The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971

You are here:

Home
Featured Article
The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981

The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981

21 February 2014, 06:00

Editor’s Note: Previously we explored events surrounding the Institute in Basic Youth Conflicts (IBYC) scandal that culminated in 1980 with Bill Gothard’s resignation and quick reinstatement as president of that organization, which would later be renamed the Institute In Basic Life Principles (IBLP). You can read the Introduction here, Part One here, and Part Two here.

In our research for these articles, we have worked with a group of former IBYC staffers, volunteers, and associates who witnessed these events firsthand. In addition to the group’s first-person accounts of the scandal and surrounding events, they have shared with us a large volume of related documentation. Their memories, notes, and records have allowed us to write about these difficult events with evidence and accuracy.

This chronology posted below was compiled by the group during and shortly after the scandal. Many entries are firsthand accounts, while others are recorded second-hand, detailing the group’s efforts to record the unfolding events to the best of their abilities under challenging circumstances. We have redacted some names and details to protect the privacy of the individuals involved. The letter codes and blanks used to denote women involved in the scandal were used for their privacy, and do not correlate to the women’s names or initials.

All articles on this site reflect the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of other Recovering Grace contributors or the leadership of the site. Students who have survived Gothardism tend to end up at a wide variety of places on the spiritual and theological spectrum, thus the diversity of opinions expressed on this website reflects that. For our official statement of beliefs, click here.

About the author

125 Comments

Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply

On a somewhat related note, I found out a bit more about the Oak Brook College of Law issue from a couple of days ago.

This information comes from "Homeschoolers Anonymous" (HA), which is a blog similar to this one but generally opposed to homeschooling in general. The website address for the article is below:

http://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/oak-brook-college-of-law-distances-itself-from-bill-gothard-and-iblp/

HA noted two things which the Oak Brook email didn't state:

1. Oak Brook was not solely an IBLP institution. It was, in fact, a joint venture between IBLP and HSLDA (Homeschool Legal Defense Association).

For anyone familiar with the Financial Freedom Seminars, one of the key things it teaches is that one should NEVER be in a partnership with anyone else, not even another Christian. So once again, the "universal, non-optional principles" are apparently "universal and non-optional" to everyone but IBLP.

2. Though it is true that no current IBLP board member remains on the Oak Brook Board of Directors, the current Board includes a gentleman named Bob Barth. Mr. Barth is heavily involved at IBLP; he serves as its General Counsel, and is the Corporate Secretary for three Gothard-run organizations: IBLP, ALERT, and Embassy International.

So anyone who thinks that IBLP isn't "affiliated" with Oak Brook any longer, is being badly fooled.

Sorry to digress from the topic at hand, but I felt this was important to share with the rest of the RG community.

Mark
- Colonel Advice February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Mark,
  Thank you for posting this. I'd like to clear up a few misconceptions. First, to say that HA is "generally opposed to homeschooling" is like saying "Republicans are generally opposed to ObamaCare". It’s a very strong opposition.
  
  It’s important to note that there is not a formal partnership between HSLDA and OBCL. Simply that some of it’s graduates have gone and worked there. While Robert Barth is still employed by IBLP, the readers of this blog should keep in mind that there are always facts and nuances that are not known by the general public, and it's good to reserve judgement until all the facts are known.
  - "Hannah" February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    You're serious? I could be wrong, as I am not personally involved with HA. However, my general impression of HA, is not that they are opposed to *homeschooling*, so much as they are opposed to a lack of accountability in homeschooling families, and the resulting excesses and abuses. I'm with them, there.
    - Colonel Advice February 21, 2014
      
      Hannah,
      They are opposed to the lack of accountability, but they jump to the conclusion that "homeschooling = lack of accountability". Ergo "Homeschooling, bad".
      
      Not really trying to start a debate about HA. Just making sure the reader understands that OBCL and HSLDA are not and have never been in a "Joint Partnership".
  - "Hannah" February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    You're right that this article is not about HA. I do think HA's mission is misunderstood, here. Quote from their mission statement:
    
    "When homeschooling is done responsibly, it can be amazing. What we oppose is irresponsible homeschooling, where the educational method is used to create or hide abuse, isolation, and neglect."
    
    http://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/about/
  - Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Colonel, thank you for your comments.
    
    While there may not be a "formal" partnership between HSLDA and IBLP regarding Oak Brook, until recently the Oak Brook Board had members of both groups. I was trying to point out yet another incident where IBLP shows themselves to be hypocrites, by teaching to IBLP alumni that Christians are NOT to be in a business partnership of any sort (formal or otherwise), yet it's OK for IBLP to do so with HSLDA.
    
    Remember also that, although Oak Brook announced that IBLP Seminar attendance will no longer be a requirement for admission, IBLP's "principles" will still be taught. And with Bauch--a key member of IBLP and its affiliates--remaining on the Oak Brook Board, IBLP will still exert significant influence over Oak Brook's operations. (It wouldn't surprise me--given what happened after the 1980 scandal--that within 2-3 months IBLP board members aren't back on the board.)
    
    Regarding HA, the very name of the blog brings to mind such groups as Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, groups that clearly state that total abstinence from alcohol and drugs are required for success in their programs. ATIA isn't the only curriculum they criticize--BJU, A Beka, ACE all get their share as well. (And HSLDA is frequently targeted.) For them, the only successful homeschool program is NO homeschool program.
    - Mark R February 21, 2014
      
      Colonel--I did not realize that your comments on HA were a purposeful understatement.
- RyanR February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I'm an alumnus of OBCL and I don't believe the claim that OBCL was a joint venture between IBLP and HSLDA is true.
  
  Yes, a number of OBCL students/grads worked for (or currently work for) HSLDA, but I believe that has more to do with the criteria HSLDA uses to select interns and staff rather than some sort of secret collaboration. In the early days of OBCL, most enrolled students had some connection to ATI (i.e., they had been ATI students or parents) and probably were aligned with HSLDA's mission of protecting the legal right to homeschool.
  
  I believe that HA's attempt connect the dots that because a some OBCL graduates now work for HSLDA that there is some behind the scenes collaboration between IBLP and HSLDA is about as logical as concluding that a number of OBCL gradus drive Toyotas and therefore IBLP has some sort of alliance with Toyota.
- *** February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Mark: You are mistaken. Oak Brook College was never a joint venture with HSLDA. There is no basis for this statement. I think this blog that you reference is trying to draw a connection--e.g., some Oak Brook graduates went to work for HSLDA--but that is entirely different than a JV. Also, there is currently one indivdual, Bob Barth, who is a member of various IBLP boards and is also a member of the OBCL board. That does not mean that OBCL has not taken significant steps to separate itself from IBLP. Time will tell, but I strongly doubt that Bob Barth has "control" over the OBCL board through his single vote.
  - Veronica February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Bob Barth is *NOT* a member of the IBLP Board. He has been general counsel for IBLP, but he is NOT and has NOT been a member of the Board.
  - Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Again, just because Oak Brook isn't a "formal" partnership or joint venture doesn't mean that there isn't an association between the two.
    
    But if Bill had found out that an ATIA family had started a similar agreement, they would be removed from ATIA post haste, because they violated the "universal, non-optional principle" against Christians being in partnership with others. So why can IBLP do so with HSLDA?
    
    I agree that Bauch's single vote can't force the Oak Brook Board to do anything. (This, of course, implies that the remaining non-IBLP members are truly "independent" in both fact and appearance; we saw in 1980 how well that worked.) But the fact that he remains on the Oak Brook Board (and, more importantly, that Oak Brook continues to teach IBLP "principles" in its curriculum) shows that IBLP intends to exercise significant influence over Oak Brook.
    - Chris Jones February 21, 2014
      
      Oak Brook announced that they will no longer include any IBLP materials in their curriculum.
    - kevin February 21, 2014
      
      "Oak Brook announced that they will no longer include any IBLP materials in their curriculum."
      
