.jpg)
.jpg)
|
Home
News
2012
June Headlines
|
Pipim Sexual Abuse Victim: The Story from a First-person Observer
Submitted: Jun 7, 2012
By Loren Seibold
A year ago Dr. Samuel Korangteng Pipim admitted to sexual misconduct while traveling in Africa. Dr. Pipim is well known as the author of a number of books against the ordination of women pastors in the Seventh-day Adventist Church and accusing some of the top theologians in the denomination of heresy in their interpretation of Scripture. He was an ordained minister and employed as director of campus ministry by the Michigan Conference. He resigned from denominational employment, turned in his ministerial credentials and ended his membership in the Church.
In subsequent months Dr. Pipim has endeavored to restore his reputation, even writing a book about his infidelity and starting a ministry of recovery. He has now asked to be rebaptized by the local church in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Though Dr. Pipim has received a lot of attention the victim, a young student from Africa, has been largely forgotten. Recently she consented to let her counselor, Jennifer Jill Schwirzer, speak on her behalf. She was interviewed by Adventist Today writer Loren Seibold.
Adventist Today: How did you get involved with Dr. Pipim’s victim?
Jennifer Jill Schwirzer: I’m a professional counselor licensed in the state of Pennsylvania, and I volunteer for a ministry that helps victims of clergy abuse called The Hope of Survivors (THOS). Nandipa (a pseudonym) contacted someone for help, who referred her to THOS, who then referred her to me. I’ve talked with her off and on for most of the past year.
AT: What can you tell us about Nandipa?
JJS: Let me first say this: I’ve been given Nandipa’s permission to share her story, but I do so with great reservation because of the danger of exposing her to blame. She was 20 years old at the time, a new convert, with no Adventist background and little support within the church, attending university. She’d had some experiences in her life that left her deeply vulnerable. Dr. Pipim had been invited there by a church young adults’ organization for a week of prayer. She was one of his contact people and hosts for the visit. She felt, and still feels, very vulnerable to this man of God who she so looked up to.
AT: How did the encounter happen?
JJS: Nandipa asked him for counsel regarding some scars from her life before meeting Jesus. He invited her to his hotel room. To Nandipa, he was an awesome, larger-than-life spiritual figure. Others were going to his room for counsel. It didn’t cross her mind that she should be afraid. So she innocently went into his “counseling office.” After talking awhile, he began to touch her. Nandipa wasn’t sure what the touches meant. She didn’t want to accuse a man of God of impropriety, yet he appeared noticeably aroused. That encounter ended when another counselee came. She left in a state of confusion.
He came to her later telling her to come to his hotel room again, that he wanted to give her a sermon on CD.
AT: Why did she go back?
JJS: I pray people will understand the psychology here. She’s a struggling girl. She’s kicking herself, thinking, “This is because I’m such a bad person. He’s a man of God. Maybe I’m imagining this.” When you’re new to the faith, young, and female, you don’t question someone like Dr. Samuel Pipim. He was a hero, especially in that part of the world. Plus she did take what she felt was a precaution: she rode to his hotel the second time with a Seventh-day Adventist chaplain, thinking that she’d get the sermon and she’d leave with the chaplain, as he was her ride. Instead, Pipim sent the chaplain away, saying he’d send her home in a cab. Essentially, he then violated her while she protested in tears. Before he sent her away he gave her $100 and some of his books.
AT: Would you call it rape?
JJS: Some don’t understand how, short of physical force, one can be a victim of rape. That attitude shows psychological, social, and spiritual naivete. Statistically it’s been shown that women often plead, cry, and try to reason with perpetrators of sexual crime, but they rarely scream and fight, even though their chance of escape increases when they do. There’s a power imbalance. She did what women in her situation typically do: she pled for him to stop. He didn’t.
Forcible rape uses physical strength. Power rape uses social and psychological strength. If Nandipa had had the psychological training and strength, she could have screamed, fought, and run. It was psychological overpowerment, plus her own lack of internal strength and social support, that kept her there.
AT: Dr. Pipim did eventually confess.
JJS: Here’s my understanding of the timing. The abuse occurred January 21 of last year. He didn’t confess until May 23. In between, Nandipa had gone to the Botswana conference brethren. They wanted proof. She taped a phone conversation with him that proved it. They took the matter to the division president, who called Pipim. Pipim then called Nandipa, telling her he would be confessing the matter.
He then called his conference, and confessed his version of the story. On the surface it seemed like an honorable act, but really he gave a very inaccurate confession. He said it was “the sin of a moment,” a “moral fall.” He gave no indication that it was abuse. But really, it had to be. When someone in power has sex with someone powerless, or nearly so, it’s always abuse. Abuse of the office and abuse of the person. That’s not to say there’s never any fault on the part of the victim. In Jesus’ parable to Simon the Pharisee, he presented the guilt ratio of perpetrator to victim of sexual abuse to be ten to one. (Luke 7:40-43)
AT: What was Nandipa’s relationship with Dr. Pipim afterwards?
JJS: She felt confused, bewildered. There’s something called a “betrayal bond,” where the victim shares a secret with the perpetrator. He tried to keep a relationship going in which he presented himself as her father. It was classic perpetrator behavior to try to keep her loyal to him. But she gradually broke free of that and sought help.
The spirit of this girl, her resilience, is quite touching. It took huge courage and faith to report it to the brethren. Fully 84 percent of rape never gets reported, mostly because victims fear bad treatment by authorities. Why shouldn’t they? They’ve already been mistreated by someone powerful. Especially in a religious context, a victim’s worst fear is that the loyalty to the perpetrator will outweigh any loyalty to them. And so often it proves true.
AT: You seem to question the sincerity of Dr. Pipim’s confession.
JJS: I would say it more strongly: From what I can see, his confession is utterly deceptive. First, as I mentioned before, the “moral fall” wasn’t consensual, it was abuse. He hasn’t confessed to abuse. He’s confessed to infidelity. It was much more than infidelity. Second he didn’t confess till he had to. Four months passed between the event and the “confession.” Third, he has continued to pursue influence. A truly repentant person would want to withdraw from public life for a time. But he seems unable to let go of his status. Sexual abuse is abuse of power. Power addiction leads people to the kind of thing Pipim did to Nandipa. It seems that to recover from this unhealthy use of power he’d need to abstain completely from it, at least for a few years. But no. He’s written two books and launched a whole new ministry. Without so much as a month break!
Some believe in restoration of fallen pastors, some don’t. But even the most lenient wouldn’t advise that a fallen pastor go immediately into a new ministry—what foolishness!
Those who have supported him in this premature rebuilding should take a step back and consider this: For infidelity alone, denominational policy says, “He/she must plan to devote his/her life to employment other than that of the gospel ministry, the teaching ministry, or denominational leadership.” (NAD Working Policy L 60 20, Steps in Discipline of Ministers with a Moral Fall)
AT: Someone may ask, why isn’t Nandipa speaking out herself, or at least letting you use her name, when Dr. Pipim is being exposed?
JJS: Because of ignorance of the psychological dynamics of power rape, people often blame the victim. In some circles, the woman is always at fault. Disclosure can be good for the victim, both because in so doing they help future victims, and because sharing one’s story can be healing. But great risks are also associated with disclosure. Specifically, those fond of Pipim are likely to see her as a troublemaker, “bringing down a man of God.”
There are certain traits that make a person more vulnerable to sexual abuse. Jesus spoke of them in Matthew 18, going so far as to suggest that those who lead ”little ones,” meaning vulnerable people—the young, the small, new converts—into sin, should suffer capital punishment! So, far from the victim’s weaknesses exonerating the perpetrator, they make him or her more guilty.
AT: How does Nandipa feel about Dr. Pipim’s actions since the confession, such as his writing a book and starting a new ministry?
JJS: She’s troubled by it, because like so many victims, she’s had to watch the perpetrator apparently prosper while she suffers with the consequences. It’s super hard to watch someone who’s deeply hurt you receive praise and support, while you’re forgotten. But she’s rightly trying to detach herself and go on with her life, and I must say, doing a good job of it. I believe she’ll pull through.
