philiprosenthal
08-27-2006, 05:25 PM
40 days writes: "This is a little like when Jim Baker brought in Jerry Falwell after he sinned."
http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/23745.html?1156684460
I would agree. The similarities between the two stories are uncanny and frightening. I read the detail of the Jim Bakker scandal in the book "Integrity: How I lost it and my journey back", by Richard Dortch, who was Jim Bakker's administrator and helped him cover up the scandal.
Similarities include:
* The original offence was adultery, but led to other problems.
* The girl who was seduced was just out of school.
* The girl suffered serious damage as a result of the incident.
* The matter was disovered a few years later internally, by employees who came on board after the incident had actually happened.
* Both Jim Bakker and Paul Daniel got 'internal discipline' and counselling from his own employees (a sham in my view).
* The ministry decided to cover it up when they found out.
* Various different people were involved in the cover-up, but none knew all the facts. They each covered up a part.
* People with previously spotless reputations get sucked into the scandal and contaminated by it. They are blinded by the great glamour and power of the ministry. They just can't see what it does is unethical.
* Massive amounts of hectic ministry activity stops people pausing to think and ponder why the ministry is off the rails - a neglect of seeking first the kingdom of God.
* Many outside leaders know stuff in the ministry has gone wrong (although not the adultery), but do nothing about it. They still try to get promotion by the compromised ministry for their own benefit.
* Those involved in cover-up get confused by concept of 'confidentiality'.
* Someone not knowing the facts warns the ministry they must repent or soon face God's judgement. In the case of Bakker this was David Wilkinson. In the case of His People I did this, but most didn't listen.
* Both Bakker and Daniel got paid totally ridiculous salaries for a non-profit organisation.
* Both cases much money wasted on stupid financial decisions taken autocratically.
* Both leaders had special ability to grasp others dreams and help them reach their dreams. This attracts fanatical loyalty.
* Leader detached from others - no one really knew him.
* Externally, the ministry is helping lots of people. Inside, it is a cauldron of power struggles.
* The leader was sent on Sabattical.
* The employees never realised he wasn't coming back.
* Other outside leaders tried to take over the ministry for their own use. (Falwell tried to take over PTL Ministries to use it to promote his own TV Show).
* The temporary takeover becomes permanent.
* Many leaders are pushed out to secure the new administration from opposition.
* The ministry was mismanaged by the takeover ministry, resulting in it starting to break down.
* The atmosphere in the ministry turned from euphoric to mean and cruel.
* Those who exposed the sin of the ministry were accused of having a vendetta against the ministry.
* Those who covered up thought they were justified in telling people half truths. They couldn't see their cover-up as scandalous and thought only of the primary offence as being wrong.
* Multiple manipulations occur.
* There is a slippery slope of ministry compromise.
This is painful stuff, but I hope others will learn from it. Since there are so many uncanny similarities, I suggest someone with some sociology insight needs to see if this pattern is repeated in scandals elsewhere and so how we can avoid it happening again.
http://www.factnet.org/discus/messages/3/23745.html?1156684460
I would agree. The similarities between the two stories are uncanny and frightening. I read the detail of the Jim Bakker scandal in the book "Integrity: How I lost it and my journey back", by Richard Dortch, who was Jim Bakker's administrator and helped him cover up the scandal.
Similarities include:
* The original offence was adultery, but led to other problems.
* The girl who was seduced was just out of school.
* The girl suffered serious damage as a result of the incident.
* The matter was disovered a few years later internally, by employees who came on board after the incident had actually happened.
* Both Jim Bakker and Paul Daniel got 'internal discipline' and counselling from his own employees (a sham in my view).
* The ministry decided to cover it up when they found out.
* Various different people were involved in the cover-up, but none knew all the facts. They each covered up a part.
* People with previously spotless reputations get sucked into the scandal and contaminated by it. They are blinded by the great glamour and power of the ministry. They just can't see what it does is unethical.
* Massive amounts of hectic ministry activity stops people pausing to think and ponder why the ministry is off the rails - a neglect of seeking first the kingdom of God.
* Many outside leaders know stuff in the ministry has gone wrong (although not the adultery), but do nothing about it. They still try to get promotion by the compromised ministry for their own benefit.
* Those involved in cover-up get confused by concept of 'confidentiality'.
* Someone not knowing the facts warns the ministry they must repent or soon face God's judgement. In the case of Bakker this was David Wilkinson. In the case of His People I did this, but most didn't listen.
* Both Bakker and Daniel got paid totally ridiculous salaries for a non-profit organisation.
* Both cases much money wasted on stupid financial decisions taken autocratically.
* Both leaders had special ability to grasp others dreams and help them reach their dreams. This attracts fanatical loyalty.
* Leader detached from others - no one really knew him.
* Externally, the ministry is helping lots of people. Inside, it is a cauldron of power struggles.
* The leader was sent on Sabattical.
* The employees never realised he wasn't coming back.
* Other outside leaders tried to take over the ministry for their own use. (Falwell tried to take over PTL Ministries to use it to promote his own TV Show).
* The temporary takeover becomes permanent.
* Many leaders are pushed out to secure the new administration from opposition.
* The ministry was mismanaged by the takeover ministry, resulting in it starting to break down.
* The atmosphere in the ministry turned from euphoric to mean and cruel.
* Those who exposed the sin of the ministry were accused of having a vendetta against the ministry.
* Those who covered up thought they were justified in telling people half truths. They couldn't see their cover-up as scandalous and thought only of the primary offence as being wrong.
* Multiple manipulations occur.
* There is a slippery slope of ministry compromise.
This is painful stuff, but I hope others will learn from it. Since there are so many uncanny similarities, I suggest someone with some sociology insight needs to see if this pattern is repeated in scandals elsewhere and so how we can avoid it happening again.