      Trying to distance themselves. Now, the when you try to connect to the OBCL link on the ATI/IBLP website, here is what you get- File not found:
      http://ati.iblp.org/students/opportunities/obcl/
      
      Some serious scrubbing going on.
- RyanR February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I'm also acquainted with most of the members of the board of directors and the board of advisors. To my knowledge, Bob Barth is the only one employed by IBLP. To believe that he is secretly ruling the board with IBLP agenda (which I do not believe would be the case) is a disservice to the other board members, imo.
- Latebloomer February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  As a participant of the Homeschoolers Anonymous community, and as someone who spent a few months at the Indianapolis Training Center, I'd just like to clarify that HA isn't anti-homeschooling. Their mission is to give people a chance to share their homeschooling stories, whether positive or negative, and to provide resources and information to promote the well-being of children who are homeschooled. See here for more info about their mission and goals: http://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/about/
  - Shelley Randolph Romey February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    They can say what they want about their stance on home education but most of their posts tell a different story. Most of the accounts center around how homeschooling damaged people who have now escaped. Those who no longer homeschool are celebrated and congratulated. The over all feeling is that those who still homeschool are in bondage.
    
    Homeschooling is not the problem with abusive parents. It is just a means to an end. Parents who abuse and control will do the same thing no matter where their kids are taught. I find the whole experience of reading anything on HA to be very negative. I believe the accounts of what I have read there but the handling of those stories made me quit reading them.
    
    This is where I find RG to be different. Even with all the ugly details coming out they keep a spirit of grace and restoration.
  - Moderator February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    With regard to OBCL / HSLDA / HA, multiple sides have been represented by this sub-thread containing just over a dozen comments. This is a natural ending point for that topic, which is now closed to further comments.
- Courtney Blackmann February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  A business partnership or joint ventures are formal entities clearly different from an informal association. Partnerships/JV have legal and financial risks associated with it, associations do not. It is the equivalent of equating business partners with friends. The risks that come with one do not exist with the other. To equate the two is extremely uninformed.
Lily February 21, 2014 Reply

oh.my.WORD. this organization needs to close down. regardless of the good experiences many people had, the entire foundation is corrupt! this whole thing is absolutely disgusting and literally makes me sick to my stomach. i can't believe the level of cover-up involved and am just heartbroken when i think of those poor girls {and everyone else for that matter} who were taken advantage of by these perverted men, out for their own gain. The sexual abuse component is horrific enough but you add in financial misuse AND the legalism and guilt tripping everyone spiritually to keep them quiet...it's just appalling. there's no way my parents would have ever enrolled our family in ATI if they had heard even a hint of this mess. it's utterly shameful.
- Brumby February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  As a result of ATI's influence on my parents, I experienced mental, emotional, and some physical abuse. I also observed that my parents had to pay fees to be a member of ATI and that they spent a lot of money on all the publications available through ATI and IBLP. As a teenager, I began to view ATI as a cult. The sexual abuse others experienced has come as new information to me, and I am sad that the program is still affecting families AS WE TYPE. Even without knowledge of the sexual abuse, I felt that ATI was a prime candidate to be brought down because it is a cult. Knowing now that sexual abuse has been present for decades, I'm in shock that I never heard that before and that the program has survived as long as it has. When my family joined ATI in 1995, I never heard about previous scandals. No one ever filled me in!
Myron Horst February 21, 2014 Reply

The way that Bill Gothard responded to the exposure of his sexual sins and those of his brother may sound very strange, but they are very characteristic of a sexual predator.

Sexual predators by the very nature of their sin are con artists and are living a lie – often for many years. They have lived a life of deception and often try to continue to deceive others after they are exposed. In her book Sexual Abuse in Christian Homes and Churches, p 145, Carolyn Holderread Heggen says this:
“Most lay people in a congregation are not prepared for the extent nor tenacity of denial in sex offenders. Consequently, they may easily be convinced that an offender is telling the truth when in fact he is denying the extent of his sin and his responsibility for the pain he has caused another. Being swayed by an offender’s eloquent denial may keep him from facing the darkness of his heart and make it less likely he will experience repentance, redemption, and restoration.
“Congregations likewise need to be aware that “religious conversions” are common among convicted offenders. They often show extreme remorse when caught and convicted. After their “conversions” they are inclined to insist they don’t need treatment now but will instead pray more, read the Bible more, and be more active in church activities. They promise to rely more on God. They may manipulate church members or the pastor into testifying for them as character witnesses in an attempt to avoid the full legal penalty of their offense.”

One pattern that emerges over and over in the sexual abuse cases that I have studied, is church leaders using forgiveness as a manipulative tool to get the victim and their family to remain silent about the abuse. Once the sexual predator has confessed to the church leadership, the victim is the one that the leadership then puts the most focus on as the one who needs to change or repent. The victim and their family are pressured to forgive and never mention it again. Over and over victims are judged and made to feel guilty because they have an unforgiving spirit. If they bring up the abuse, they are accused for not forgiving. Sexual abuse is a very hard thing to forgive, and even though a person forgives, the anger can come back repeatedly over the years. Anytime the church leadership senses any little bit of anger, they jump on the victim and accuse them of being unforgiving.

When church leaders focus on forgiveness and cover up of sexual abuse, they are ignoring or are ignorant of some important things about the repentance of a sexual molester. For a sexual predator, just a simple act of repentance for what they have done and then everything is fine again, is not enough. A sexual molester needs to prove over time that they really are repentant and show fruits of true repentance. Mere words of repentance are not enough. Diane Langberg in her report titled Sexual Abuse in Christian Organizations, addresses this:
“The Scripture is also clear that sin is the worst thing in the world – not exposure, not getting caught, not the loss of all things. It seems we do not believe what we teach. If we did we would know that an abuser is a slave and cannot simply stop. We would understand that the narcotic of self-deception has become so powerful in his life that he not only cannot stop lying; he does not even know when he is and has lost his capacity to tell truth from lies, good from evil. We would know that habituated sin has roots and tentacles and has long done damage to the soul so it is not easily routed out. And we would know that exposure, consequences and treatment are necessary if there is ever to be freedom from the cancer that has sent out tentacles all through his life…

“Repentance of habituated sin is never immediate. It is not possible for it to be immediate. Discernment of good and evil, conscience or any desire to obey God have all been trampled and killed. Such things are not awakened and strong and consistent simply because someone has been caught. Repentance is not seen in tears; it is not seen in words; it is not seen in emotion. Repentance is long, slow, consistent change over an extended period of time because it is from the heart outward. Heart change is supernatural work. We all know that sinful humans do not turn into godly ones quickly – our own lives attest to that. The bottom line is that you cannot tell if repentance is genuine for a long, long time. If you think you can you will have not only fooled yourself but you will risk vulnerable people. Any abuser who insists he is fine and needs no oversight is not safe because he still has no awareness of his capacity for self-deception. Any abuser who insists he is trustworthy has not understood the Scriptures teaching about self-deception and how it results in not being able to tell good from evil.

“Any abuser who thinks saying, “I am sorry” readies him for a return to ministry has no grasp of his heart’s capacity for deceit, his abuse of power, his assault on the sheep and his tragic dishonor of the Name of Christ.” http://netgrace.org/wp-content/uploads/Sexual-Abuse-within-Christian-Organizations.pdf pages 16-18

I Timothy 5:19-20 “Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. 20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.”

Recovering Grace's exposure of Bill Gothard's sins is following what God has commanded that church leaders be rebuked before the whole Church (Body of Christ) so that others will also fear public humility and not engage in such sins. Covering up sexual abuse and sweeping it under the rug takes the fear away from perpetrators from being caught and exposed. Fear of being found out is a strong motivator to help people not to sin.
- JessicaB February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Myron,
  
  I really appreciate your comments, and the book passages you quote. I think that these are important lessons every group of believers need to understand as they deal with abusers.
  
  Thank you for sharing.
  - AmandaH February 23, 2014 Reply
    
    Yes, thank you, Myron.
- Shane February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  "Once the sexual predator has confessed to the church leadership, the victim is the one that the leadership then puts the most focus on as the one who needs to change or repent. The victim and their family are pressured to forgive and never mention it again."
  
  This is evil! Ministerial malpractice! And cannot be tolerated!
  - Shane February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Sorry for shouting.
- Lori February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Thank you SO much, Myron. That was excellent!!
- Roz June 7, 2015 Reply
  
  Thank you, Myron. I'm a Christian psychotherapist who will always need to learn more about high-control congregations and the perceptions of sin, guilt, and loyalty. You've done me a considerable service here.
  - LynnCD June 7, 2015 Reply
    
    Roz, if you aren't familiar with Bill Gothard's seminars and books, he also tends to throw out, in his teaching and writing, just enough to make you think he's aware of his own tendencies to sin and how to deal with it, and that he is above the kind of abuse told on this site.
    