AT: Has the church been too quick to let Dr. Pipim move on in his ministry?
JJS: As I understand it, he was disfellowshipped, de-credentialed and de-ordained. In many cases there is far less appropriate discipline. On the other hand, he was hired shortly after his confession by a lay publishing ministry. He’s continued to do ministry in some situations. And he’s already been declared a candidate for rebaptism.
I think those who have supported him fall into two general categories. Number one, nice people who are touched by someone’s apparent honesty about a sin and who want to bestow grace upon him. Number two, people with a political bent who think that his sin was the result of a demonic attack, which came because he was a champion of certain causes. These believe he should be quickly restored so he can carry on his ministry of reform. I honestly can’t think of better way to open the floodgates to abuse than to lionize someone who committed such an indecent act. Heaven help us!
My role in this situation has been to advocate for the victim. I want people to hear her side of the story. I must do that without overexposing her, which is difficult. I’ve tried to walk that fine line. We’re told to, “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy.” Proverbs 31:8-9. I don’t really know Sam Pipim, and have no desire to hurt him. My focus is Nandipa. I know I’ll probably be accused by some as being in cahoots with liberals. The truth is, I weigh in on the conservative side of the theological spectrum on most issues. So I am not really his enemy in every respect. I agree with him on some “conservative” issues. But I would like to see truth and justice prevail.
________________________
Share your thoughts about this article:
Log In to Post a Comment. Log In | Register
What Dr Pipim did is deplorable but to suggest rape and abuse?? Is there any evidence to corraborate that you are indeed her representative? This would I'm sure you understand will help in the issue. Do you believe a crime was commited?
Are we to believe only her side of the story?
How do we know that you are not exploiting this girl's situation to get your 5 mins of fame as the "Lady who stood up against the mighty abuser Sam pipim?" IF you believe there was a crime commited I'm sure you know the correct protocols but to to carry out an interview on Atoday is testament that you are only after your own ends!
You and I know that by Giving Info to Atoday you lose credibility to the majority of adventism hence nandipa is not really helped! It seems you are also guilty of the sin of which you are accusing Pipim? I truly feel For Nandipa it seems People will continue to exploit her. Some for sexual gratification, others for 5 mins of fame on the adventist blogsphere.
Tapiwa, are you serious? You are acusing JJ of something equivalent to what in effect amounts to rape of a young woman! I can't believe your response and it is really quite outrageous!
Yes, I did think whether JJ should be devulging this information to us, but the information is obviously no private. There is a legal principle that might be applicable here - you can't bring up an accussed's bad past unless they try to bring up their good past. In this case, as Dr Pippin has publicly stated his own version of events, his right to confidentiality has been waived and the same Adventist public is entitled to hear the other side of the story from the victim.
The only concern I have is whether the victim herself approves of JJ devulging this info. If Nandipa has given her approval for this information to be devulged then I have absolutely no problems at all. Perhaps AToday could clarify that?
I am not refusing the possibility of Nandipa being sexually abused by Pipim. I am questioning however your credibility and your motives by giving an interview to Atoday. Do you really believe that this will really help the Girl? You are just providing ammunition to a particular side in the adventist cold war. Abuse and exploitation can come in many forms.
But Tapiwa you are do just that...you are...
I am not defending Pipim. For all we know he could have actually done it. However it is another thing to accuse someone of rape without sufficient evidence. Your double standards and misrepresentation are unbecoming!! I am accusing JJ of taking advantage of Nandipa albeit for Different reasons. I am not defending Pipim If HE is guilty then Justice should be done. But to accuse a man without sufficient evidence just to win an ideological battle Mr Ferguson is low low low............
Do you hate him that much I have major differences with many people here but I would never want them to be accused for a crime they did not commit. I state again If pipim raped that girl, then He should be imprisoned. But you seem to be more concerned about Pipim's denigration rather than the victim.
Happy sabbath
I am not making any comments at all for ideological reasons. In fact, in my own local areas, there have been very serious concerns about Deliverance Ministries (a.k.a. Strategic Level Spiritual Warfare), and as far as I know, Dr Pipim is about the only major Advenist leader today who is still willing to talk about the dangers of this Pentacostal-Prosperity Gospel influenced ministry (despite the GC BRI producing a report in 1980s warning about this exact type of ministry). Therefore, contrary to what you might think, I have immense respect for Dr Pipim actually, in terms of some of his theological positions. Although I obviously don't agree with all his positions, you would be surprised that I do actually agree with some of them, and he performs an important role in at least ensuring that certain view points are given a voice.
I also agree that it is unclear whether JJ was providing this information with the permission of Nadnipa, which should be clarified by AToday. If Nadnipa doesn't know or consent, then it may be a serious breach of confidentiality by JJ and AToday.
Rather, my concern is you seem to be more concerned with protecting Dr Pipim, and your own assertion that JJ and AToday must be motivated for ideological reasons in reporting this matter. With some irony, that would appear to reveal your own ideological motivations.
Re your notion that unless Dr Pipim is charged and convicted of a crime the Church should leave him alone, I get where you are coming from. However, that is a false standard because:
- Whether he can be charged and convicted of a crime requires a very high burden of proof at 'beyond reasonable doubt' rather than 'balance of probabilities' (assuming Botswana's Common-law legal system). No where is it suggested the SDA Church should adopt the same standard of proof test.
- The girl may well be too intimidated to lodge a formal criminal complaint.
- As is common in many rape cases, it is very difficult to obtain a criminal conviction on the higher standard of criminal proof. However, the mere absence of a criminal conviction is not proof that Dr Pipim is innocent or that the SDA Church should do nothing.
- Most importantly, Dr Pipim himself has admitted to some sort of sexual sin with this woman. Regardless of whether he did or did not force himself on her in a criminal sense, he was in a position of power, and clearly took advantage of her. Ellen White has very serious things to say about men who do this.
- Regardless of whether the sexual sin of rape did or did not occur, a serious question mark hangs over whether it is appropriate to rush Dr Pipim's re-baptism. In fact, there is an argument that is actually against Dr Pipim's own self interest to do so, because his own conscience might have been better with a little longer period of self reflection. This is made clear in the Church Manual, and it appears in this instance the local Church conducting the local baptism is perhaps cutting corners because of his celebrity status.
So there is actually no reason for Tapiwa keep questioning all this. It seems that he can't cope with the fact that the man (over 50) raped a girl (20) and is being called on that. There was clear abuse of power aiming personal gain. Did he really think that $100 and some of his own books would do it? And worse, apparently he kept in contact with her for a while, most probably exploiting her emotionally.
Still worse is his current attitude, almost defending himself. Chech his own site and see the article "An Answer to Everyone" on www.drpipim.org
This is an outreageous case of arrogance. I have never seen someone being rebaptized with such an attitude after committing adultery. Much less after a rape!
What would Jesus say here? What would our prophet say here? Let the church put aside ideology and politics and seek to protect the powerless and vulnerable. Let the church be prophetic rather than political.
Somehow, it seems more egregious when someone who makes a handsome living preaching moral correctness to others than for others to similarly err.
Loren Seibold
When this case first became public, I spent some time following Dr. Pipim's reaction on is own website. I didn't need Jennifer Jill Schwirzer's testimony to see that Pipim was clearly not repentant, but represented himself as a victim in need of support and sympathy. Granted, he did not blame the real victim, but he blamed the devil for taking advantage of him through the person with whom he engaged in a "moral failure," that, given his high standards (for others), could surely have been no more than a little "impropriety."
He soaked up the sympathy and letters of support, featuring some to them prominently on his site. Among other things, he posted an adulatory poem sent him by another young women, casting him as a "wounded eagle." That is not the behavior of a repentant man -- even if he engaged merely in an "impropriety." The whole tenor of his writings minimized the sin and maximized his victim status.
