Anyone who has been reading blogs recently has run across the supposed scandal at Ligonier Ministries and the allegations made by Frank Vance and his cohorts at Ministry Watchman and other various blogs that have now disappeared. I have been passively watching this play out for several months, and even posted my views on the “the watchman’s” attempts to circumvent scriptural courses for discipline and proclaim themselves…well…watchman.
It became obvious to me after reading that something didn’t seem quite right about the entire ordeal. After emails to few key people and reading those who had the time and resources to research the truth, it has become apparent that “the watchman” are liars and need to repent. It would at least give them some credibility if we actually knew who they really are. Yet they refuse to post under anything other than pseudonyms and have done a pitiful job of covering their own tracks when caught.
What I hate most is that so many people believed the lies and actually fell into the trap. I have been amazed at how many people have vehemently defended Frank Vance, who isn’t even a real person. It seems people were just jumping at a chance to jump on the bash other Christian bandwagon without so much as a sliver of actual proof. (hearsay, speculation and opinion do not equal proof) However, this has hardly hurt Ligonier in any significant way regardless of what “the watchmen” believe.
Bear in mind however, that this is not over, though it is slowing down drastically thanks to bloggers that have taken the time to prove the fallacy at blogs such as “ministry watchman” and Little Geneva. The one request I have is that when this is all said and done and it is further proven that Ligonier is not what it is said to be by these men/woman those who were bold enough to publicly bash Ligonier will be bold enough to publicly apologize. You have been had, now be man enough to admit it.
If you have an hour to learn some interesting discoveries I highly recommend reading the 10 or so posts at “Who Is Mrs. Binoculars”. You will not be disappointed.
Tweet
36 year old husband, father, pastor, singer, musician, reader, eater, rider, watcher,
Thank you for this post. Mrs. Binoculars has been a tremendous help. I attend RC Sproul Sr.’s church in Lake Mary, FL.
Unrelated to that, I lost my grandmother and dad last year and also moved cross country to take a new job after being fired from a job in California. I should add that my dad’s sister tried, unsuccessfully, to steal my and my sister’s inheritance.
I mentioned my misery of the past year to somewhat explain the depression I have experienced and how that may have left me vulnerable to false accusations floating about on the internet.
The rumors surrounding the Sprouls and Ligonier Ministries had really gotten me down. I should not have paid any attention to these rumors, but I did. It was sin on my part.
The posts at Mrs. Binoculars have helped me get past this part of a very trying time. Thank you for being part of the healing process.
SO…….? Does that put RC in the clear? Really?
Well, actually Brianstine I am still waiting for someone to tell me what it was Dr. Sproul did wrong. I never read anything he supposedly that I had any any issues with.
Scott, you said “If you have an hour to learn some interesting discoveries I highly recommend reading the 10 or so posts at “Who Is Mrs. Binoculars”. You will not be disappointed.” I AM disappointed Scott. I’m not just disappointed that just I wasted well over an hour of my time, I’m disappointed that you’d link to a gossip mill site like that AND give it your personal recommendation. If you’re going to say that Ministry Watchman is wrong then recommending a site like Mrs Binoculars doesn’t turn two wrongs into a right.
Scott, in your last article you raised some good concerns about Ministry Watchman, especially about accountability issues. I’ve got similar concerns. Anybody with an internet connection can set up a blog and say whatever they want, and a lot of what’s being said isn’t honoring of the Lord. Where’s the accountability?
Here’s my concern though about your latest article. You’d previously said “The Ministry Watchmen have no proof.” But now you point us to a blog of a man who is loooooooong on words and very short on proof. His articles are full of rumor and gossip and speculation and personal suspicions with no supporting evidence. Where’s his proof? Even of what little proof he does have it doesn’t disprove any of Ministry Watchman’s allegations.
If what Ministry Watchman did is to be condemned because there isn’t enough proof, why would you give an endorsement to a blog that reads even worse than the National Enquirer? If Matt Chancey has to stoop that low then I don’t think he’s hurting Ministry Watchman any. He’s just hurting the men and their ministries that he thinks he’s defending.
–Ty
Go ahead Ty, stay on the bash Sproul bandwagon. Does it bother you at all that the Watchman all post under psuedonyms?
Scott,
That’s just uncalled for. What do you mean “bash Sproul bandwagon”? How have I bashed Sproul? I’m not on anyone’s bandwagon. I just said that I’m concerned about blogging accountability problems, including how Ministry Watchman is doing things. Yes, I’m concerned about the use of pseudonyms, but I don’t get what any of that have to do with what I just said?
The way I see it there’s been a lot of wrong on ALL sides of this. I see it Scott. Why don’t you? The ends do not justify the means, but that’s the impression you’re giving when you personally recommend a site that’s obviously nothing but a gossip mill like Mrs. Binoculars.