    For example, in the Basic Seminar, on the subject of a clear conscience, he talks about a man who was scared to go into the ministry because of all the women who would wave their handkerchiefs at him and say, "Yoo hoo, remember me?? Preach it, brother!" So this man went to each woman he had offended to truly ask forgiveness for whatever sexual sin he committed against them.
    
    From all reports, Gothard has not done this with his victims.
    
    Also, in one of his books (I *think* the one on the jealousy of God) Bill talks about a young man reproving Bill when a pretty young woman walked in the office. After she left, Bill claimed the young man said he noticed how Bill's eyes lit up when she entered the room.
    
    This gave the appearance that Bill was open to receiving reproof and correction from those who worked for him. But he wasn't. At least, not the vast majority. But that was what was stated in his book, and many probably believed Bill had problems just like the rest of us, but was open to being accountable to people around him admonishing him.
Lizzie February 21, 2014 Reply

In Daphne du Maurier's book Jamaica Inn there is a particularly poignant scene, one that I recalled to mind as I read this timeline.

Mary Yellan has discovered the true depths of the evil smuggling ring that operates out of Jamaica Inn, where she has been staying with her aunt for several months, and has just witnessed her aunt's murder. She has been rescued by the kind squire and his wife, and they gave her over into the care of her mentor Reverend Davey, who had been her counselor/friend throughout her long ordeal.

"She had no will of her own; they could make decisions for her; and, when Francis Davey offered his home for shelter, she accepted meekly and without feeling, conscious that her listless word of thanks savoured of ingratitude. Once more she knew the humility of being born a woman, when the breaking down of strength and spirit was taken as natural and unquestioned."

She awakens late in the evening at the vicarage and wanders downstairs, where she finds several drawings that the artistically talented Mr. Davey's has created. But one in particular captures her attention.

"This was not a drawing at all, but a caricature, grotesque as it was horrible. The people of the congregation were bonneted and shawled, and in their best clothes as for Sunday, but he had drawn sheep's heads upon their shoulders instead of human faces. The animal's jaws gaped foolishly at the preacher, with silly vacant solemnity, and their hooves were folded in prayers. The features of each sheep had been touched upon with care, as though representing a living soul but the expression on every one was the same -- that of an idiot who neither knew nor cared. The preacher, with his black gown and halo of hair, was Francis Davey; but he had given himself a wolf's face, and the wolf was laughing at the flock beneath him."

This drawing makes Mary realize that it is her trusted friend and mentor who is the true mastermind of the smuggling ring; the man who both uses the other men to do his dirty work, and who carefully led her away from confessing the truth to the squire.

Mankind never changes, does it? The character of Francis Davey appears to be nearly identical to that of Bill Gothard.
- Lori February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Wow. Thank you for that vivid parallel, Lizzie. The similarities are striking indeed!
Sarah M February 21, 2014 Reply

I really appreciate Tony here. He is a hero to me. I hope that wherever he is, he has experienced healing, despite the fact that this situation he worked so hard to change remains unresolved.
- Amos February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Agreed.
  
  Tony, your dedication is commendable. Thank you for taking a stand in the face of so much opposition.
- Larne Gabriel February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Tony, Bill Wood, Chuck Lynch, Lin Entz, Ken Nair, even Gary Smalley and many other fought the battle in those early years. As a result Gothard personally went after some of them with a vengeance. He tried to taint their reputations with churches, communities and employers. Some of these attacks were successful and had negative consequences on these "proclaimers of truth". Yet Gothard called them "agents of satan".
  
  Tony is doing well, still loves the Lord and continues as a "proclaimer of truth", he has a great sense of humor and a true friend to all who know him. Yes he "Rocks".
  
  Larne Gabriel
  - Andrew Harper February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Larne, thank you for being here. I know that you have been struggling with this for longer than some of us have been alive, but I really, REALLY appreciate your perspective. Thank you.
  - Veronica February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Yes! Larne! Thank you SO much.
    
    You have been in my thoughts and prayers as all of this has come up; knowing that it will affect those involved from "back then" negatively through rehashing everything.
Timothy Sutterfield February 21, 2014 Reply

Tony,

You sir, ROCK!!
David Pigg February 21, 2014 Reply

Darkness won out.
- Nancy2 February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  At the Cross it also appeared such, yet on the third day came Resurrection. Days of darkness are for a season. We serve a Conquering Savior. Mr. Gothard is just one battle.
  
  Jesus will be victorious over this too. We are witnesses to how He has delivered so many from this legalism of ATI/IBLP. We are seeing God's gentle movement of people longing to know His Grace and finding it.
  
  But I agree. In the article the darkness feels oppressive.
Toni February 21, 2014 Reply

There were two parts in all that madness where I just had to laugh out loud.

At the bottom of page 7: "Bill Gothard (also unmarried)"

Top of page 18: "Dr. Brown wears a beard which represents a false philosophy."

Seriously. What the what?
- eva February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  When we investigated joing ATI about 1986, one of the requirements was that the father (or any male in the family, I suppose) could not have a beard....unless he was a Mennonite. My husband didn't have a beard but he couldn't see why no beard was more Godly than a bearded man. He now has a big beard and the son we were thinking of for ATI has an even bigger one. It was a Gothard authority thing I guess.
- 'Megan' February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  If I remember correctly, there was a teaching floating around that for a man to have facial hair was an indication that he was immoral. I don't know how long it lasted, although I understand that exception was made for Mennonites.
- The Quiet One February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  When my family joined in 1994, the requirement to shave beards was still in effect. My father, who was not a Mennonite, had a full beard. He shaved it off, but not before he followed the ATI guidelines for appealing to authorities and wrote a letter using Scripture references to show that shaving one's beard is not a Biblical command. That incident alone should have been a warning to us, but the apparently beneficial effect of the Basic Seminar on a rebellious sibling weighed too heavily on the opposite side. Thankfully, now they do not endorse ATI/IBLP in the least and are quite ready to admit that the organization was a cult. None of my siblings, even the one it was supposed to have helped, will have anything to do with the organization.
- KH February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Concerning the beards...before I moved to my current church position and a year before becoming an ATIA parent ( now former) I had a full beard. My new pastor, another former ATIA parent, requested that I shave off my beard before my first day at work. I was told that a study by IBM determined that men with beards were considered to be less trustworthy and were possibly hiding something. Therefore none of IBM's technicians working with the public were allowed to wear beards and also wore suits with white shirt and dark tie. This even included repairmen. I have never seen the actual study.
  - greg r February 22, 2014 Reply
    
    @KH: the IBM study you referred to is in a temp. controlled vault in Salt Lake City... or so it seems
- Mike February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I'm not a true ATI guy, I was homeschooled with certain influences of BG, so I'm not sure of all his teachings except for generalities. As a result, I don't know if BG ever quoted Spurgeon or Moody, but he's a big fan of George Muller, who had a beard....I suppose we need to reconsider Muller's philosophy too?
  
  Sigh, the hypocrisy is mind-boggling.
Beth February 21, 2014 Reply

The whole mess is just so sad. That someone would assume ultimate authority over other individuals for their own purpose is just deplorable. Tony and all the other people who tried so hard, to their own detriment, to bring this into the open, are amazing! My heart goes out to the people who tried to bring this out and also to the girls that were trapped. I can't even begin to fathom how hard it would be to want God after being so controlled and used in the name of god. My prayers go out to the people right now who are bringing a painful past back out all over again. Having been there myself, I realize this is going to crush some people still trapped by this organization. God isn't an organization or Bill, you'll find Him and trust me, He's so much more than anything ATI/IBLP has to offer. He doesn't require a set of rules because we could never be good enough anyways, He's enough and He just wants us in all our brokenness.
Samuel Lundmark February 21, 2014 Reply

In my opinion, this documentation is one of the most damning statements about Bill's, his dad's, and IBYC/IBLP's actions in hiding sin to date.

