and past administrators, parents, and family members.

At this point, based upon those willing to be interviewed, no criminal activity has been discovered. If it had been, it would have been reported to the proper authorities immediately, as it will be in the future if any such activity is revealed.

We have been made aware of at least one young woman who was interviewed by this investigation who did, in fact, testify to Gothard’s sexual harassment, as well as to blatant criminal behavior including labor law violations and failure to report sexual abuse of minors. Why was this not included in the report? Did the board immediately report it to the proper authorities? And if they did, why wouldn’t they disclose this information? Are there more allegations that they’ve decided are unimportant and not fitting their definition of criminal activity?

We have been in communication with multiple sources, both within the IBLP organization and other individuals who were interviewed as part of the investigation. We have also researched those who are conducting this investigation. Based on the evidence, we know this investigation was neither external nor impartial, and that the board’s description of the investigation is highly misleading at best.

The board’s investigation was spearheaded by Dr. David Gibbs, Jr., of the Christian Law Association (not to be confused with the more prominent Christian Legal Society). It has been well-documented on other websites that Gibbs Jr. and his team have historically been on the wrong side of abuse cases. In fact, David Gibbs III, the son of Gibbs Jr., recently asserted in an official statement that his father’s legal work “helps cover for alleged and/or eventually convicted abusers, or the churches or ministries they work for.” Gibbs Jr.’s historic role is not that of impartial investigator, but of an attorney engaged by churches to minimize their organizational liability in cases of misconduct and abuse.

IBLP's "outside legal counsel" speaking at Big Sandy in April 2014

Additionally, Gibbs Jr. was a keynote speaker at both of the ATI regional conferences this year, and has maintained a long-term relationship with Bill Gothard and the IBLP organization since the 1980s. Only in the most technical of terms can the board can say that their review process was “conducted by outside legal counsel.” It was an error in judgment to entrust such a sensitive investigation to someone who has consistently demonstrated poor judgment when dealing with abuse cases, and deceptive to characterize someone so closely tied to and socially invested in their organization as an objective investigator.

It is also important to note that, during the course of this investigation, not one of the women who have shared their stories on our site were personally contacted by Gibbs Jr. or his investigative team, including Charlotte, who alleged molestation. While we would not blame any of these women if they were not willing to be interviewed by such a biased investigator, we find it telling and troubling that none of them were ever contacted personally by the investigation and given a chance to speak, even though their identities are known to people within the organization.

Instead, Gibbs Jr.’s legal team contacted a member of the Recovering Grace leadership team, in an attempt to set up a secretive face-to-face meeting to see if we could facilitate interviews with the women who had posted on our site. However, after a lengthy exchange of emails and phone calls, Recovering Grace declined their request for two reasons: First and foremost, we do not speak for, nor do we legally represent, the women who have shared on our site; we are a media blog and not a legal team. Second, Gibbs Jr.’s team demanded that Recovering Grace sign non-disclosure agreements as precondition to hold even a preliminary facilitation meeting, and named specific team members whom they did not want to attend the meeting. We sought outside counsel regarding these unusual restrictions, and were strongly urged not to sign anything. We communicated these details in writing to Gibbs Jr.’s team, although our impression is that they simply relayed to the IBLP board that we were unwilling to help them. We also communicated the victims’ interest in speaking directly to the IBLP board, as well as their strong interest in speaking to a legitimate third-party investigation, such as G.R.A.C.E. These suggestions seem to have been completely ignored by Gibbs Jr.’s team, and, as far as we know, they made no further efforts to contact the victims personally.

Our team has attempted to reach out to the board several times in hopes of meeting and sharing our hearts with them in person or by phone. We have expressed our strong belief that personal interactions with our team and the information we hold are crucial to their investigation. These requests have been repeatedly rejected, apparently upon the advice of Gibbs Jr.

The board’s statement is defensive of Bill Gothard’s work and teachings

The most glaring omission in the board’s statement is their failure to publicly, definitively, and permanently remove Gothard from the IBLP ministry. Perhaps it was their intent to permanently disqualify him, but they used very weak language that leaves much wiggle-room to reinterpret the statement at a later time. In stating that, “at this time the Board unanimously agrees that Mr. Gothard is not permitted to serve in any counseling, leadership, or Board role within the IBLP ministry,” the board leaves room for Gothard to return at a later date, or to be immediately involved in roles such as authoring IBLP curriculum or teaching.