Immediately after his publicized "confession," he was actively seeking sympathy and support while clearly continuing to see himself in the role of counselor and leader of young adults. He made numerous references to all the great work he had done for the church. Never did he take his website offline. Most who visited his site in the following months to read his essays and buy his books had little idea of what had actually taken place.
This was not the behavior of a repentant man.
I just now visited <a href="http://drpipim.org/">his website</a> again and found the front page article entitled, "'An Answer To Everyone'" A Response to False Accusations." In his "Answer," he spends a little space reminding readers of his "repentance" (a portion of the original acknowledgement of a "spiritual fall") and a great deal of time verifying his accomplishments by recounting the wide-ranging influence of "Campus Ministries" and GYC. Possibly he forgets that if "Campus Ministries" is a work of God, it is not for him to take credit. And we do not believe "in once saved, always saved," and hence not in "once a good work done, all subsequent works will be good." Yet he goes on about ministries "birthed" by the ones he originally started. Is he seeking to bask in the approval those ministries generate?
It seems that he has continued without misssing a beat.
Previous to his "spiritual fall," I wondered why he did not mention his family, particularly his wife, in his appearances. Without some research, it was not evident that he was even married. Now he does mention his wife as "suffering the same humiliation and pain" that he suffered.
In his "Answer," Pipim categorically denies that his conduct constituted "rape," calling the accusation slanderous, and claiming that he should be consulted before such things could be truthfully said. No mention of the person against whom he sinned -- whatever that "sin" might be, according to him. (I would not expect him to name the person, but I would expect a truly repentant person to at least acknowledge the damage done to a vulnerable young woman. But then he does not acknowledge that the person involved is such a person, casting it more as a consensual relationship. As I suggest above, those who know Dr Pipim's high standards may very well assume that the encounter did not go as far as sexual intercourse but may only have involved inappropriate touching, if that. )
Apparently others picked up on the implications of his publishing the adulatory letter about the "wounded eagle" on his website, since he spends a fair bit of time "explaining" the action.
Pipim quotes a passage from Ellen White in which she counsels a man not to publicly confess a private sin, even though the sin is of a different nature than his. However, he neglects to quote from her writings passages that indicate that some pastors should never re-enter the ministry but should serve God in some other way. She even goes so far as to write that some should never be re-accepted into church fellowship -- and if they are saved at all, they will be saved outside God's church. (I don't have time to find these counsels jus now, but others may.)
And now "Samuel Koranteng-Pipim, PhD" has launched another ministry to mentor others to do what he does so well.
May our God of justice and mercy intervene in the way He knows best.
Inge Anderson
Editor of <a href="http://ssnet.org">Sabbath School Net</a>
It can be found at http://www.scribd.com/doc/96287948/Board-Letter
(Just copy and paste into your browser.)
Pipim was obviously involved in a foul deed, to say the least, and he must pay the price. Only the local church to which he belongs can determine the proper action. One must ask whether the liberal press is ganging up on Pipim because of his previous stands and careful interpretation of Scripture.
http://advindicate.com/?p=1360
"I have no real ground of hope for those who have stood as shepherds to the flock, and have for years been borne with by the merciful God, following them with reproof, with warnings, with entreaties, but who have hid their evil ways, and continued in them, thus defying the laws of the God of heaven by practicing fornication. We may leave them to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling, after all has been done to reform them; but in no case entrust to them the guardianship of souls. False shepherds! Oh, can it be that the men who have been engaged in this work for a long time will corrupt their ways before the Lord after great experience and special light?"--Testimonies to Ministers 428.
But Pipim has already started a new ministry! What now? Are the folks in the Michigan Conference considering this? Is his pastor?
Two weeks from public confession to these types of statements are a pretty short time period for one to map out life's continued pathway after a moral detour.
Rape: On one level, rape is a criminal act which is defined by the statute. On this level, if the statute is not violated, rape did not take place.
Statutory rape: Statuatory rape is defined in the law in a manner that says that under a given set of circumstances rape occured regardless of whether or not the other individual consented. In effect, such a law states that the individual cannot give consent.
Professional counselors typically believe that "power relationships" can exist in which it is impossible for one party to give consent. Such relationships can be between a psychiatrist and a patient. It can be between a pastor and a member of a congregation.
In the U.S. there are a few places that can criminally prosecute for Statuatory Rape that occurs between a clergy person and one seeking spiritual help. But, this is not often. More typically the clergy person cannot be prosecuted.
If the offense occured in Africa, I doubt that any criminal prosecution can take place.
Several seemed not to have noticed that the victim gave her consent to her story being told by her counselor.
Confession: I admit to the sin of schadenfreude. It is almost impossible not to, given the circumstances and the individual involved, who can be compared to Jimmy Swaggart, Bakker, and the original: Elmer Gantry. Young girls flock to such people like "groupies" to a rock star and can so easily be taken advantage of by their idol. It is not only no different, but much worse because this individual claims to be "A Man of God" not a pop star.
Can't we leave the man alone and accept his repentance? This is starting to remind me of the junk that passes for news on network TV; only with an Adventist twist.
David committed adultery and murdered his victim's husband. His repentance was accepted. Unless we can read his mind, I don't believe we can judge the genuineness of Pipim's repentance. Where are the posters who usually cry out against "judging?"
1. As I said before, people can't really complain about AToday bringing up the victim's side of the story when Pipim himself has heavily promoted his own side of the story. You can't ring the local newspaper, tell your version of events, and then complain when another newspaper prints the other side of the story. The whole reason AT has printed this story is in large part because Pipim has been extremely public with pushing his side of the story - he has published a book for goodness sakes!
2. Second, God did forgive David, but not without consequences. If you recall, David was given a very public dressing down and his unborn child died. Our sinful actions in this world, even when forgiven by God, can continue to have ongoing temporal consequences.
Director of camups ministries! Perfect place to carry out his secret behaviour. How many more young women have been his victim?
When in ministry I attended more than one program about sexual abuse. Pipim's position, reactions to exposure and subsequent behaviour suggests he is potentially a classic example of a perpetrator/predator.
See http://www.drpipim.org/why-drpipimorg-mainmenu-123/197-awomantoremember.html (tribute) and http://www.scribd.com/doc/96346371/Transcript-of-Victim-s-Recording
The transcript indicates that he is attempting to cast the interaction as consensual -- which is typical of sexual abusers.
At the very, very least Pippin coerced, by his position and power over this women alone, a vulnerable young, emotionally fraught woman into having sex with him...a women 3-4 years shy of being young enough to be heis grandaughter!! At worse, he is a power-influence rapist.
Let's assume the best for Pippin...the first option alone does not warrant his attitude, arrogance, behavior and quickness to come back into the ministry like he has. He speaks of 'moral failures' and 'heat of the moment' like this was some sort of accident, like he slipped and fell into intercourse with this moment. Option 1 or 2, this was clearly a premeditated act! not the way that he seems to want to portray it. He is a predator no matter which way you want to slice it and just that alone should disqualify him from ever coming back to the ministry, EGW's clear affirming words to that nature, aside.
"Last time I checked conservatives did not have a monopoly on sins of the flesh.'
Maybe so, (though I'm not convenced) but they sure have the monopoly on white paint.
A culture who makes excuses for this behavior is diseased and becomes equally responsible for any future abuses by this man. It is clear that he is using this incident to regain power as an "expert" on recovering from "the devil's snares." This simply plys on the gullibility of a culture ignorant of predator cons. It also reveals a culture more interested in the illusion of "man of god" celebrity than people.
I simply don't have the words to express my disgust toward those who would excuse this behavior in even the slightest manner. I have no interest in punishing Dr. Pipim, but I do have interest in severely limiting his ability to gain power ever again. There are a multitude of ways to serve humanity without giving him any responsiblity over others ever again. This is not a punishment. It is a safeguard to prevent anyone else from being harmed by this man again.
1) A responsible counselor does not counsel people in his hotel room privately -- EVER.