I think it is telling that the pastor of LaGrange Bible Church declared Bill to be not under the authority of the church as one of his reasons for not getting involved in the organizational dispute in regard to Matthew 18. I consider this to be significant. As an outcome of this, there was no forum for Matthew 18 resolution and the reson was laid at Bill's own feet. This, in effect, leaves the matters to be resolved either inside IBLP (which had already proven to be impossible) or outside in the public view as they are today.
- Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  In retrospect maybe LaGrange should have revoked or suspended Gothard's credentials. But there are these things to consider:
  
  1. Though LEGALLY LaGrange could have revoked/suspended his credentials (that is considered to be a purely ecclesiastical matter, and secular courts will not hear those matters), did they feel they could MORALLY do so, since none of the incidents took place under the auspices of the church or on its facilities? (IBLP has never been a ministry of LaGrange.)
  2. Even if LaGrange did so, Gothard would have easily used that as "evidence of persecution" toward IBLP (and some IBLP-supportive church would have issued him credentials).
Lynn February 21, 2014 Reply

Larne Gabriel, regarding Jim Sammons was ATI and IBLP just a perfect place for him to sell his seminar based on Bill's teachings of no debt?
JennV February 21, 2014 Reply

Have any of the ladies that Steve G. seduced from the 1970's come forward to tell their story publicly? I pray that they will find strength to do so.
Laura February 21, 2014 Reply

Just when I feel like I'm gaining some victory an article like these recent ones is posted! Oh how many, many, many families could have been spared devastating pain from this evil had this been revealed in full at the time. I note the first date: 1971!!! 43 years of cover up! Gothard Gate! I am personally devastated as initially, I questioned how an unmarried man could counsel on marriage and children. I attended too many seminars and gradually drank the kool aid! Had Bill been dealt with and removed we could have been spared! I know some tried and I also know they didn't have the advantage of the Internet.
"It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble." Luke 17:2
Would it not be advisable to view BG as a reprobate?
"From the perspective of The Bible, a reprobate is someone who refuses to make good use of the understanding of the Word of God provided to them, "these also resist the Truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith." (2 Timothy 3:8 KJV). Reprobate is used to translate the originate Greek word of the New Testament, pronounced, ad-ock-ee-mos, meaning rejected i.e. those who reject the Word of God will be rejected by God's Word in due time, as made plain by the Word of God (John 1:1,14), Jesus Christ: "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings has a judge; the Word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day." (John 12:48 RSV)" He may not have appeared to reject the Word of God, but he has twisted it to his own ends and is not repentant in these 43 years!
Andrew Harper February 21, 2014 Reply

"...Steve has brought a rifle down from up North on the Lear jet to Chicago..."

This would explain to me why some of the staff may have started to fear for their lives (as noted in yesterday's article).

Aside from all the other emotions the last few days have brought up in me, I am starting to get nervously curious as to WHAT BG is currently doing? Obviously, he's not spending effort on directly addressing the information being revealed here... So, that's energy freed up to do WHAT, exactly? As I said, nervously curious.
- Samuel Lundmark February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  That doesn't happen to have been the only veiled threat ever given in ATI/IBLP.
  
  I had one made directly to me when I was deemed as uncooperative due to my not accepting their lying and manipulation. It backfired on them because I stopped giving ATI/IBLP the benefit of the doubt. There is more reason as to why it backfired, but that's for another day.
  
  Fortunately for them, that happened outside US jurisdiction.
- Samuel Lundmark February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  In my opinion, this translates roughly to emotional manipulation. I consider it a move to produce fear in order to get a person to back down more than anything else. In my eyes, it is a strong proof of guilt. A righteous person has not need to resort to such tactics.
  - Andrew Harper February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Samuel, I think I just realized that I stayed at your house in 2003 while I was working a CI (I was about to go into the Army later that year). I've seen your other comments, but didn't realize who you were until just now. I must say you definitely piqued my curiosity with these last two comments.
    - Samuel Lundmark February 22, 2014
      
      Yeah, Andrew. That's right, I think. The experience I am referring to happened the next year--early 2004.
      
      I documented the situations and asked for answers to my questions in a letter to the IBLP board. I received confirmation that the letter had been received and was presented to the board, but I never received answers to my questions. Disregard for answering questions is a signal of a problem in and of itself. Because of that, I left and will not return to or fund IBLP or any sub-organization tied to it. Neither will my family.
Ryan Sapp February 21, 2014 Reply

For context we were third year Atia (87?) with my parents attending their first basic in the early 80's. This type of info was hard to come by in the type writer era. I attended seminars as soon as I could, maybe 12, I'm 40 now.

I haven't been involved with RG before the last few weeks. Knew about it but was way past BG in my life. I would like to commend RG for how professional and tasteful they have been. I don't think this is what they set out to do, not in their wildest imaginations. As they created a "recovery" site, location for people to talk and connect I think these stories started coming to the forefront. That is my assumption and I could be wrong but it seems like a natural progression.

My mom called today and seriously wanted to burn her character sketch books. After all that's what Bill told us to do with our rock music and other material. Knowing that Steve wrote those books at the same time he was leading this type of lifestyle is disheartening to say the least.

We can all agree that we learned many good qualities from the teachings. Whether more than bad can be debated. I have dealt with many things like losing my youth, not going to college, marrying when I was so emotionally/experientially unprepared etc. etc. those are big deals BTW.

What if Bill would've actually manned up and lived a life congruent with his teachings? Maybe get married, have kids etc. Focus on the family type of ministry( they could've had their own scandal, I am way out of the loop). Bill definitely WAS (past tense) charismatic leader. Maybe he could've actually accomplished lasting, helpful results.

Remember how Bill would trot his parents out on stage in their 80's at the end of the seminars and such. Build them up and all, come to find out his Dad was the ring leader. I can't help but think that his family was/is extremely dysfunctional. It's like Bill was stuck at a 15 year old development stage with women, footsies and cheap feels. That's not to marginalized the pain and hurts of so many women.

Some of us have been dealing with these hurts for years, others, it's been a matter of weeks. It takes years to sort through. Acknowledgement, hurt, anger is a normal progression. I will try to cut others slack knowing in 1988 what my families response would've been.

Most of us have viewed Bill as being in left field for a while now. It's a whole other level to see him as a complete fraud. To think he could've nipped all this in the bud with open discussion and repentance with RG and his victims. As we have all seen through the correspondence he tried to handle RG the way he has every other problem for 40+ years only this time technology will be his accountability.

Ryan
- Brumby February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  The act or art of burning things will likely have a negative connotation for me for the rest of my life - another way the ATI teachings and rituals have instilled "quirks" in me forever. When recently processing grief and a personal loss, a therapist encouraged me to write a letter pertaining to my feelings and situation, then burn it as way to keep it private, yet process and "let go." Burn it?!?! No way! Instant flashback. No bonfires here! I got me a good paper shredder instead. :)
- eva February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I threw mine in the trash. No burning allowed in our county. I only hesitated because of the cost of the things in the first place. I didn't know then about Steve but saw that they were no longer true and needed to go.
Moderator February 21, 2014 Reply

All comments are being moderated at this time. We will approve comments as we are able.

We feel it was getting too heated. We strive to maintain a respectful atmosphere even in spite of the emotional nature of the problems.

We feel our success depends upon a narrow focus on Bill Gothard and ATI / IBLP. For now, we will be quick to moderate comments and questions related to other people and other organizations.
- Jonathan Owens February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Good call!! You guys are awesome and I for one am praying for you.
Shannon Wehr February 21, 2014 Reply

Tony, what a real man full of guts, courage and humility this whole debacle proves you to be! How many people would be willing to continue working for resolution and reconciliation with Gothard and other leaders involved after numerous times of being betrayed, humiliated, lied to and about, called out publicly (to some 40,000 seminar attendees in printed form, no less!!!), ridiculed, demeaned and on and on. From what I can tell, putting the stories together, Tony was in his early to mid-twenties besides. Talk about real solid character and moral fortitude! Glad to hear he's still God's man!