Our concern is further deepened by the board’s assertion that “God still desires to use Bill Gothard for His work in the Kingdom of God.” As we have stated many times in recent months, Gothard’s behavior clearly disqualifies him from Christian leadership and ministry according Titus 1 and I Timothy 3. Perhaps God does have a future ministry for Gothard, but this could only come after a time of deep brokenness and proven repentance before God and those he has victimized, and it should not include teaching or ministering alongside underaged young women ever again. It is both highly inappropriate and disturbing for the board to make such a bold assumption in the same statement in which they almost acknowledge that Gothard has sexually harassed young women.

Furthermore, we are extremely concerned with the board’s statement that Gothard’s sin does not “discredit the truths of God’s Word that were taught through him.” When someone has consistently behaved in a manner contrary to God’s Word over a long period of time, all of his teachings must be closely examined to see if, in fact, they are in line with God’s Word. It was Gothard himself who often said that “a man’s morality dictates his theology,” and, while the legitimacy of that statement can be debated, it seems only right that the board would hold Gothard to the same standard he preached. Perhaps a more accurate viewpoint comes from Matthew 7:18, which states that “a good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.” The board’s statement shows greater concern for defending the Gothard-generated content of IBLP’s product line of books and seminars than it does with God’s Word, which is available elsewhere.

We strongly believe that the IBLP board needs to either request an independent review of Gothard’s teachings by credible theologians and scholars who have minimal association with the organization, or to simply pull them from publication and distribution. In cases where there are clearly faulty teachings, IBLP should issue public retractions of the content.

Bill Gothard’s interview with the Chicago Sun-Times

The board’s statement would have been disconcerting enough without Gothard’s recent comments in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on Thursday, June 19, 2014. These comments served to confirm our fears that Gothard desires a return to the status quo in both his behavior and public ministry.

Concerning whether he sexually harassed young women, Gothard stated that “sexual harassment is to a large extent intent, and my intent was never to harass them.”

In this shocking statement, Gothard essentially acknowledges the allegations, but dismisses them because he had no sexual or ill “intent.” If one could actually accept Gothard’s assertion that he did all of these things without “sexual intent,” as he publicly stated in April, it would still be irrelevant, because sexual harassment is defined by the negative impact on the victim rather than by the alleged intent of the perpetrator. Anti-harassment laws and policies would otherwise be meaningless, as they would be easily and universally circumvented by harassers’ assertions of good intentions. Furthermore, Gothard systematically fired, sent home, and shamed dozens, if not hundreds, of young men and women throughout his ministry for having even the most innocent interest (or perceived interest) in the opposite sex. For Bill to claim that “intent” is the determining factor is ludicrous in and of itself, is not consistent with his own strict teaching, and is strongly at odds with his decades-long history of dismissing staff for far milder and non-harassing behavior.

Making matters worse, when Bill was asked whether he planned to return to the IBLP ministry, he failed to give a clear answer, saying “That’s not my goal or desire right now. I just have a desire to work with and encourage the young people that I have served in the past and I want to continue that on a personal basis.”

Not only does Bill use the words “right now” to leave the door wide open to a future attempt to recapture power and influence, but he states that his current desire is to continue to personally work with the young people whom he has served in the past, which would appear to include the young women who were previously victimized by him.

Final thoughts

Let us make our position clear. Bill Gothard should not be serving, working with, or encouraging young people—especially young, underaged women. This statement by Gothard, as well as his previous public statement, clearly indicates that he is, at best, unaware of the evil of his behavior, and, at worst, is intentionally planning to continue in it. Gothard should not be allowed to be around young people, and the board of IBLP has placed themselves in a dangerous legal, ethical, and spiritual position through their continued endorsement of Gothard’s future ministry.

At this time, it appears that IBLP plans to continue its present course with only minor cosmetic adjustments. It is clear that the board of directors is either ill-equipped or unwilling to address these issues in a biblical and ethical manner. They have chosen to minimize the offenses of and defend Gothard, his destructive teachings, his decades of power abuse, and his sexual targeting of oft-underaged subordinates, and to ignore the voices of those whom he has harmed.

EDITOR’S NOTE: For those of you wishing to express your thoughts to the IBLP board, you can email them at [email protected], Attn: IBLP Board of Directors. If you are a victim of Bill Gothard or the IBLP ministry, you are always welcome to write to us at [email protected].