2) A responsible counselor takes his role seriously and recognizes that the counselee is not an "equal" who can participate in a "consensual" relationship.
3) A responsible counselor who has concerns expressed by friends does not shrug them off and defend himself -- he admits his fault, makes restitution so far as possible, and seeks an alternate ministry that will remove him from ever encountering similar circumstances in the future.
This is true of a religious counselor or a secular counselor. By any standard, Dr. Pipim's behavior is irresponsible, and allowing him to continue working with students or to counsel others will place them in danger. If he wishes to have a private writing ministry, that may be reasonable. I cannot see any appropriate role for him outside that.
For example, look at many modern policies of child abuse (including specific pro-child abuse ministries). Most of them note it is important to try and reach these people, who although criminals (or alleged criminals) deserve to have the forgiving love of Jesus. HOWEVER, that is not to say that churches should be foolish to allow the situation to arise again. When child abusers attend church, the local church and conference must take steps to ensure the offender themselves are never put in a situation where it is easy for them to offend again.
Moreover, even where the offender is not formally convicted by a criminal court (because of the standard and proof and presumption of innocence), doesn't mean the church should take no precautions for the future.
What I would like to know is what this local church is re-baptising Dr Pipim is doing as practical cautions to prevent this type of situation happening again - I suspect not much!
David, by virtue of being king, clearly gets preferential treatment. And while Dr. Pipim doesn't appear to be getting preferential treatment officially, restoring his ministry in any form is a lack of accountability. I agree that we can have compassion for Dr. Pipim, but in no way should we excuse what he did. Taking responsibility means acceptting the consequences of one's decisions. No counselor who did this would ever be allowed to counsel again no matter how talented. Recovery from this type of power abuse is rare or non-exsistent. The safety of others should be the highest priority and anyone who was truely sorry would understand this and not allow themselves to be placed in that position ever again.
She lives in a culture where women are often second-class and when a rape has occured they are often "filthy" and unmarriagable. Where is the pity for her? It has all been extended to Pipim and where is his concern for her ever mentioned in his book size essay addressing "false accusations." Does that tone of being falsely accused sound like a penitent sinner?
David did not get special treatment because he was king. David got just what he decreed to theProphet Nathan. Look at what happened to each of his "lambs". Uriah lost his precious lamb.
2Samuel 12:5-6 "And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the LORD liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die: 6 And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity."
Trace what happened to David's four sons.
How is this fair is a question for God. We on earth don't to well at figuring out fair. We will have 1000 years to talk with God about fair and then the rest of eternity, if we own our sins and let Jesus cleanse us from all unrigheousness.
Elaine is right, more attention should be given to that girl. He was a church employee, and in this circumstance I think that Pipim's former employer should make sure the girl get proper treatment and recover from this traumatic experience. I understand she was a new convert. What a bad experience she went through. It actually became a "bed" experience with someone who was supposed to help her and to protect her. I wish she recovers from this as much as possible. The pain, however, will be with her for ever.
I am thinking of the victims, and how this must have affected their lives.
http://advindicate.com/?p=1394
Gal. 5:19-21 - 19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. (emphasis added)
http://advindicate.com/?p=1394
Well done and God bless to the courage of Nandipa and those like JJ who supported her. It isn't clear to me whether this second person to come forward did so because of Nandipa, but it is highly likely this other 'moral situation' would have stayed in the dark (where sin likes to hide) without Nandipa having the courage to speak up about her own situation.
Once again, thankyou Nandipa - you have the real courage of Esther and Daniel both.
However, before anyone thinks about gloating, I would like everyone to remember that his strongest supporters are the one most betrayed - other than Dr Pipim's actual victims of course.
This should be an object lesson for all - never put your whole trust in other human flesh. No human being, no matter how picture perfect and Holy they seem, is God-incarnate. Rather, the only one we can trust is Jesus Christ, and everyone else is but a flawed servant - very flawed. To that extent, I hope we all can unite learn something positive from this whole sorry mess, no matter how tragic.
Those in positions of influence, who are doing damage to the devil's kingdom, are the ones he works on the hardest. So it should be no surprise that there will be the occasional "victory" on his part. But I'm not throwing away his books. Must We Be Silent, Receiving the Word, & Here We Stand (which he edited) are some of my favorite books. His downfall does not diminish the truths contained in those works.
approach outlined by Pipim is rooted in perfectionism and irrational/impractical thinking. (His Faithful unto Death seminar especially illustrates this). He has attacked numerous very decent, fine Christian Adventist scholars like George Knight, Alden Thompsen, some of his former seminary professors, etc. Was his outlook on these matters, his ethic, shaped by his torn conscience, by the conflict with his inner demons and the dishonesty with which he approached life? If he had a grace orientation, would he have recognized that he didn't have to be perfect, that he could admit mistakes and associate with other imperfect people without cricizing or fearing criticism? If he'd had a different worldview than espoused in his books, might he have sought help early on, as this behavior was developing? I certainly can't know that, but I his books and writings DO reveal his character in ways that are only now confirmed. My wife and I both agreed when we first read his Faithful Unto Death seminar questions that this man had a fixation with sex and that we thought it was in reaction to issues in his own life. That is now confirmed. Jesus said, Whatever comes out of the mouth comes from the heart, and this is what makes a man unclean. I believe that goes for writing as well.
And I disagree that Pipim's theology is "rooted in perfectionism." His "attacks," as you call them, are nothing more than exposing the errors taught by these individuals.
In the U.S. (we do not know the place of the second victim's story), ministerial redemption would not even be an option. He would have been charged with rape. The evidence of the ministers' working for a year on his spirituality falls a little flat in light of the severity of the actual accusations. It was NOT simply adultery; it was rape! It seems the church was treating it as marital infidelity rather than the crime that it was.
When a church treasurer becomes an embezzler, does the church counsel the perpetrator or do they report it to authorities? Only because this occured in Africa was that not possible, but there are phones there and the leaders of the church there should have been contacted to ascertain the facts.
Pipim's aura of infallibility in his spoken and written words is indicative of a personality that overcomes vulnerable people: emotionally, spiritually, and physically. In the willingness to be forgiving and restorative, the men of the cloth overlook what everyone else is able to see: a wolf in clerical robes which made them blind to the obvious.
I don't understand your fixation with the idea that by terminating Pipim's employment (either voluntarily or not) the church lost control/leverage to effect change and drive counseling processes, etc. for him. I disagree. The church cannot force him to go to counseling whether he is an employee or not. He must be willing to do so of his own accord. If he does, the church an provide a path to restoration of membership when sufficient time has passed with evidence of repentance and reformation. On the other hand, if he does not, then the church may by withholding membership deprive him of the validation that he so craves to support his business enterprise (aka 'ministry'). In fact, I think the opposite is true of your claim: by restoring him to membership the church will lose leverage over him and his 'ministry'. Especially if that restoration is the result of a politically motivated cover-up which he can then use as leverage against leaders who know.
Yeah, the liberal press is ganging up on Pimpin for his"VERY DETAILED" interpretation" of Scripture to the "Saints" :)
Dr. Pipim has been extremely harsh and right wing in his theological approach. But these are the kinds of experiences that teach us about grace and our need of Christ.
If Dr. Pipim does turn around, his ministry might very likely be extremely powerful. But the question remains whether he will experience the power of God's grace or not.
Pipim's own posturing on his own website http://drpipim.org/
"AN ANSWER TO EVERYONE"widely published on the net by himself, his followers and accolytes (and his detractors) essentially taunting that many would be they who rejoiced ( others who have always opposed what we stand for will have an additional reason to rejoice .) that he mere hapless unfortunate was caught up in some deceptive (by inference-and declaration, false accusation) shows how schizophrenic we are individually and corporately about sex.
Have we forgotten that the one-flesh covenant was God's first gift made specifically for us-and the Sabbath given as a honeymoon, a celebration of (procreative) relationship? Instead, we want it (because God made it that way) but we also demand Victorian Puritanism and teach sex itself is evil.