As I read the comments above I am reminded of what a terrible thing slander and gossip is. Once a person’s character is attacked they are usually left with only two options:
1. Do nothing and let the charges go unchallenged.
2. Challenge the accusations and defend one’s self.
If option one is chosen, then the accusations usually stick and one’s testimony is damaged. If one is a minister then the ministry can be negatively effected.
If option two is chosen, then one usually is able to clear his name with some but look even more guilty to others.
Christ defended himself against charges in texts like John 8-12, even calling his accusers liars and children of the devil. Paul defended himself many times, including his apostleship.
So, the point is… slander and gossip is a terrible thing. It causes everyone to look bad or do things that they would rather not do. Sometimes we should stay silent; sometimes we should defend ourselves; and sometimes others will defend us so that we may stay above the fray.
May God give us all wisdom.
Ty, to quote Paul in 1 Timothy 5:19, “Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.”
Ministry Watchman (and the like) openly violate Paul’s admonition. In addition, they are gossips.
Perhaps you caught Matt Chancey on a technicality. However, being that my pastor is one of those being maligned by these gossips, I’m all for the work of Matt Chancey. Somebody needs to go UFC on them (in a blogging sort of way)!
This experience has once again shown me evidence of total (or radical) depravity. It seems many people on the net (myself included) are very quick to believe bad news from people who don’t have the spine to identify themselves. Then someone writes something positive and the same crowd attacks them for using similar tactics as the gossips.
Amazing.
Stan
Scott, in your last article you raised some good concerns about Ministry Watchman, especially about accountability issues. I’ve got similar concerns. Anybody with an internet connection can set up a blog and say whatever they want, and a lot of what’s being said isn’t honoring of the Lord. Where’s the accountability?
That is a good question. It seems to me that the way to find out isn’t to ask it here. It’s to ask it of the person who is writing that blog. Speaking for myself, my church members and the elders all read what I write on a regular basis and if there’s a conflict, they will, if anybody asks them investigate and intervene. That happened once last year, and the person who complained wound up being told that they had offended me, not vice versa.
So, dear brother, might I suggest you (or Scott) contact the person there and ask them this very question and then confirm it with the elders, assuming they answer in the affirmative? Would not that be the proper way to obtain the answer to the question?
Gene, I agree that would be the best and really only biblical approach to the entire situation. The problem arises in the fact that the men on one end of this conversation not only refuse accountability, but even refuse to admit who they really are.
My only other post on this topic was on the issue of accountability and the Watchman’s refusal to follow the biblical model for holding these men, who they claim are unethical, accountable.
We follow a similar guide similar to the one Gene described at Fide-o. We have tried, as much as is realistically possible, to keep the blog separate from the church. Yet, Jason and I along with the other elders read our post to make sure we are acting in accordance with sound Christian principles. However, I agree with Ty that there are very few blogs who are accountable to anyone.
Scott, does Mrs. Binoculars have the necessary truthful facts to back the claims in this blog? That would be a major issue. If this cannot be answered or Mrs. Binouclars cannot back up their facts, then we need to move on.
A lot of the Lord’s time can be wasted on hersay.
God Bless
Steven R. Mason
“Perhaps you caught Matt Chancey on a technicality. However, being that my pastor is one of those being maligned by these gossips, I’m all for the work of Matt Chancey. Somebody needs to go UFC on them (in a blogging sort of way)!”
So in other words two wrongs DO make a right.
Is it just a “technicality” that you nailed Ministry Watchman on?
I’m seeing some double standards operating here and I’m not impressed.
Tyrone said, “Yes, I’m concerned about the use of pseudonyms,”
If that is the case they you might want to set up an actual profile so we will have some idea of who you are.
“Presumed guilty until proven innocent” is not a Christian principle. Why is that so hard for some people to understand?
I have been surprised that so many professeing Christians have not hesitated to say things like “There’s something fishy going on at Ligonier… somebody’s guilty of somethin’”. Is not bearing false witness against one’s neighbor itself a sin?
The Bible says, “love hopes all things”. That means seeing the best in people, hoping that what appears to be questionable is actually very explainable. We hope that what we do not know would vindicate the person if we had all the information.
In a word, love gives the benefit of the doubt!
Jesus said, “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” John 7:24
“The one request I have is that when this is all said and done and it is further proven that Ligonier is not what it is said to be by these men/woman those who were bold enough to publicly bash Ligonier will be bold enough to publicly apologize.”
Why did Ligonier fire Don Kistler? In a public statement, Don defended Ligonier.
I wonder if Jesus would be “blogging” to defend himself against accusations?
A big part of this is that men who build empires are much more vulnerable to stone thowing. Men who build other men have nothing to loose.
Sproul, Legonier, Phillips, Vision Forum, Mega Churches, are all empires of men (and the men who built them).
These guys would have nothing to attack if these empires did not exist.