Kudos to Smalley and the others, too. What a complete and total disaster! I have no respect for anyone who could remain in support of the Gothards after knowing what they did those years.
Karah February 21, 2014 Reply

Tony, If you're reading this, THANK YOU for taking a stand for the truth!
Shannon Wehr February 21, 2014 Reply

I just got off of the phone after having spoken with George Mattix at IBLP Headquarters. He said that a statement by Bill in his own words and of his own making will be posted on the IBLP website in the next two or so days. Unfortunately, he expressed some of its contents will be to the effect of, "Bill Gothard regrets any hurts he has caused and wishes to pursue reconciliation." Mattix also said that it will be a reiteration of the continued statement he has made for many years. When asked whether Gothard admits to any wrongdoing in said accusations, Mattix explained that Gothard has always and will still stand by his statements that he has never kissed a girl, fondled a girl or had sex with a girl. Anyway, I look forward to reading Gothard's statement, but am disappointed to know it will likely have nothing new to say.
- esbee February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  “Rewards of Being Reviled” is a book you can buy at IBLP and here is what it says about it.....
  
  “We can expect to be reviled if we are disciples of Jesus. However, when we recognize that the spiritual and eternal rewards are great, we will be able to respond joyfully as Jesus commanded: “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you” (Matthew 5:11–12)”.
  
  So guess who thinks he is being reviled and will most likely mention that in his announcement in a few days ?
  - kevin February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Yes, and he has been loading up on this teaching to his followers on his website recently- as well as his twitter account.
    His August update to his website has an intro to the reviling teaching with a link to his teaching on the subject:
    http://billgothard.com/content/unexpected-rewards-being-reviled
    
    So, Bill would have them all believe that he is being "reviled", just like Stephen and Joseph. His teachings are essentially all about Bill Gothard; how to continue his abusive behavior, cover it up and blame anyone who would dare call him out on it.
- Headless Horseman February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I think we already know that no such statement will be forthcoming, based on his past tactics of delay and stalling. After all, his MO in the past has been to agree in the daytime to statements/confessions, then the next day he would completely reverse his decision.
- Ryan Sapp February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  "Never kissed a girl," That's actually very sad. Explains a lot. I wonder if he has ever had a healthy relationship with a woman.
  - John February 23, 2014 Reply
    
    He never kissed a girl....... just groped a few...... I guess that makes him naive.....NOT!
- Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  You may be right that another "apology" and desire for "reconciliation" may be all Gothard gives us.
  
  He is in his 80's, and people who live a long time are set in their ways, even the most saintly among us. And having closed his mind, stiffened his spine, and hardened his heart for so long, God may have already given him over to a reprobate mind.
  
  But there is always hope, so long as one is alive, for repentance and change.
  
  So let us plan for the worst (that the statement says nothing new, and that RG must continue to shine its light on the dangers of IBLP and its affiliates) while praying for the best (that the statement shows true repentance and a desire to change).
- David February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Well, here is the problem: Bill may indeed give a veiled apology for any hurts he MAY have caused. That is, of course, baloney. But he won't apologize for preaching 40 years of heresy. And the point is, it is the heresy, especially his authority teaching, that made all the rest of these abuses possible. Indeed, even if he would come truly clean about all of his moral failures -- I'm dreaming -- all that would accomplish is to strengthen the misguided faith of his fans in him and fortify his position as a false teacher.
  - Laura (attendee and former parent) February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Does anyone remember BG's teaching on apology? "It must be in person if possible, it must never use the wording: "may have caused" because that implies both that it is questionable that you caused someone pain, and indeed they may be the party in error. Obviously you wronged someone so be specific!" Thus far he does not appear to be following what he has taught whatsoever EXCEPT "don't document because you don't want to be writing down your confession for history". Now that he has applied! In his careful hedging he is missing both specificity and sincerity and puts the blame on others as he 'questions' whether he indeed cause ....
    How his teaching comes back to haunt me!
    - Brumby February 22, 2014
      
      Yes, I have similar struggle to shake the nonsense teaching about apologies. I can't just say, "I'm sorry," when I've done something wrong without wondering if I apologized sincerely, if it was "enough," or if I must also plead for forgiveness and mention the conviction of the Lord. How did the healing phrase of ownership and sincerity "I'm sorry" become so meaningless???
- AmandaH February 23, 2014 Reply
  
  I, personally, am not interested in any words he feels obligated or coerced to say just to appease the masses.
  
  I am more interested in what the Board of Directors has to say - declaring what actions they deem necessary to bring BGothard to accountability for his actions that brought such detriment to others; for his overt lies and more subtle deceptions; for using his position of influence to manipulate, intimidate, and control others; for hurting - instead of helping - those who were already hurt and vulnerable; for using IBLP (and its Board and all supporters) as a front for his own personal gain.
  
  If BGothard does come forward to say something, he's going to have to back it up w/serious actions - like stepping down and allowing the Board to handle the functions and assets of the organization.
  - Marie February 23, 2014 Reply
    
    I am very curious about the board as well. Has RG reached out to them? Are they standing united in support of BG? It is hard to believe that they could do so! It makes me think of the saying "there is none so blind as those who will not see."
    
    RG team, thank you for all you are doing and for the way you are doing it.
  - kevin February 23, 2014 Reply
    
    "I am more interested in what the Board of Directors has to say"
    
    Based on their most recent group photo, I'm not holding my breath:
    
    http://thumb7.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/249301/96143699/stock-photo-hear-no-evil-see-no-evil-speak-no-evil-male-version-96143699.jpg
    - AmandaH February 24, 2014
      
      LOL! . . . :sigh: I hope not. But it is definitely within the realm of possibility. :(
mitchell chapman February 21, 2014 Reply

In 1973 Bill taught it was ok to borrow money for a house which I did and I am glad I did but he changed and than said can not borrow at all so does anybody know why he changed his view on borrowing. My house payment was less than some of the ATI people were paying in rent but they would not listen cause whatever Bill said was what they had to do.
This was 10 years latter when ATI was being promoted at the Basic Seminars.

thanks for the input and the ATI children need our prayers as they try to get their minds around all this info.
- David February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Not picking on you -- this just caught my attention. Look at how you are describing the way Gothard's teachings controlled the lives of people. Bill said this....he changed it to that...? WHO CARES what Bill Gothard thinks? Did anyone read the Bible for themselves? Did anyone realize that they are to have a personal relationship with Christ for themselves? Evidently, many simply waiting for the next pronouncement by Bill Gothard. Aside from the fact that Bill Gothard is a false teacher of, "another gospel," God does not appoint people to THINK for us. True ministry is supposed to teach people to know and walk with Christ for themselves. Is Bill the Protestant Pope?
  - Becky February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Another hypocrisy was that he taught that people shouldn't use credit cards but then accepted them for book orders. One of the most common questions asked when I was working for him was "why will you take a credit card if people aren't supposed to use them?" Yes, people blindly follow Bill.
    
    Everyone in ATI did read the Bible daily. But I think the way we were encouraged to read made it very difficult to hear God's voice. We either had to read huge amounts at a time because there were goals to reach (legalism), which made us zone out and just get through it. Or else we had to take a single verse out of context and "meditate" on it or memorize it.
    
    Bill himself has a habit of just using even only a part of a verse. I have heard him say many times, "The law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ." Sometimes under his breath he would quickly add "...that we might be justified by faith." But often he would even leave that off altogether!
    - mitchell chapman February 23, 2014
      
      from
      MITCHELL CHAPMAN
      
      Bill was just trying to help people not get into financial binds so that part for me I thought great advice. Lots of stress on families when they borrow and can not pay back but I think it is a good time now to borrow money for a house because a young family will have a house payment that is less than the rent.
      I think the big thing is to think about every situation and not draw a black and white theology.
    - David February 23, 2014
      
      I hear you. Every, "Christian," cult on the planet claims to use the Bible. Many of them know what it says better than some mature Christian people. But people in cults are programmed to make it mean what they cult says it means. The only way to know what the Bible means by what it says is to know the One who wrote it.
Nicole February 21, 2014 Reply

Tony, your courage and humility stands out as profound and exemplary. You continually revisited truth gently, even when you were ignored, and even when you suffered slander. Of all the characters in this story, your gentle and courageous woodpecker-esque faithfulness serve to redeem this whole matter, and bring hope to those of us who struggle with discouragement. Thank you.
Elizabeth February 21, 2014 Reply

As much as I’d like to think that Mr Gothard would be able to recognize sin in himself and be accountable to the masses that he has apparently defrauded – not to mention countless young women in an even more heinous way – I don’t see that happening, and I’ll mention why, because it doesn’t make sense to most of us.