This didn't work for Semiramis or the Israelites, all the way thru the Universal and Mystic/Eastern churchs, down to us lowly protestants. Is it not time for less of more of the same?
And someone who recognizes the value of confidentiality. I just cannot accept that a person who claims to be a professional would talk freely and publicly about either the victim or the perpetrator. That boggles my mind.
Actually, I have the impression that the victim took this as an nopportunity for personal catharsis, that letting the world know about this rape is most probably part of the healing process for her.
Let's not be mad at the counselor or at the victim, please. They did nothing wrong. The wrongdoer here is only one, the perpetrator Pipim. Trying to revert the responsibility to the victim, and now involving the counselor is just unfair and unacceptable.
Thanks again
Often the perpetrator has denied or minimized what was done, and in this case, Dr Pipim has told his version of the story online and in print in various ways for all the world to see. So in my opinion it is entirely appropriate for her to tell her story, in this case through giving someone she trusts permission to give the interview. I do not know her, but I would also think that getting it out there so he could not have free rein to do it to other girls might be a motive--I know it is for many victims.
There is a time for confidentiality, and there is a time for truth telling. Secrets thrive in darkness, and organizations who choose to guard their secrets end up having them brought to the light after they have multiplied. Since you are a truth seeker, having both sides out in the open will not be scary to you.
Open youe eye, toothseeker...
hiding their sexual sins did not serve the Universal church or the thousands upon thousands of victims.
Healing is not possible without appropriate revelation or admission; Pipim himself probably, by his very vociferous posturing post alleged rape, contributed to more wounding, and may have catalyzed the young victim to speak. Nandipa's courageous (and honest) telling of her story undoubtedly has contributed to the other victim speaking out as well. Anyone in counseling understands two things; confidientiality is near sacrosanct, as is the need for the victim speaking. Sometimes-in rare and select cases, the victim is also well served, as is the whole scenario, if no pseudonyms are used even. Jennifer I believe wisely brought the story with creedence and sensitivity to victim, alleged perpetrator, and the church, with motives of preventing future abuse on others.
Those of us who have spent years working in recovery ministries well know this. You, on the otherhand, (obviously not having any apparent such experience) choose not even reveal your identity here. Oh well, we all have something to hide, each and every one. And we are only as sick as our secrets...
Thank you so much for making yourself vulnerable to all sorts of criticism for revealing the side of the victim. There is need for Mr. Pippin to honestly look at why he is using this abuse of power that is demeaning to the young lady and to himself. Thank you for calling upon for him, and those in authority, to be responsible for his actions. There is much cleansing of the soul that needs to take place here. Since there are so many comments on this article, I will not say more than to just Thank You.
R. Elaine Myers
He has lost his job, his credentials and his church membership. Technically he is no longer an Adventist and does his writing as a private citizen. This means that he is no longer doing what we feel he should not be doing.
A couple of questions, though
<<
<<Some don’t understand how, short of physical force, one can be a victim of rape. That attitude shows psychological, social, and spiritual naivete. Statistically it’s been shown that women often plead, cry, and try to reason with perpetrators of sexual crime, but they rarely scream and fight, even though their chance of escape increases when they do.>>
Here we have a 20 year old woman who goes to a hotel room and Dr. P:ip fondles her, yet she does not know what that means?
What bothers me some is that she goes back the next day and sleeps with the good doctor. She receives $100 and leaves.
Tragic, yes. Rape? Perhaps. However, if is she is as fragile as described, is this the place to be sharing her story?
She signed a consent, but was it an informed consent? If she is in this mental state, how could it be? Well, I hope that JS knows what she is doing and that this will turn out well.
By the way, where is this young lady? The crime [that is what rape is]happened in Africa. Is this young lady in the United States? If so, how and why did she get here? Does she have a family, and are they aware of what we now know?
I am not passing judgment, just stating facts and asking questions. Actually, I wish nothing but the best for this young lady and hope that she can work through this. I hope that she gets peace of mind and finds happiness.
Usually the thougts about the behavior or act develop in the perpetrator's mind for quite a while. A plan starts to be designed. And then it's execuited according to the opportuinity. Calling a female to a hotel room for "counseling" is certainly a clear sign of a very well elaborated PLAN to do something. Neither pastors or professional therapist see counselees in hotel rooms. Rapists do!
This is also why there is usually more than just one instance, because there is a plan to benefit from situations like this, and the plan is executed whenever there is an opportunity. Seeing girls for "counseling" in hotel rooms in different cities and coutries as a routine practice will most probably not make just only one hurting victim ... We may still see a strong domino effect happening soon.
Remember Herman Cain and how the "conspiracy" against him made him abandon the campaign? But only after the domino effect took place.
Pipim is already getting the taste of it. Let see what's next.
Why does it seem that Pastors are always being kicked out of the Church for sexual incidents? I have heard it said that pastors are regularly in danger of going down this path if they are not careful. They are in positions of power, and where vulnerable people really share very intimate things with them. In fact, probably not unlike Psychologists.
Are there any professional standards that say apply to Psychologists that could apply to Pastors? I may not be framing my questions well but a professional insite would be helpful.
Unless specifically trained, most pastors are not counselors. That is not given them at the seminary. So when any pastor spends hours talking to hurting women, my red flags go up. We have seen a number of pastors through the years who liked attention from broken women and who insisted the rules didn't apply to them. Their "ministry" usually ended in tragedy--for both sides.
I have seen conferences try to hold this type of pastor accountable but have not seen it work because accountability cannot be forced on someone. Unfortunately, the local church usually has even less ability to enforce it than the conference, because grandiosity often accompanies this pattern and the pastor says things like "They just don't understand, I am using the gift that God gave me" etc. And anyone who disagrees with this "gift from God" is then given no further credence or influence. Termination is the only accountability they cannot squirm away from--and sadly, that often only happens after a victim is brave enough to come forward.
To be able to renew my psychologist licenses (CA active, UT inactive) every two yeras I have to complete CEUs (continued education units) - 36 in CA, 48 in UT. There is always one subjetc that it's mandatory to get some units for it or no renewal is allowed. Its LAW & ETHICS.
The laws are very strict on us, and it's right, it's good. But there are still many people often losing their licenses because of sexual misconduct.They just don't do what the law says.
Now, imagine pastors! No laws, no CEUs, no special training, nothing! They just study their Bible, preach sermons, and do so many other things - all without any further requirement after school.
Pastors should take some mandatory classes on Ethics once in a while during their career. I don't even know if such classes or semina rs are offered for pastors. And remember, pastors usually have no professional training to do counseling, but they do "pastoral counseling" anyways... which sometimes ends up like in Pipim's case. Instead of praying with the needy, they end up "preying on the unwilling." This is sad.
Now, this business of doing counseling in a hotel room... well...needless to say that any sane person will find this very strange...
Everything that has been done by both parties since the event, in public and private, is evidence. How that evidence is interpreted varies wildly, based on the bias and life experience of the interpreter. That is why there is disagreement.
It still boils down to his word against hers. She was there willingly. We still don't know if she took the money. If she did, why? He apparently came on to her the first time but she did not "understand" what happened. So she goes to his room later and he forces himself on her. After forcing himself on her, she is STILL in the hotel room when he forces himself on her the next morning. Why didn't she leave right away.
I am not saying it was her fault. All I am saying is, it's not clear. She had her first opportunity as to what kind of a person Pipim was (she does nothing about it but return). He forces himself on her (she still lingers in his room) and he takes advantage of her again the third time. She is either very naive, or there was something consensual between the two.
Look people, even the Pastor who was going to re-baptise him has now in effect recognised he was wrong.
Regardless of how she did or did not respond, the fact that they were in a counseling relationship makes a consensual relationship impossible. In fact, even if she initiated the sexual contact, the fact that he was counseling her means that it STILL would not be considered consensual. He took advantage of a situation in which there was unequal power.
