I guess when you are the center of your family (prophet, king, and priest) where all the women serve you (wife and unmarried daughters), it must go to your head. On top of that add homeschooling expert, president of a company/ministry, and leader in a church, sought after speaker, author, and not to mention one's own sin nature, and what do you have?
Pride, arrogance, bloated ego, thinking far too highly of one's self....and dis-contentedness.
Simply put, you can't underestimate the power of the flesh, to which all Christians must die daily, and mourn when we do not.
A person's preference, while having a good motive and can remove or reduce the probability some areas of temptation, it just cannot restrain sin; that is a spiritual battle only won through the Person and work of the Holy Spirit (Phil. 2:12-13). So, trust in a man, trust in a movement, trust in a boundary, trust in Self, will never be able to deal with the root issue: sin.
Such is the pitiful downfall of Doug Philips.
Questions are still to be answered: how long did this immoral relationship go on for? What does "lengthy" mean? A month? 6 months? A year? Years? "Lengthy" is problematic because it means its a habitual, deliberate, ongoing activity, versus a momentary lapse into sinful behavior (King David comes to mind).In other words, how long did he lie to his wife, children, co-workers, ministry supporters, board of directors, church, fellow elders, congregation, and friends?
Additionally, how did the confession come about? How long ago was this "affair"? How long did it take for him to repent? Was it forced (so as not to lose everything?) or was it out of a true, godly sorrow? From his letter, it sounds like he was disciplined at some point in the past (" My church leadership came alongside me with love and admonition, providing counsel, strong direction and accountability.") and is only now just admitting it. Timing says a lot about motives and plans.
Other questions also arise. Was the "other"woman married? Is there yet another family and spouse needed to be reconciled with? Are there more children that also has been affected directly? Was this adultery or fornication on her part? Was she part of his church or ministry organization? If she is, she also lied to them as well. In other words, she needs to step forward and publicly repent as well. She is after all, also to blame for this. (I hope he's not covering her guilt in order to keep that patriarchal/valiant hero facade up; covering her sin is definitely not part of repentance; it's still trying to sound heroic, which means one still is clinging to pride). I haven't seen a call for this yet, anywhere by those who have been reporting/blogging on Phillips.
And who instigated it? The guilty party must also take that responsibility too. Why? Because it shows motive and the guilty party must address this too as part of true reconciliation and asking for forgiveness. Indeed both parties are guilty, but one party was the instigator. It's one thing to be "lured" into sin, but quite another to deliberately go after it. It reveals just how hard hearted one is. Obviously, both still bear the blame of infidelity.
The other question no one is asking is this: given Phillips has lied for a "lengthy" time about this whole thing (and lied to multiple people), are we to just presume he's telling the whole truth now? It seems people are taking his word that he didn't have sex with "that woman", but we haven't heard her side of the story. Pro 18:17 "The first to plead his case seems right, Until another comes and examines him." If a man is losing all he worked for, and has lied over time to a multitude of people, is it not reasonable to consider that perhaps such a man will try to keep some semblance of his empire in tact by lying/withholding all the facts/painting a fairer picture of the incident (his "innocence"), so that in time he can return to the post?
On another note, if the boundaries set up to avoid sexual impurity are a bit extreme, as reported about the Vision Forum movement/patriarchal movement (chaperons on all dates for example), would not the consequences of sexual impurity have to be equally extreme in order to stay consistent? It seems to me that Phillips may have gotten off easy in his movement/circle. Granted, he didn't actually have sex with the woman, according to him (how are we to know that? The woman hasn't come forward.). Still, the measures and movement created to remove such temptation (and the belief that it WILL), should be met with like consequences in order to be consistent, shouldn't it? Indeed he should be terminated from being an elder, as he has disqualified himself from ever holding that office.
No comments:
Post a Comment