As I’ve read in recent days of this man’s consistent behavior over a span of years, I unfortunately recognize the pattern, and it goes far deeper than footsie or fondling. I have lived with a narcissistic husband for 26 years. For 24 ½ of those, I knew that things were not normal, but I couldn’t figure out why. I DID know all along (down to my bones) that he didn’t understand grace. I just didn’t know the bigger picture of how all the “little” things could ever make sense.

Not to say that narcissism makes “sense,” but I’ve learned a tremendous amount in the past year or so … about narcissists’ need to assert an image (one that meets legalistic standards) in place of reality at ALL costs … about how other people don’t matter, only the image … about unbelievably intricate methods of isolating, barricading, projecting, hiding, and scapegoating – tools in arsenals used to control and manipulate situations and worse, PEOPLE that they supposedly love. And the lies. OMG, the brazen LIES.

A narcissist can skillfully manipulate a situation to maintain his image … even over a great span of time, if need be. As easily as I can pour a cup of water, a narcissist can lie about one person to another so as to frame a “reality” of his own choosing. The rest of us would never get away with such a thing. Besides having consciences that prevent it, we would simply never expect our façade to withstand cross-examination or involved parties comparing notes. But nothing is simple about narcissism. All that’s covered, because just as he’s lied to YOU about someone else, he’s lied to THEM about you, and just as YOU would be intimidated to ever broach the subject with THEM, he’s done the same to THEM, too. So there IS no note-comparing to worry about. Or in case that ever does happen, there’s always denial and a host of other deflective mechanisms to pull out of the bag.

A male “Christian” narcissist is the worst of the worst. In addition to the standard tools, they additionally have the “big guns” of Scriptural authority (twisted, of course) to use as tools of intimidation and control. As you can imagine, these tools are especially effective on women (think wife/employee/intern) that are eager to follow God’s plan for their lives and assume submissive roles – even to the point that they repress their own good judgment.

In stark contrast to Scripture (but at the same time ironically referring to it), my husband has appointed himself as my accuser, and continues to try to control and manipulate me so that he can maintain the image of respectability that he desires, but to which he does not measure up. Familiarity with this “M.O.” makes it easier for me to see this other man and get over all the questions – like – how could he do that? … how could he get away with it? … how could the girls/parents/followers/board fall for it? … how did so few people compare notes? … how can he say/do one thing as a teacher of Scripture and something totally different in an office or under a table? … how could this possibly be true??

So I understand those who cannot reconcile what appears to be the long-term skillfully projected image of this man (a Godly spiritual leader and Biblical teacher with a spot-on confession of belief) with what appears to be the persona that he prefers to keep from view (an internally-conflicted power-hungry self-serving manipulative pervert). Actually, I sort of wish it didn’t make sense and wasn’t believable to me, either. But I can tell you with all conviction that just because it doesn’t make sense to people that can’t imagine such evil doesn’t mean it can’t be reality. And the reality is that these people rarely change, which is why I don’t see any genuine confession coming any time soon. The sad facts are that (1) nobody but a narcissist would do such things; and (2) anybody BUT a narcissist would at least confess, especially when confronted with (a) such a body of evidence, (b) his OWN teaching, (c) Scripture; and (3) people unfamiliar with narcissism can blissfully not imagine either (1) or (2).

One more thing. Although I’ve stated that narcissists rarely change (and before I’m jumped on for neglecting this last point), Jesus is able to do anything. If a narcissist was beyond His reach, then His reach would be limited, which it’s not. But Jesus will never be found in legalism … only in GRACE. Narcissists are legalists, and as long as they choose this path, they can quote, memorize, meditate on, or even preach Scripture all they want, but they won’t find JESUS. It doesn’t mean He’s not available to them. Or that his atoning sacrifice wasn’t enough for them. Bill Gothard needs Jesus, just as my husband does.

For anyone wanting to learn more, there are many resources with varying degrees of helpfulness. I would point you in the direction of gracefortheheart dot org. Commentary there about grace and narcissism/legalism being on opposite ends of a spectrum was what made things click for me.
- Rebekah February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  This is an excellent explanation. Thank you for taking the time to post, Elizabeth.
- Deanna February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  I agree with you, and as I've been reading through these RG articles it's become more and more obvious that Bill Gothard is a Destructive Narcissist.
- Shane February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Can I just add an appeal for those of us in ministry to consider well the realities you've described and account for them WHENEVER we teach on marriage or gender roles, do premarital counseling, or encounter a difficult marriage conflict?
  
  Thanks Elizabeth- this is very helpful.
- GuyS February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  Thank you Elizabeth. What you said is so powerful. I have lived for many years with narcissists in my family. So of course, I am guilty. Thank you for your voice. Processing all this is not easy. Your excellent explanation is very helpful.
- Laurie February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  Elizabeth, you were able to articulate all the thoughts in my heart. BGs seminar my narcissist husband and I attended around 1984 led to almost 30 years of bondage and heartache for me. The male narcissist in his world is free to do what he wants. I was just a mere tool to be used for his selfish purposes, while blaming myself. God help us all.
- greg r February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  @Elizabeth: your post above is one of the clearest, and saddest, statements of truth I've read here on RG. Not sure if it would "fit" but this might merit article status, if fleshed out a bit. I think it answers MANY questions, not only about BG, but (sadly) multiple similar tragedies involving charismatic leaders, past (Joe Smith , anyone ??) and present ...holding my tongue on naming names here..
  - greg r February 22, 2014 Reply
    
    A sure sign of said narcissism is seeing yourself/your ministry as INDISPENSABLE to the greater scope of GOD's Kingdom. Sometimes that attitude is subtle, sometimes not.
- dreamer February 23, 2014 Reply
  
  Thank you, Elizabeth. Your description sounds a lot like another recently disgraced Fundamentalist leader I know of, whose name starts with "D" and ends with "Phillips."
The Quiet One February 21, 2014 Reply

Page 14: "Facts confirmed during the July 15th, 1980 meeting with Tony:

1. Even though Bill Gothard explains at his seminars and to all the pastor's meetings that he has made a vow to God not to watch TV anymore, Bill does watch TV for personal pleasure when he is up North. He admitted today that his vow only applies to when he is in motels on the road traveling."

I have been quietly watching Recovering Grace's reporting on this scandal. My days of following IBLP have been over for a while and I thought I was emotionally detached from it all, though I sincerely sympathized with Ruth, Larne and the other victims. Then I read that quote above and broke down.

You see, the teaching on vows in the Basic Seminar was the single most destructive force in my adolescence. Even seemingly innocent commitments to read my Bible everyday became "heavy burdens, grievous to be born." I do not exaggerate when I say that the web of commitments Gothard wove in his Seminars drove me to the edge of insanity.

I attended the Seminars in 1999/2000. To discover that it was all a sham on his part, that he himself did not take seriously the fearful warnings on breaking vows which he quoted in the Seminars, that he admitted to breaking his vow two decades before I heard about those vows in the Seminars - it was overwhelming. Thank God that the truth of His word has set me free from those coerced 'commitments'.

I pity Gothard, for unless he repents and humbles himself in the dust before God and the Church and walks quietly for the rest of his days, his account before God will be heavy indeed.

"But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you... and many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of...and through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you...

Presumptuous are they, selfwilled... which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; but was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet...

While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption...For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning..." [Excerpts from II Peter, chapter 2]
- Steve240 February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  “I had forgotten that you are only a common boy. How should you understand reasons of the State? You must learn, child, that what would be wrong for you or for any of the common people is not wrong in a great Queen such as I. The weight of the world is on our shoulders. We must be freed from all rules. Ours is a high and lonely destiny.”
  
  ― C.S. Lewis, The Magician's Nephew
  
  Maybe this explains why Gothard's rules didn't apply to him. Gothard otk this attitude.
- Shannon Wehr February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Over the years, I have been so grateful looking back for the insight of one of Bill Gothard's prominent personal assistants, Michael LeFebvre. He had recently left Gothard's service and entered a pastoral apprenticeship. For some reason, he was chosen as one of our EQUIP 7 speakers. His notes must not have been reviewed or his speaking topic either, for that matter. We all sat shocked as LeFebvre explained how he had made every vow Gothard had advocated until after some years, he realized he couldn't even remember them all, let alone kept them all. Under great dread and fear of God, he tried desperately to write down the vows he could remember to at least try to keep those. It was hopeless. There were some 60 or 80, I forgot what he said. He was desperate and implored God for help and grace. He decided to beg God to cancel all his vows, grant him a clean slate and release him from their heavy bondage. From then on, he purposed he would never make a vow or commitment for more than one week. If he was really convicted and he thought that the commitment had value, he would renew it for another week and so on, till he forgot about it.
  