John, consensuality does not even enter the equation.
His role as counselor, as well his "spiritual leadership" precludes that.
In situations such as this suggests, the perpetrator "knows" the victim, and how to manipulate.
Pipim's own words on his own websites, as well his actions when he was found out-resigning (he was not "forced" out any more than he suggests he was 'forced' into this 'fall'), yet continuing to functionally work with similar poplation, seeming apparent lack of contrition (claiming 'false allegations'), and even the haste to re-establish his credentials while continuing to suggest he was merely a 'victim' all tend to indicate a serious and unadressed problem.
This is as much a church-and culture within it- problem, as it is a personal tragedy.
Begs question; women in ministry on equal footing just might have strong normative effect. Perhaps indicative of Pipim's garrulous anti-ordination stance...
Spiritually speaking, the person to be pitied here is Pipim who has not realized his spiritual condition.
Jean you are absolutely correct. Were David's Psalms banned because he was involved in a sordid affair involving adultery and murder? The judgmentalism and condemnations from parties who are not in a position to dictate the penance one must engage in, demonstrate a clear dislike for a man who has been at the forefront of truth.
I certainly wish the Ann Arbor church success in doing what is right without pressure from the liberals.
Acceptable collateral damage...mere to maintain whited sepulchre?
My heart breaks for the damaged, for the damaging, as well the entire church. My heart breaks for a church represented by a faction who wishes divorce from his brother. my heart breaks less, though, than the God who cried for unity, and we try give Him uniformity, and proud.
What exactly should the fruits of our efforts be? Protecting a predator, becauser he is "at the forefront of truth"? Or embracing the damned, the lost, the broken?
No, SPK has great opportunity for "Fall into grace...", because of his ongoing stance.
I do not hear Jesus utter one whit for Simon, but I imagine he placed His outer cloak over Mary, and placed his robe of grace over all that were naked enough to be covered
I would like Schwirzer to explain how she was able to get a signature on a document to release info publicly from a person in Africa. I have sympathy for a predator but the facts must be substantiated. If it is a "he says" and "she says" how can anyone who is fair-minded make an accurate judgment?
And no matter how much some of us strive for justice there seems almost always to be a commenter ready to spin it in a way to make it appear other than is intended.
Schwirzer does not have to explain to any of us how she got consent from the victim, her patient. This is none of our business. I only tell you that if she is saying she has it, she has it. I doubt she would jeopardize her license, her career just for the fun of breaking the law an possibly beig prosecuted. No sane person would do it.
So instead of looking for possible flaws on the part of the victim and her counselor, I think it's better to realize that who commited a crime is the perpetrator, not the victim or her counselor. I know...., the perpetrator is, first, a male, then... he was an influential pastor, and he is still very arrogant. He may still get some simpaties from onther men...
MOTIVE
1) Was she looking for money? I'm sure she could do much better than a church author. I don't care how popular SKP is in the church. If you want to land a whale, he ain't no John Travolta or other mult-millionaire to exploit. And if you are going to go to the highest church authorities and have your name dragged through the mud and expose yourself to ridicule, scorn, religious censure and myriads of other social woes, you better have a much better payoff then a Protestant evangelist the world has never heard of.
2) Was she a woman scorned? Trying to get back at Pipim for something he said or did for her to turn a consensual sexual tryste into a case of rape? Nothing seems to indicate that. On the contrary, we see by the conversations they had over the phone and Pipim's own actions after the fact wanting to be her 'daddy' and offer to pay her plane ticket to come to the US shows that he WANTED to continue some sort of relationship, not end it brutally with her.
STORY
I'm sorry. If you want to bring up false allegations for money, noteriety or vengeance, you keep the story simple. "We went upstairs for CDs, and he took advantage of me." Heck you are lying anyway so make it plain! You don't come up with a strange convoluted chain of events like being offered a shower, the man going to take a shower, falling asleep on the bed, getting violated, falling asleep again, waking up the next morning to get violated again, be given a $100 and a CD. Please
BEHAVIOR
It was clear that something was different in Nandipa the next day. Many noticed it. A far cry from someone who willingly and premeditatedly had sex (and wanted to have sex) with an SDA superstar. Her vulnerability on the phone messages, her internal anguish and her finally coming forward in a patriarchal society to the highest church authorities of her area to tell this tale all point to her having a valid and consistent story of rape. What about Pipim's behavior? He clearly had something to hide. He manipulated the truth even if it was a consensual act. He turned a premeditated act of taking advantage of a young vulnerable girl into a "heat of the moment" momentary moral lapse. Then he hid it until he was threatened with it going public. Then he spins a yarn to make himself look good.
I'm sure others could add more. Let's put this foolish blaming on her away. Let's stop deflecting the arrows that clearly need to land on Pipim. Let's start to make him be held responsible for this and not a 20 year old new convert of our church.
i) recorded transcripts;
ii) Pipim's own admissions;
iii) the fact that he visited with this woman alone in a hotel room, which was obviously witnesses by the SDA chaplain who was asked to leave, and which is untoward before by Pipim no counsellor would do;
iv) the fact that another victim has now come forward (which makes the possibility of some sort of vexatious claim by Nandipa impossible now); and
v) the fact Pipim's own strongest supporters, notably those in his local church, seem to acknowledge their mistake in trying to re-baptise him (the Pastor's letter is quite strong in talking about Pipim on judgment day).
One can make excuses to the cows come home, and keep blaming the victims, if that makes you feel better, but the fact is Pipim is, by his own admission, someone who has engaged in sexual misconduct (even assuming it wasn't rape) with a young woman under his care, and on that basis he is not fit to be a Minister of Religion.
" age of majority" means when a person has attained the age of 21 years;
http://www1.eis.gov.bw/EIS/Policies/Environmental%20Policies/Interpretation%20Act.pdf
Regardless of the practical difficulties of charging and convicting Dr Pipim with rape, the fact is by his own admission he in effect had sex with a 20-year old, who under Botswanian law was still a child. Therefore, even assuming Dr Pipim's defenders are correct, that Nandipa gave consent, can one of his defenders explain how one can continue to defend his actions, given he in effect had intercourse with a child, given a child's consent is not relevant?
So, to those who have any urge to defend him, just think that he committed the same crime just in another country.
I believe the focus of this blog was not so much on how Pipim's actions should be labelled, but the danger posed to the church, to himself, and to others by not demanding a sufficient time span between when he confessed and when he was to be rebaptised, and also his rush to return to ministry of any sort. In fairness to everyone the church needs to do whatever it can to make sure enough time elapses so that Dr Pipim's change of heart can be demonstrated to be genuine and to have resulted in a change of behaviour. If he has truely repented and reformed, then it is in his own interest to make sure he allows time for others to see that and for it to be beyond dispute.
In my mind, the sin is more serious because:
- The girl is indeed very young (a 'child' whether or not she had the capacity at law to give consent).
- Dr Pipim was in a position of care, control, custory or power over the girl (which is why implictly most jurisdictions raise the age of consent to the age of majority where such a relationship exists).
To focus on all these things that you and others say make this case 'worse' is to lessen the harm if they do not apply. It is his act that is at fault, and that is what should lead to an appropriate response from him. He has taken advantage of a vunerable person by virtue of his position and standing. Had this been a 50 year woman (or man) instead of a 20 year old woman, it would still have been just as wrong. The nature of the vunerability is not that important in dealing with the issue. However you look at it, this was not a case of two adults consenting to a relationship built on love and respect. I believe both sides admit that.
Even if it turns out that Dr Pipim's account is true, there still has to be concern that in less than 6 months he has repented, been rehabilitated, has established a new ministry and was about to be rebaptised. I don't believe his theology or the vulnerability of the other person needs to be taken into account for a resaonable person to decide that that is too little time. Is it even enough time for his wife to work through her issues and be ready to support him again? The words 'unseemly haste' come to mind even if we assume the best case scenario.
Is this a question worth considering?