  How in the world did he get in there?! LeFebvre was one of the first speakers. We had never heard anything like it before and were very impressed. (Dr. Jerry Benjamin came shortly after and reiterated what LeFebvre had said emphasizing that Christ wanted relationship and to be preeminent in our lives.) For the rest of our eight weeks of training, including a week with Gothard, hardly ever did any of us raise our hands for any of the 'commitments.' Gothard and the rest of the regular speakers were very disappointed in our class, and Mr. Camenisch admonished us to reconsider to no avail. We felt extremely grateful for the testimony of LeFebvre,though I suppose he was never invited again. (I later heard he hoped to minister to disillusioned Gothard followers when Gothard died, and help them find the truth.)
  
  Imagine my horror to hear that Gothard has set up a new program to go over all the commitments/vows he has taught for over the years so that people can renew them and find success in life. Oh, my!
  - *** February 21, 2014 Reply
    
    Shannon: Thanks for sharing this. I was a contemporary of Michael's when we worked directly for Bill around the same time. I have enormous respect for him and know something of his post-Gothard journey to the Gospel. I had a similar experience coming to realize how unbiblical these vows can be. When I was 21, my father (who was in ATIA) asked me to vow to never drink alcohol. I did so without hesitation. Years later, my wife and I began to attend and became members of a church that served wine at communion. I felt conflicted. I talked to the pastor and he asked me a simple question: “Your Heavenly Father says, ‘take this wine and drink, it is my blood shed for you.’ Your earthly father has said, do not drink wine. Who are you going to obey?” When he put it like that, I of course knew the answer. It was obvious and I suddenly realized how I had put the commands of men about the commands of our Lord. I was also reminded that, at the time of the Reformation, the teaching of the reformers was that Catholic vows of celibacy made by nuns and priests, along with similar types of vows, were not to be followed. And so Martin Luther himself married a emancipated nun. We are not to make vows that prohibit what God has blessed. God has ordained marriage. Our Lord inaugurated his miracle ministry by turning water into wine—not Welch’s grape juice—at the wedding of Canaan. These are blessings from our Lord and we should be wary of any man who calls us to make vows to abstain.
    - Kevin February 21, 2014
      
      good points. As you may be aware, Gothard claims that they were really drinking grape juice, not wine.
    - Shane February 21, 2014
      
      ...and yet another example of the shotty exegesis used to prop up his principles and new laws.
  - David February 22, 2014 Reply
    
    Vows? James 5:12 -- "But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation." What part of that does Bill Gothard, and his followers, NOT understand?
- phyllis February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  Thank you Quiet One. Very well put. The scripture you quoted is so fitting. I am encouraged by the incredible amount of mature thought expressed throughout these comments. I am grateful that God is using RG to expose this liar.
Nicole February 21, 2014 Reply

Last night in Bible Study, we were looking at the book of Jude, specifically where the patron archangel of Israel, Michael, was wrestling with satan over the body of Moses (Jude 9). In the study, we were discussing why satan and Michael would be wrestling over the body of Moses, and as part of our lesson we were led back to the original passage in Deuteronomy, where Moses' death is recorded. The verses were so interesting to me:

"So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the Lord. 6 And God buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, opposite Beth Peor; but no one knows his grave to this day..[...]... 10 But since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face, 11 in all the signs and wonders which the Lord sent him to do in the land of Egypt, before Pharaoh, before all his servants, and in all his land, 12 and by all that mighty power and all the great terror which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel."

Our study material said that the inference is that God buried Moses without marking the grave, but that satan was wrestling with Michael because satan wanted so badly for the Jews to have the body of Moses. The very description of Moses, saying that there had never been a prophet like Moses, and detailing the dazzling signs, wonders, power, and magical terror that seemed synonymous with his public ministry (even citing his special, exclusive relationship with God: "Moses saw God face-to-face!"), made him the type of figure that the Israelites would tend to worship. They had previously been enticed easily to worship a golden calf, and how easy it would have been for them to exalt Moses -- as a man, instead of God -- and to begin to make an idol out of his body. Satan was perfectly happy to use a man of God to accomplish his evil purposes -- and to that end, wanted the body, so he could use it as a sensational and emotional reminder of God's miracles, designed to tempt the Israelites to worship anything aside from God.

Listening to the lesson last night, my husband and I exchanged significant glances, and immediately thought of Bill Gothard. He has long since stood for many ATI/IBLP members (myself included for many, many years) as a sort of intermediary to God, an exalted figure whose word was gospel. I am encouraged to check myself anytime I am willing to promote any man above the individual calling of God in my life.
- Mark R February 21, 2014 Reply
  
  Moses raised the bronze serpent, and eventually they worshipped that as well, requiring Hezekiah to tear it down and break it to pieces. So worshipping the body of Moses would have happened sooner or later, had God not intervened and buried him in an unknown place.
- David February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  "There is ONE Mediator between God and man...Jesus Christ." Bill's authority teaching -- and the practice of it -- puts Bill, and all who follow his authority teaching, outside of this foundational Truth of Christianity. Christianity is CHRIST IN YOU -- the individual. This is why Bill Gothard doesn't merely teach false things about Christianity. He teaches a false Christianity and another gospel. His teachings destroy the personal relationship God has for the individual through Jesus Christ, and classifies what ought to be basic Christian Truth as rebellion. This is also why any apology for hurts caused will not do -- he will never confess the error of the teachings that made those hurts possible.
Steve240 February 21, 2014 Reply

I imagine Bill Gothard's conscience (if he really ever had one) has been seared as Paul wrote about here:

4 The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. 2 Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. 3 They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.(I Tim 4:1-3)

It is also possible that Bill Gothard is a "sociopath" using the definition given in this book: THE SOCIOPATH NEXT DOOR The Ruthless Versus the Rest of Us. By Martha Stout. Stout's definition of a "sociopath" isn't what one normally think of when hearing that word but rather people in ordinary life that have no conscience and can do things without remorse. For more information do a search on the book title.

It should also be pointed out the dangers of nepotism. Bill Gothard tolerated actions that his brother did that he wouldn't have tolerated with others. It sounds like this group was more of a family business than a ministry
Dodged the bullet February 22, 2014 Reply

Oh my goodness. No results from the SBC leadership meeting in these notes. Wish I could have been a fly on that wall. Grew up in the SBC and know for a fact that many SBC youth attended those Basic/Advanced Youth Conflict meetings during the mid- 1980's. Youth director and church pushed for parents and youth to attend. Thank goodness my parents said "No." Guess they had discernment which I didn't get at the time. I heard every other "Hero" of the 1980's so don't know why Gothard wasn't on the approved list for my parents. Fast forward a few years, I get married and meet my new sis-n-law and bro-in-law that were heavily involved Gothardites in the 90's. My in-laws weren't impressed with the non-cutting of their granddaughters' hair (so long the girls had toileting issues) and quite a few other oddities. Thankfully after many, many children they pulled out but still spent several years in Recovery from Gothard groups. I finally saw the wisdom in my parent's decision, but as many have shared, how many lives could have been spared if those "Giants of the SBC" could have shouted from the rooftops that Gothard should not be teaching our children and their parents.
Lori February 22, 2014 Reply

"40,000 seminar alumni pastors"!

For a pastor to sit through the Basic Seminar and not see the heresies in it demonstrates he is unqualified to shepherd God's people.
- guest February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  Not sure I agree with that. Many of us lay people didn't see it, and there are stories here from pastors who were well meaning and didn't either. It's no different than any of us trusting in things other than Christ's sacrifice alone- why would a pastor really be any different in terms of that- we all have to guard against trusting our reputation, our parenting, our sincerity…….. at least in the first decades it drew you in promising you successful kids, and maybe for the pastors successful ministry. haven't been involved or in the loop for years, but I get why pastors were no different.
  - GuyS February 22, 2014 Reply
    
    I agree with you Guest. It was hard for lay and pastors to see the heresies that came at you fast and furious. This has been discussed elsewhere on RG.
    
    Also there were many things BG said that were technically true, but false by misdirection. Some of us were too immature to catch it.
    
    Also there were many things BG said, he did not really believe himself. Of course we did not know that at the time. A great example of that is part of the letter BG sent to Larne and Ruth.
    
    "...so that Jesus Christ will be exulted - not principles, and that alumni will have the power to mortify the deeds of the flesh through God's Spirit-not through human will-power."
    
    This is so outrageous!! This is so contrary, upside down, absolutely deceptive that words fail!!
    
    There are scores of testimonies on RG that say otherwise. They say just the opposite. They say that over time it became clear that BG did not exult Jesus Christ but did promote human will power over God's Spirit.
    
    But when BG sincerely with his soft voice said the proper words, what reason did we have to disbelieve him? Nothing wrong with giving someone benefit of the doubt who exults Jesus Christ and His Spirit. Nothing wrong with a lot of stuff in his seminars. A lot of it was true, just false by misdirection. And anyone with discernment can easily see the errors. But we couldn't
    
    BG gets you (lay and pastors alike) drinking the Kool-Aid. You then put your full weight on the rock of BG. It turns out that rock is deceptive with no real connection to the God you trusted. He said it was OK and there was a lot of truth he said. Enough for you to trust him. So you go tumbling down the hill. And great was the fall.
    
    Sure 20-20 hindsight is great. Of course the lay are supposed to protect their families and the pastors are supposed to protect his church. It is so easy to see with 20-20 how both lay and pastors missed the mark.
    
    We did fall.
    
    We were wrong.
    
    We were and are in a sorry state.
    
    However, I suspect that many of us would like mercy and grace for our stupid lack of discernment.
- David February 22, 2014 Reply
  
  You are absolutely correct. A pastor is supposed to protect his church from heresy. They sat and listened to another gospel and never realized it. This doesn't mean they were bad people. They were sincere. But it certainly does expose the sorry state of the churches, doesn't it?
  - Lori February 22, 2014 Reply
    
    Yes, David. You're right; I'm not saying they were bad people or intentionally remiss. I feel for them. It's just that for a pastor not to recognize a false gospel when it's thrown in his face means he has a lot of learning and discerning to do before he is truly qualified to shepherd. Most of those who are educating our pastors are really letting them (and us) down. It's sad that so many of our churches are unprotected. How it must grieve the Lord. I was incredibly blessed to have such a discerning pastor when I was a new Christian back in 1993-1998. He saved me untold potential confusion and grief.
- GuyS February 23, 2014 Reply
  
  Lori I must reluctantly agree:
  
  "For a pastor to sit through the Basic Seminar and not see the heresies in it demonstrates he is unqualified to shepherd God's people."
  
  It is the corollary that is extra hard for me to swallow:
  
  For a lay person to sit through the Basic Seminar and not see the heresies in it demonstrates she/he is unqualified to shepherd their children.
Amy February 22, 2014 Reply

"Bill G. finally admits that all the accusations against him for physically and emotionally defrauding his personal secretary of six years are indeed all true."

I believe a more accurate word than "defrauding" would have been "abusing."

Agree with other commenters -- the abuse is just a symptom of the bigger problem, which is the lust for power and the controlling teachings and cult organization that Bill Gothard has built.

Countless people have suffered at the hands of abusers who were empowered by Bill Gothard's teaching, both within his organization and within churches and families who were influenced by his teaching.
The BJU Sex Abuse Coverup, Day 16 | The BJU Sex Abuse Coverup February 23, 2014 Reply

[…] Recovering Grace: The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971-1981 […]
chb February 23, 2014 Reply

The timeline indicates that in March 1978, multiple R- and X-rated movies were purchased with Institute money and then viewed by Steve and others. I attended my first Basic Seminar in April 1978, having mailed in my registration fee of $45 a few weeks earlier, in March. I am by no means denigrating the significance of the other wrongs that have been brought to light on this website, but I am broken-hearted and outraged *both* to learn what was done with at least a portion of my Basic Seminar Registration fee.
The GOTHARD Files: 1983 Transcript | Recovering Grace February 26, 2014 Reply

[…] Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]
Defrauding: What does it mean? | Recovering Grace February 27, 2014 Reply

[…] February, 1981, Bill once again confessed to “physically and emotionally defrauding his personal […]
EV February 28, 2014 Reply

My parents were heavily influenced by the IBYC in the 70's. They hosted many of the leaders in our home in Maryland. I didn't realize that some of these people were IBYC until I found letters to Bill Gothard from my parents thanking him for letting these people visit. (Weird) When my father retired we moved to SC to be near to Bob Jones. I attended the Academy during high school. My husband attended BJ from Jr High through College.

I was surprised to see the Bob Wood and Bob Jones III in the notes. We never heard of Bill Gothard at school nor do I recall the bookstore selling any of the materials.

When the seminar finally came to Greenville in the mid 80's, my family attended. It was a pretty large crowd and I was surprised to see that it was a video tape. My parents were also surprised. Hmmmm. Wonder if the friction between BJU and IBYC was in play?
Trish February 28, 2014 Reply

Wow! I did not know any of this. I went to a couple of seminars back in the early 90's in the DFW area with some friends (who really wanted me to go) and my (then future) husband. He and I really felt he was too legalistic and seemed to gloss over grace. We moved to another state about a year later, and since IBLP wasn't popular here, we never really followed up with it. But, I know some of our friends from back then are still involved in ATI. We do homeschool our kids, but not because of IBLP, but because of medical issues and learning disabilities that would not get the right help in a 30 kids per room situation.

I will say that some of his materials did help me forgive abuse from my past, but this site has really opened my eyes to the false teachings in those things, and I will need to re-evaluate what I have been through in light of these new revelations...

Wow. Just wow.
On Growing Up in Bill Gothard’s Homeschool Cult | Redemption Pictures February 28, 2014 Reply

[…] when there is documentation stretching all the way back to the 1970′s of sexual misconduct, questionable finances, and strategic cover-ups, I can’t believe that […]
Silencing The Lambs: Twisting Matthew 18 | Recovering Grace March 4, 2014 Reply

[…] Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]
The GOTHARD Files: Failure to Reconcile 1981-ATI | Recovering Grace March 7, 2014 Reply

[…] Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]
The GOTHARD Files: Failure to Reconcile 1981–ATI, part two | Recovering Grace March 8, 2014 Reply

[…] Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]
‘Survivor’ Bloggers Join Forces to Reveal Abuse in Christian Fundamentalist Groups | BCNN1 – Black Christian News Network March 23, 2014 Reply

[…] a 1983 conference call in which people discussed how to address Gothard’s misbehavior, a 10-year chronology compiled by staff decades ago, and internal […]
Miscellaneous Updates from RG | Recovering Grace March 25, 2014 Reply

[…] Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]
Our Response to the IBLP Board Statement | Recovering Grace June 20, 2014 Reply

[…] Full Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981 […]

The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981

About the author

125 Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Explore All Content

Seen "Shiny Happy People?"

Their Day in Court: Part Three

Their Day in Court: Part Two

Their Day in Court: Part One

Statement from Recovering Grace regarding the lawsuit a ...

Rethinking the Nativity

Bill Gothard’s Powerless Gospel

Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...

An ATI Education, Final Chapter: Guilty Silence

Introducing our IBYC/IBLP Facebook Recovery Group

Plaintiffs Amend Lawsuit Against IBLP, Also Sue Bill Go ...

Charlotte's Story

Bill’s Cabin: Uncovering Sin

Sacred Grooming, Part Six: A Secretary's Account of Lif ...

Trapped in the Shadow of 'God's Anointed': Breaking fre ...

Our Response to Bill Gothard’s Statement

A Call to Repentance

Bill Gothard Issues Public Statement

The Agent of Satan

Confident Statements Do Not a Solid Argument Make

Search Recovering Grace

Recent Posts

Tags

The GOTHARD Files: Scandal Chronology, 1971–1981

About the author

Related posts

125 Comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Explore All Content

Search Recovering Grace

Recent Posts

Tags