This must not have pleased certain individuals. To them it has seemed essential to read the Bible with the understanding of the pope. And this non-Biblical downgrading of the value of a woman seems also needed for a man to view a beautiful young creature of God as a toy for his own pleasure. That is why we must harness the right posers under divine guidance to restore our church.
Read some descriptions on Pipim as a person dealing with others and preaching, and you will be reminded of some dictators in history - that ended up actually abusing and exploting others.
Äbusing and exploting?" Hmmm, sounds familiar isn't it? It seems it happened in a hotel in Botswana as well....
If he goes to any SDA church the brothers and sister will think, “ here comes the adulterous the rapist”… “watch out keep away your girls the wolf is out”.
Who will like to hear a sermon of this man? or read a book of him?
In these days thanks to the Internet in seconds we can see his picture and recognize him. Well in this case AT even facilitated (did AT got his permission to put his picture in the blog? Watch out if you overlook that one you could loose all you founds). This man is marked for the rest of his live. I hope that Mr Pipim could find forgiveness of God.
Have you read his defense/explanation on his site? It's kind of a thesis... www.drpipim.org
1John 1:9 “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”
When Mr. Pipim confessed something about the first known sexual encounter, if it was from the heart it seems he would have owned up to all such experiences. If not then Mr. Pipim, do it now for the sake of your soul! Get yourself a licensed counselor to help you. Admit it, you are in need of outside help.
When Lucifer sinned in heaven he hardened his heart and moved into open rebellion. He was determined to do it his way. When Adam and Eve sinned, when confronted by God accepted the provision God made for them. To gain the benefit of the promised Seed who would defeat the old snake, they had to confess and repent.
“No man can cover his soul with the garments of Christ’s’ righteousness while practicing known sin, or neglecting known duties.” R&H 1890
In Matthew 7 those turned away with the “I never knew you…” words were those who claimed the right to enter because they had worked miracles, cast out demons, and done many wonderful works! Time to lay aside self justification and admit sin and need of the Savior!
Let me first start by saying that I am not one to post things on discussion like this. However, I feel that my voice needs to be heard too. There have been many good points brought to this this discussion from both sides. As a Christian therapist and social worker, my heart goes out to this brave girl for telling her story. I work with rape victims, and I see first hand the torment and distruction it does mentally, physically, emotionally, socially, and spiritually. While there may be argument that there is in conclusive evidence, I can tell you, I have never in my career, found a young woman who has lied about being raped. Having been sexually molested myself, I can tell you, it is not something you make up and the amount of guilt and shame felt by the victim is enormous. There is one thing that everyone needs to understand...IT IS NEVER THE VICTIMS FAULT!! I don't care if she did not yell, scream or fight, it is not her fault. New research, and yes I am an evidence based practitioner, suggests that it is actually better when women do not fight, yell, or scream because this does not bring out the physically violence that often accompanies rape. However, this is not true for ever case! There are always exceptions to the rule.
This being said, before I worked with rape victims, I worked with sex offenders. I am a 100% believe that there can be reform and remorse with the right spirit. I have no idea what is in Dr. Pipim's heart and what he talks to God about in his peronsal time with him. I believe as a church we should forgive him and give him council, but he also needs to take respondibility. I agree with the psychologist who has posted previously (I'm sorry I have forgotten your name) that these incidents do not just "happen out of the blue" and often when one victim comes forward usually this gives validity and allows others to come forward as well.
I for one am not a believer in perfectionalism. I think this sets us up for failure. But being open to be used by God and filled with the Holy Spirit we can be mighty tools for His service. Personally, I think there should be concequences, but also redemption. It not our place as sinners to point fingers and judge, and I believe there are many on here who feel that way. I actually think this could be looked at as a positive occurance. Stay with me for a second. I've grown up in the Adventist Church and I love almost everything about it. The one thing I see almost everyday in my practice is people scared to be real in their church. I have been told many times by church leaders that our church does not have domestic violence, sexual molestation, affairs, and many other "worldly" things. Guess what, we do!! But guess what else, there is hope! With the lighting of these situations, I believe we can grow and stragnthen our church and move fully towards the purpose of winning souls for Christ and finally be able to go to our forever HOME!
I apologize if I offend people, but this is my point of view. I have seen way to many young people hurt and have a hard time staying quiet any longer. Sorry this is so long, and hopefully you can make it through without getting angry. That is not my intent. I am not a confrontational person, and I believe each indvidual has a right to their own opinion and I would never want to push my point of view on others...shocking coming from a liberal, I know....but we are human. No one is without sin, all we can do is be sincer in our confession to God and to man.
For example, my understanding of paedophile ministries is that while we are meant to show love and forgiveness, we should still be as cunning as snakes (Matt. 10:16), which means taken steps to remove or mitigate from the person any temptation.
Do we his bretheren (and in particular any Church that re-baptises him, or any ministry that hires him, including any independent ministry) owe a moral duty to watch out for Dr Pipim, to ensure (as much as is practically possible) not put in such a situation of temptation again? For example, does anyone know how GYC have responded to all this - will Dr Pipim continue to be involved with young people?
Whilst I feel the official SDA Church did act relatively swiftly, we can all see the problem in the relative short term, when Dr Pipim re-enters the Church in either an official or unofficial capacity.
Accountability happens when the person either asks for it and submits to it (for example the pastor making his own standards clear to his board/church family and is in an accountability relationship with a same-sex friend with similar standards) or when others see red flags and hold him accountable, whether he wishes it or not. (for example: "Dr Pipim, we do not agree that counseling at your hotel is the best. We will provide a place here at the facility for you.")
The higher up on a pedestal a person is, the harder it is for those around him/her to hold them accountable. Especially if they have a history of arrogance and grandiosity.
In my view, LMcCabe, it is the fellow pastors and their superiors who attempt to shield the perpetrator from scrutiny by transferring him to another area or another Conference. I have no doubt viewers could cite examples of that type of action. It is "circle the wagons" mentality. Accountability is not very evident to the laity in the hierarchical structure generally.
I fail to see how arrogance and grandiosity enter this picture.
For clarity, I was also speaking of the conference that we have pastored in for nearly 20 years. I cannot speak to the polices of other conferences. I agree with you that we have not always had a climate of openness and accountability in the church and until that changes, laity have every right to be skeptical. Fortunately, it is much harder today to sweep things under the rug than it used to be! And the laity is speaking out--as evidenced by the fallout in this situation. Leaders who used to make decisions behind closed doors and not have them questioned are having to get used to a new way of doing things.
I haven't met him either. But just reading him arrogant "defense" of his crime on his own site makes me believe in what so many people have written on the blogs.
Check it out for yourself: www.drpipim.org
The discussion above was regarding polices and procedures to keep this from happening again. I did not say that it entered into "this picture." My example of Dr Pipim was to illustrate what forced accountability might have looked like.
You said in a previous post "...and no matter how much some of us strive for justice there seems almost always to be a commenter ready to spin it in a way to make it appear other than is intended." May I respectfully point out that can go both ways?
Did you see my question further up? I would really like to hear your answer.
"Sadly, none of these individuals and organizations (all of who claim to be bonafide Seventh-day Adventists) has done the Christian thing of personally sitting down with me to ascertain the truth or, at least, seek a clarification from me. And yet, they have splashed these uncomplimentary and malicious information all over the world."
www.drpipim.org
It would be interesting to know if Pipim's claim is true. At any time did AToday ever contact Pipim for his own response?
It really does get all a little incredulous when he tries to explain in great detail why he only confessed after being caught. He even tries to use Spirit of Prophecy - not sure if Ellen would have agreed to be used in such a way? Clever men, and Pipim is indeed cunning, can really rationalize anything with scripture if they really want - the sad thing is when people don't see through their fruits of the flesh, rather than fruits of the spirit.
My favourite and most outrageous line is:
"As far as I knew, our sin had been repented of, confessed, and renounced."
Well obviously we now know that is not true when he said it on 29 May, as evidenced by the latest victim that has just come out since then. What do people think we can expect from Dr Pipim's 'An Answer To Everyone Part II'?
Check it out:
Shades of John Edwards, dej vu. A wife with cancer not told because of her "health issues."
"As far as I know (?) "our" sin (indicting the victim as accessory) was a private issue to be dealt with privately....it was up to me to use my discretion as to the best time to share with my wife..."
Pure, unadulterated slime defenses.
Why would a 20 year old remain in the room overnight with a molester? I don't buy a lot of esoteric psychological mumbo jumbo attempting to explain that action.
Is the case airtight that Pipim violated moral strictures? I see no holes in it since he obviously has already confessed as to what essentially happened. Should he be made to suffer the consequences of moral fall? Definitely.
Should liberals pile on since he has been a vocal supporter of Scripture? You decide!
The site of the newly discovered second case has not been given, so prosecution is dependent on where it occurred. Pipim is smart enough to have been in other countries where their laws are quite different and women's equality before the law may not at all be comparable to the U.S. laws.
What a surprise it must have been for Pipim that "What happens in Botswana does not stay in Botswana"....
New International Version (NIV)
9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?Are these statements factually true?
Whatever does this have to do with this discussion? She is a maiden, not a wife.
Let's not get into this now.
Ordaining a woman is a much greater sin than having illicit sex with, or even raping the woman. There are no great possibilities of redemption in case a woman is ordained, while the other offences ere explainable and easily forgiveable in case you get caught.
Is this the policy we want for our church? Could the ordination of some women be like a shield of protection to prevent men from downgrading womanhood?
This has proved repeatedly: in business in legislative bodies and even with women in top positions (there have been many female prime ministers of nations as well as queens). It is extremely doubtful that women would have gone to war as quickly as men.
This is the reason that women should be seen a equals in all church positions, no exceptions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial#Initial_allegations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_ritual_abuse#Court_cases
Hasn't all the information received come directly from official church sources: Michigan conference?
I well remember the McMartin case but this is not even similar: it was about children at a day-care center, and this is about a preacher-perpetrator. Maybe, compare it to Sandusky? Or the Catholic priests? In all three cases, it is a powerful, father figure taking sexual advantage of a vulnerable victim.
Here we have a situation regarding the sexual scandal of Dr. Pipim. I have no desire to defend him, but fair is fair. He is being condemned for things that we don't have any evidence. Just read through the thread and see for yourself. I have yet to hear a straight, honest answer to the factual questions raised.
He is now a serial rapist against whom another victim has arisen. We don't know what happened, when or where it happened. It doesn't matter: we are so sure of his guilt that we don't need to wait for the story or the "evidence."
He talks about piety and high standards. Fine, except the minute he gets to Africa he bangs a young lady half his age. When he gets back to the States he says nothing for a half of a year until (like the Watergate tapes) he is in a corner, then we see the pious tears on his cheek. How touching!
Now he has had a change of heart. He has produced a web site, book, etc. to prove that he is not guilty of the things he told us he did! That is the oxymoron of the day.
He leaves behind an amazing legacy. He has lost his credentials, discredited his ministry and possibility destroyed the life of a young lady. I wonder what he preached the day he took the girl to his bed. Moral perfection? Seal of God? Remnant church? How about extinct church.
You see, I am not defending this man, to the contrary, I just want us to be fair. Why open a drawer when we have a hamper full of dirty clothes. How many bullets does it take to dispatch someone?
Meanwhile we need to come up with something concrete to help this young lady get back on her feet. Let's not talk about her in a bedroom; let's focus on what she is in Christ.
As for Dr. Pipin let's give to him the same mercy that we want for ourselves. Remember, he is our brother, but we are all nothing without Jesus Christ. Christ is the God who commands and the man who obeys while Satan is the one who accuses.
If the truth be told, we are no better than our fallen brother; it's just that our sins are different. Let's put his failures and ours where they belong, under the blood of Jesus.
Have a good Sabbath, Elaine. I really enjoy your comments and the work you do on this forum. Keep up the good work.
He is now a serial rapist against whom another victim has arisen. We don't know what happened, when or where it happened. It doesn't matter: we are so sure of his guilt that we don't need to wait for the story or the "evidence."
"He has lost his credentials, discredited his ministry and possibility destroyed the life of a young lady. ...
Meanwhile we need to come up with something concrete to help this young lady get back on her feet."
Hold on here Howard. You are contradicting yourself here. The reason why so many are here condemning Pipim as a predator and rapist (other than his own lying behavior), is that this woman came forward and accused him. You can't have it both ways. Either what she is saying is true and we are justified in saying so, or she is a conniving liar spreading false stories about Pipim because she felt guilty about having a consensual sexual affair with him. You seem to be hedging your bets here. Making her to be both a victim and a perpetrator.
I need to find an online dictionary and see if there is a new definition for the word "irony"...
I am not hedging anything because I am not betting. I am asking questions
<<She was there willingly. We still don't know if she took the money. If she did, why? He apparently came on to her the first time but she did not "understand" what happened. So she goes to his room later and he forces himself on her. After forcing himself on her, she is STILL in the hotel room when he forces himself on her the next morning. Why didn't she leave right away.">>
Why would a woman who has been hit on, go home in the evening and return the next day, have sex, spend the night, and have sex the next morning? How can this be rape?
This is horrible, unthinkable. But let's call sin by its right name.
All I want is an answer to this question. I am not hedging anything. I am merely asking the question. Please answer it for me. Thanks
If you want to learn the answers to your questions, spend some time educating yourself on why someone who has already been abused or raped is more likely to be re-abused again. Talk to people who work at women's shelters. Read stories of individuals who have overcome abuse. If you can't find resources, several of us here can help you.
That said, we don't have any way of knowing for sure what happened that night. All we can go on is their stories and their actions since then. And those of us who have experience both with victims and perpetrators can tell you that her actions during and since are absolutely congruent with a woman whose "no" was taken from her long before she went to the hotel room that night. And that his actions since are congruent with a man who repented because he was caught, but otherwise would have continued to live his life as if it never happened. She could be lying, he could be innocent. God knows and will not be mocked and the reaping is sure. (Gal 6:7)
For me, it is not so important that we figure out who is innocent--since you and I have no power here anyway--but that the entire discussion will give everyone more understanding of the issues involved. That pastors will not be idiots and counsel young girls in their rooms--to protect themselves AND the girl. That those around them will be empowered to hold them accountable if they insist on doing it. That young girls who believe men on pedastals can solve all their problems will have second thoughts. That all the pedastals will be dismantled. That "average" people will be educated enough in these issues to stand up, speak up, do something to help victims and perpetrators both, to keep things like this from happening. Abuse that stays in secret tends to keep happening.
I know the discussion, especially using an emotionally charged word like rape, has caused a lot of sparks, but I still believe that openness is the only way to fight the darkness that is abuse in all its forms. And if someone learns from it, at least something will have been gained from the tragedy.
YOU: "spend some time educating yourself on why someone who has already been abused or raped is more likely to be re-abused again."
Sorry for the misnomer
....if only Christ were in that hotel room, or better yet their hearts....
Sad reality is these sorts of things transpire daily; in secrecy and darkness the evil grows.
There are really two related undictments here; a healthy church would not depend on the 'cult of personality', and furthermore, would neither allow its "ordained representatives" to capitalize on such charisma, would teach its members to avoid such, and would foster an environment that would address this within its leadership.
Business as usual and not addressing the underlying issues ensures we will experience more of these far too human failings. Lets drop the fig leaves and apple polishings, and own it instead of blaming the victim, the other, society, the devil...or whatever.
I believe there is even a well-known story in the Gospels that give us a very good idea exactly how Jesus might react. Except instead of writing with His finger in dirt, He may well have written with His fingers on a keyboard.
"We are not to judge. We are a denomination of Christians that are to help and strengthen each other. God is the judge."
Not a bad idea.